Here is your Crux PM update:

Former GE chief Jack Welch calls Bernanke and Hank Paulson "heroes"
Hmm... this may have something to do with the gov't handing a ton of money to GE.

Contrarian investment legend Dreman "terrified" of bonds
Says inflation will erode bond investments... so he's buying stocks instead.

Chinese stocks BLOW OUT old high...
The world's most exciting stock market is soaring right now.

---------- Advertisement ----------
U.S. Treasury Dept's Gold Glitch?

WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Treasury Department has inadvertently created a "glitch" in the gold markets. And savvy investors are now cashing in.

As Tony Scott from New Haven, CT recently said: "My initial purchases have doubled... outperforming anything else in my portfolio." Larry Carr from Dover, DE adds: It's "way better than the stock market."

Click here for full details...
------------------------------------

Doug Casey debunks fallacy that FDR cured the Great Depression...
...and the myth that WWII helped things.

Another dirtbag politician from Detroit busted...
Councilwoman – who is married to a Congressman – steps down after bribery scandal.

Gambling banned in Russia
Putin wipes out gigantic industry overnight.

Regards,

The Daily Crux
www.thedailycrux.com

UK ID Card Scheme Has Not Been Defeated
Headlines everywhere announced yesterday that the British government has been defeated on ID cards, and that a great victory has been won for civil liberties. The problem is that we have heard this several times before and it is simply not true

Fuel tax could be replaced with by-the-mile road tax
The year is 2020 and the gasoline tax is history. In its place you get a monthly tax bill based on each mile you drove — tracked by a Global Positioning System device in your car and uploaded to a billing center.

Michael Hudson's 
'Super Imperialism -
The Economic Strategy Of Imperial America'
By Stephen Lendman
7-1-9

 

