Saturday, January 24, 2009

The Next Deal

Dear FDR.

I would like to hear your views.

I hate the FED. For the reasons we are all too familiar. But Mr Obama has pledged to spend money on programs to update the infrastructure, stuff which never happens in good times. Personally, I find this not only vital, but much more acceptable than spending it on bailouts that go STRAIGHT into the banks pockets without any value given to the public, like improved and updated public services and jobs for the boys.

Assuming these jobs go to USA passport holders, am I being naive in thinking this type of spending is better than "here banks, have some free cash"?

Thank you.

Thanks for asking my opinion, it sounds like your opinion is probably better-reasoned, anyway. I've been wanting to spur some discussion on president Obama and what his election means for America, so I decided to post an answer. I am definitely more cynical than you are, sorry about that.

I do not believe that anyone can become president of the USA in 2008 without full vetting from the corrupt stealing-machine that we now call Washington. At the same time, I don't think that means the person is corrupt, although they usually are, it just means that anyone allowed to win the office has been approved by the Money Trust.

President Obama is an interesting choice in this respect. He doesn't have the deep root system one would expect to find in an approved candidate. Personally, I think he was hastily accepted, and maybe begrudgingly so on certain decks of the pirate ship.

I think he won approval based on a few things, which I've tried to prioritize:

1 - Emotional appeal to the electorate. Emotion is incredibly important, all money changes hands on emotion. The money changers are professional swindlers, they instinctively grasp Obama's potential to rally the nation and also to tear it apart. They see dollar signs.

JFK could be viewed as a similar emotion-charged choice who was not in lock step with the thieves. In fact, one thing that worries me is the presence of an LBJ in Obama's VP slot. JRB made no political sense at all, he was the anti-Obama, on change, hipness and young voter appeal, race issues, and he brought nothing to the electoral college. Which leads to #2...

2 - An assurance that monetary policy would be assumed by JRB if Obama went astray.

3 - Obama's existing and/or potential for corruption. Chicago. Not a coincidence.

4 - A genuine disposition towards debt as a solution. The problem is not important.

5 - Malleable foreign policy. War is their biggest prize.

On your question regarding #4, how the debt is used, I honestly don't think it matters much. The money power simply wants debt, debt, more and more debt. As long his solutions generate ceiling-busting debt, Obama will prosper in the media.

Obviously the most effective debt is money borrowed specifically for stuffing the pockets of the super-rich, and so far, Obama is a Grand Slam. But they'll happily take any and all debt. The fact that bankers had to push the their own bailout through congress, at great political expense regardless of what the MSM regurgitates, is a good sign of sorts, because it indicates they are not in full control of the catastrophe they've created. There's hope the criminals will hang themselves by accident. Crooks are generally dim, especially the rich ones. Intelligent people enjoy level playing fields because they know they can win.

From a practical money-making perspective, I think the Money Trust will love the infrastructure idea. One reason is that is can be sold to congress, these mega handouts always generate political favors and a huge potential for more corruption. More importantly, remodeling consumes, rather than creates. I'm not saying it isn't needed, but when you are in crises mode and your job has been axed, taking out a HELOC to redo the kitchen probably isn't going to change your condition for the better.

The ideal solution, from the central banker's perspective, is monstrous new debt with little to no immediate return. That way, more debt is required.

They see you as a mouse in search of a wheel.


  1. Oabama has picked the ultimate insiders thus far for his cabinet members - Geithner, Panetta, Clinton, Holder.......but I sense he is going to be something different than Washington insiders believe. The fact that he has been studying Lincoln in preparation for his role as president gives me some hope..hope he might be concerned about average Americans...that being said he is going to run up against the inertia of Congressional politics regardless of any good intentions.

  2. Quote: but when you are in crises mode and your job has been axed, taking out a HELOC to redo the kitchen probably isn't going to change your condition for the better.

    The above quote basically says everything anyone needs to know about this pork barrel gov't ripoff.

    Obama wants to replace air conditioning units in federal buildings.

    These types of completely gratuitous spending in this moment in our history is just wrong.

    We are about to create a Boston Big Dig in every corner of the country.

    As far as debt creating more debt, how many of us believe that ANY SINGLE PROJECT that gets started is wrapped up on time and under budget?

    Or do we now need infinite bank bailouts as well as infinite public project budget 'updates' from now on.

    Seriously, name one project that is being proposed that will defintitely not involve illegal workers, will definitely finish on schedule with no additional funds required later, and will put white collar former real estate and financial industry soccer moms back to work for good in a promising new career.

    Total nonsense.

  3. I guess at the end of the day, all debt incurred by private industry or government is good debt as far as the Fed Reserve is concerned. They're in the debt delivery business.

    So if the government is successful at stimulating the economy, what that means is that private industry recovers enough to start incurring more debt again. In which case, the Fed Reserve still wins.

    This a no-lose game for the Fed unless they're put out of business.


The USA's political-economc system is best described as:

On Nov 2, 2010, I plan to vote (FOR or AGAINST) my incumbent congressman

Free Hit Counter