First written in 1972, it was updated in a 2003 edition that's every bit as relevant now - thus this review focusing on Hudson's new preface, introduction, and detailed account of the book's theme.   He revisited it in his 2008-09 Project Censored award- winning article titled: "Economic Meltdown - The 'Dollar Glut' is What Finances America's Global Military Build-up" in which he explains the following - the "inter-related dynamics" of:   -- "surplus (US) dollars pouring into the rest of the world for yet further financial speculation and corporate takeovers;"   -- global central banks "recyl(ing) these dollar inflows (into) US Treasury bonds to finance the federal US budget deficit; and most important (but most suppressed in the US media),"   -- "the military character of the US payments deficit and the domestic federal budget deficit."   In other words, the global "dollar glut" finances US corporate takeovers, speculative excesses creating bubbles and global economic crises, America's reckless spending, foreign wars, hundreds of bases worldwide, "military build-up," and culture of militarism and belligerence overall at the expense of democratic freedoms, beneficial social change, and human and civil rights.   In softer form, it's what former US diplomat, advisor, father of Soviet containment, and dove compared to others at that time George Kennan believed should be America's post-WW II foreign policy. In his February 1948 "Memo PPS23, he stated:   "....we have 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. (It makes us) the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships (to let us) maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national society. To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and daydreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world benefaction....   We should dispense with the aspiration to 'be liked' or to be regarded as the repository of a high-minded international altruism....We should (stop talking about) unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are hampered by idealistic slogans (ideas and practices), the better."   Yet Kennan advocated diplomacy over force in contrast to Paul Nitze, Dean Atcheson and other Truman and succeeding administration officials favoring hardline militarism, future wars, and National Security Council Report 68 (NSC-68) policies to contain the Soviet Union. In 1962, nuclear disaster nearly resulted. The threat remains, more menacingly than ever by "forc(ing) foreign central banks to bear the costs of America's expanding military empire" through recycling their dollars into US Treasuries - something the mass media call "showing their faith in US economic strength."   Hudson refers to a "sinister dynamic," not involving consumers or private investors, but central banks putting "their money" in US Treasuries, but "it is not 'their money' at all. They are sending back the dollars that foreign exporters and other recipients turn over to their central banks for domestic currency."   "When the US payment deficit pumps dollars into foreign economies, these banks (have) little option except to buy US Treasury bills and bonds which the Treasury spends on financing an enormous, hostile military build-up to encircle (today's) major dollar-recyclers China, Japan and Arab OPEC oil producers" - essentially a process by which they finance their own endangerment.   Up to now it's continued, but, given the reckless dollar glut in recent months, with less enthusiasm by bigger buyers and hints of a possible end game or at least less buying than previously - mostly among BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and OPEC countries but other emerging economies as well getting more interdependent on themselves than on America.   In his 2002 preface, Hudson noted that "the US Treasury (pursued the same balance-of-payment) 'benign neglect' (strategy as) it did thirty years" earlier. In 1971, it "caused a global crisis when its $10 billion (level) led to a 10 per cent dollar devaluation." Now it's hundreds of billions annually and still high during the current economic crisis when exports and imports are lower.   Earlier and especially now, if Europe and Asia let the dollar deflate, their exporters will be disadvantaged at a time they can least afford it. So they're forced to "support the dollar's exchange rate by recycling their surplus dollars back to the United States" by buying US Treasuries.   Sooner or later, it's a losing proposition, especially in today's climate with the Federal Reserve sacrificing dollar strength to bail out Wall Street and trying to keep long rates low to contain borrowing costs. Yet the greater the dollar erosion, the more losses foreign investors will incur and less likely they'll tolerate more by buying bad assets.   So far, however, they're still recycling their dollar inflows to fund America's budget deficit and global militarism - something Hudson calls a "Free Lunch in the form of compulsory foreign loans to finance US Government policy."   Even so, they have no say over US policies, yet America and international lending agencies, like the IMF and World Bank, "use their dollar claims" on indebted nations to enforce Washington Consensus diktats. Independent-minded states face sanctions, isolation, coups or wars if they refuse.   Until Nixon closed the gold window in August 1971, America couldn't run unlimited balance-of-payments deficits. However without gold convertibility, it's continued for nearly 40 years along with protectionist policies through generous subsidies to US exporters - most notably to agribusiness. As a result, Hudson sees international tensions growing for the next generation, perhaps even greater now given America's reckless monetarism and perpetual wars.   His book "provid(es) the background for US - European and US - Asian financial relations by explaining how (post-1971) the US Treasury-bill standard came to provide America with a Free Lunch." Also how the IMF promoted debtor nations' capital flight and the World Bank supported "foreign trade dependency on US farm exports...."   The early 1970s dollar crisis and balance-of-payments deficits seem small compared to today. Yet the "Treasury-bill standard (frees) the US economy from (doing) what American diplomats (force on) other debtor nations (with) payments deficits: impose austerity to restore balance in its international payments. The United States alone has been free to pursue domestic expansion and foreign diplomacy with hardly a worry about the balance-of-payment consequences." No other nation has that luxury.   Post-WW II, Washington made other countries dependent on America, something it eschewed after WW I, staying isolationist instead to pursue internal development.   In the 1970s, emerging nations proposed a New International Economic Order (NIEO) through the UN Conference on Trade and Development to promote their own trade and other concerns. It "originated as a response to America's aggressive world economic diplomacy, and how US strategy has provided other nations with a learning curve that they may follow in pressing their own national and regional interests."   The more reckless and belligerent America becomes, the more incentive they have to try - and in greater alliance, with BRIC country partners, may have a greater chance for success.   Introduction   Post-WW II, on the pretext of national security, America pursued "world power....and economic advantage as perceived by American strategists quite apart from the profit motive of private investors."   After WW I, it achieved world creditor status from its "unprecedented terms (in extending) armaments and reconstruction loans to its wartime allies." In 1917, it entered the war late when it felt staying out would "entail at least an interim economic collapse (the result of) American bankers and exporters (getting) stuck with uncollectible loans to Britain and allies." So it joined the Triple Entente as an associate, not a full partner, to protect its $12 billion investment.   Post-war, America was the world's major creditor - but one "to foreign governments with which it felt little brotherhood" and no obligation to stabilize world finance and trade. Unlike its post-WW II policy, it didn't extend loans to foreign countries so they could finance their US-owed debt. Nor did it open its markets to foreign imports. It wanted Europe's empires dissolved, their military spending cut, their wealth "to flow out and their prices to fall" - the idea being in this way to re-establish world payments equilibrium, a very unrealistic notion, but many leading Europeans embraced it. It didn't work and made repayment of foreign debts impossible.   The "world economy emerged from World War I shackled with debts far beyond its ability to pay," except by "borrow(ing) funds from private lenders in the creditor nation to pay the creditor-nation government."   A more enlightened policy would have turned "other countries into (US) economic satellites." But America eschewed European imports, and US investors preferred its own outperforming stock market. On trade and finance, US policies "impelled European countries to withdraw from the world economy and turn within."   America's isolationism prevented it from collecting its foreign debts. "Its status as world creditor proved ultimately worthless as the world broke into nationalist units," and sought independence from foreign trade and payments.   Washington pursued isolationism, thus prompting other nations to seek self-sufficiency. A bankrupt Britain convened the 1932 Ottawa Conference "to establish a system of Commonwealth tariff preferences." By the mid-1930s, Germany began preparing for war. At the same time, the Depression affected one country after another as private capital dried up while at the same time Britain and other nations had mounting debt problems. It begs the question as to why they let them get so onerous in the first place.   American Plans for a Post-WW II "Free-Trade Imperialism"   Early in the war, US officials and economists knew America would prevail and emerge as the world's dominant power. However, transitioning from war to peace needed large export volumes to stimulate economic growth and full employment. "This in turn required that foreign countries be able to earn or borrow dollars to pay" for what they got. So America supplied them through government loans and private investment.   In return, it "name(d) the terms on which" they were provided and structured the IMF and World Bank so countries could "pursue laissez faire policies by insuring adequate resources to finance the international payments imbalances," the result of opening their markets to US imports. It was thought that free trade and investment would result in "balanced international trade and payments....under US leadership."   Post-war, America was the only dominant nation intact, so it alone had enough foreign exchange to invest substantially abroad. Its commercial strength turned other economies into US satellites and assured America achieved maximum world power by:   -- having European nations let US investors buy extractive industries in their former colonies, especially Middle East oil;   -- less developed nations would supply America with raw materials rather than develop their own competitive manufacturing infrastructure;   -- they'd also buy US products and services; and   -- the resulting trade surplus would provide enough foreign exchange for US investors to buy the world's most productive resources and make America even stronger.   The goal was short-lived as:   -- America had tariffs on commodities that other nations could produce more cheaply;   -- the International Trade Organization, in place to subject all economies to the same rules, was scuttled; and   -- private US investment abroad was never enough to finance sufficient foreign purchases of US exports; IMF and World Bank loans also fell short.   America accumulated a payments surplus. It, in turn, weakened its export potential. The lesson learned was that "Beyond a point, a creditor and payment-surplus status can be decidedly uncomfortable."   At first, the enlightened solution wasn't taken - extended foreign aid for rebalancing as Congress put internal interests ahead of foreign policy.   The Cold War Pushes America's Balance-of-Payments into Deficit   Cold War strategy gave Congress an anti-communist reason to "bribe foreign governments" to fight the red menace as well as open their markets to US exporters. It got the Marshall Plan and other aid agreed on to "keep its fellow capitalist countries solvent" and not tempted to turn left. The possibility continued foreign aid for several decades.   At the same time, America's balance-of-payments reached never before attained levels and needed rebalancing "to promote foreign export markets and world currency stability." To buy US products and services, other countries needed resources to pay for them, something only Washington could arrange at a time when they weren't creditworthy.   However, what worked early on became destabilizing as America began "sink(ing) into the mire that had bankrupted every European power that experimented with colonialism." Unlike foreign investors that cut their losses when necessary, national security interests (and industries profiting from them) trump other considerations even when counterproductive. Once begun, military spending takes on a life of its own - something very apparent given its current out-of-control level and growing.   New Characteristics of America's Financial Imperialism   A growing US balance-of-payments surplus was "incompatible with continued growth in world liquidity and trade." So America had to buy more foreign products, services and capital assets than it supplied to foreign buyers. At the same time, it shifted more dollars abroad through a payments deficit, easily handled in the 1950s and 1960s as long as Washington could redeem them with gold. But that game had a limited life span as "Attempts by governments to repay their debts beyond a point extinguish(es) their monetary base."   ...."international money (is also) a debt of the key-currency nation." Providing other countries with assets involves going into debt, and repaying it "extinguish(es) an international monetary asset."   By the early 1960s, America approached "the point at which its debts to foreign central banks soon would exceed the value of the Treasury's gold stock." It happened in 1964 the result of Vietnam War spending at an early stage in the conflict. Just as two world wars bankrupted Europe, Vietnam threatened the same fate for America, but it didn't curtail spending and still doesn't.   Earlier, the result was a run on gold with foreign central banks "cash(ing) in their dollar surpluses for American gold almost on a monthly basis." By March 1968, the US Treasury suspended its sales, and informally world central banks agreed to stop converting dollars into the metal. The result - the dollar gold price link was broken, and in August 1971, Nixon closed its window with an official embargo.   Henceforth, in place of gold, the US Treasury-bill (dollar-debt) standard began. No longer able to buy US gold, substituting Treasuries became the only option and "to a much lesser extent, US corporate stocks and bonds."   From then to now, foreign central banks have recycled their dollars to the US government. "Running a dollar surplus in their balance of payments became synonymous with lending (it) to the US Treasury." For its part, America borrows from other central banks and runs trade deficits. The larger they get, the greater the amount available to be loaned back, so today the volume is enormous.   For both sides, the problem is that Washington's guns and butter economy (including trillions to Wall Street) creates greater deficits and inflated spending. America's dominance is maintained, and foreign economies are obliged to finance it. Failure to support the dollar will inflate their own currencies, give US exporters a competitive edge, and ultimately let the world monetary system break down.   The "unique ability of the US Government to borrow from foreign central banks rather than from its own citizens (through taxes) is one of the economic miracles of modern times. Without it, the war-induced American prosperity of the 1960s and early 1970s would have ended quickly...."   How America's Payment Deficit Became a Source of Strength, not Weakness   It let America achieve what no earlier empires did - "a flexible form of global exploitation that controlled debtor countries by imposing Washington Consensus (diktats)." It's used the IMF, World Bank and other international lending agencies for its purposes, while the Treasury-bill standard "obliged the payments-surplus nations of Europe and East Asia to extend forced loans to the US Government." If they don't, world economies face monetary crisis.   Implications for the Theory of Imperialism   Hudson calls it a "new form of imperialism" under which America exploits other nations "via the central banks (and international lending agencies) rather than via the activities of private corporations seeking profits."   A "Super Imperialism" model "pressed foreign governments to regulate their nations' trade and investment to serve US national objectives...Washington Consensus (diktats) made aid borrowers more dependent on their creditors, worsened their terms of trade by promoting raw materials exports and grain dependency, and forestalled needed social modernization such as land reform and progressive income and property taxation."   US companies thus achieved a competitive advantage, not in the marketplace, but by Washington Consensus rules and the Bretton Woods institutions it controls - the IMF, World Bank, etc. What's good for US business benefits America overall and its Super Imperial ambitions.   Today's Source of Financial Instability Compared to the 1920s   The earlier period had a shortage of liquidity. By the early 1970s, it was in surplus, the result of the enormous volume of dollar inflows in world economies. The Korean War began shifting America's balance-of-payments from surplus to deficit. In 1971, Vietnam forced it off gold and "induced a US debtor-oriented international financial policy (with) the rest of the world" - something other nations have been trapped by ever since.   US deficits have disrupted world economies, but its character has changed. Not only does it finance US militarism, but it also "sustain(s) America's stock market and real estate bubble" while at the same time industrial America erodes. In addition, pressure is applied to privatize public enterprises to let this sector pass "into the hands of global finance capital....controlled and shaped by the Washington Consensus."   Under a "new state-capitalist form of imperialism," central banks, not industry, "are the vehicle for balance-of-payments exploitation" with the dollar as the world's reserve currency. It's Super Imperialism because one nation alone gets a Free Lunch right to benefit by getting others to finance its deficits and reckless spending.   The system's unique feature is that other countries may extract their citizens' wealth, but only America extracts theirs through the sale of its Treasury securities.   The World's Need for Financial Autonomy from Dollarization   In its relationship with client countries, America's dollarization policy imposes dependency, not self-sufficiency. It drains "the financial resources of its Dollar Bloc allies (and retards) the development of indebted third world raw-materials exporters...." But its gain isn't put to productive use. It's used instead for militarism and financialization at the expense of its former industrial strength.   It's an unsustainable system, but for other countries to break away, they'll have to renounce Chicago School alchemy, the austerity programs it imposes, and advantages it gives America in trade and other relations. It drains other nations' resources by trapping emerging economies in chronic debt and developed ones into forced buying of US Treasuries.   In return, America gets a Free Lunch. It rules as world debtor, forces other countries into creditor bondage, and threatens to bring down the global monetary system if enough of them balk. So far it's worked because Europe and Asia lack the political will to devise a "New International Economic Order" so nations producing economic gains can keep them and not let America use them to reinforce its "new kind of centralized global planning" - one based on financialization and a US Treasury securities standard, not industrial mechanisms. In WTO terms, it transfers foreign trade gains from other economies to the US, drains their resources overall, promotes dependency, not self-sufficiency, and backs it with hardline militarism and threats of systemic monetary collapse.   Eventually, exploited countries won't tolerate more "taxation without representation," a "quid without quo," a Free Lunch from "the world's payments-surplus nations." The longer America demands it by glutting world economies with dollars, the more likely disadvantaged nations will object. Hudson put it this way in his Project Censored award-winning article:   Today, "the only way a nation can block capital movements is to withdraw from the IMF, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization (WTO). For the first time since the 1950s, this looks like a real possibility, thanks to the worldwide awareness" of America's dirty game and how it harms them.   "De-Dollarization and the Ending of America's Financial-Military Empire"   In his June 14, 2009 article, Hudson explained that "Chinese President Hu Jintao, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and other top officials of the six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)" had a two-day June 15 - 16 meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia, with Brazil attending on the 16th. SCO countries include Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrghyzstan, Uzbekistan with Iran, India, Pakistan and Mongolia having observer status.   The meeting's stated purpose was "to discuss mutual aid," not challenge America's financial and military empire. Yet it potentially may be pivotal by doing just that.   On June 5, Medvedev told the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum that Russia, China and India have an opportunity to "build an increasingly multipolar world order" away from America's "artificially maintained unipolar system (based on) one big centre of consumption, financed by a growing deficit, and thus growing debts, one formerly strong reserve currency, and one dominant system of assessing assets and risks."   In other words, America "makes too little and spends too much," especially with regard to its military. It also gluts the world with dollars that end up in foreign central banks. Either they recycle them into US Treasuries or "let the 'free market' force up their currency relative to the dollar - thereby pricing their exports out of world markets, creating domestic unemployment and business insolvency."   Given a choice up to now, they've had to choose the least bad alternative. "Now they want out" as Medvedev explained in St. Petersburg saying: "what we need are financial institutions of a completely new type, where particular political issues and motives, and particular countries will not dominate." How so is the question, and can it work?   "For starters, the six SCO (and other BRIC) countries intend to trade in their own currencies" to benefit by what America "until now has monopolized for itself." China's central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan wants a new reserve currency "that is disconnected from individual nations." It was discussed in Yekaterinburg.   These and other countries see America as "a lawless nation, not only financially but also militarily." It forces its rules on others but won't abide by them itself - a practice now intolerable, and there's more.   So much of America's budget is for militarism that the Pentagon faces overstretch while the nation is so indebted it's effectively a deadbeat with amounts impossible to repay. For countries like China, the problem is especially acute given its $2 trillion holdings "denominated in yuan."   A "return to the kind of dual exchange rates common between World Wars I and II" may be the solution - "one exchange rate for commodity trade, another for capital movements and investments."   With or without these controls, "foreign nations are taking steps to avoid being the unwilling recipients of yet more dollars" that face lower valuations the more of them America prints. If SCO countries and Brazil have their way, America "no longer (will) live off the savings of others....nor have the money for unlimited military expenditures and adventures." For these nations and many others, it can't come a moment too soon.   Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.   Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

CAP & TRADE RAPE PASSED - WHAT MUST BE DONE NEXT

 

 

By: Devvy
June 29, 2009
© 2009 - NewsWithViews.com

"We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy." – Tim Wirth, former member of Congress, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs.

At the Fifth Congress in Moscow, 'The Program,' was drafted and agreed upon by the International Communist dictators. It was agreed that an environmental "crisis" would be graduallydeveloped to siphon off the money from capitalism and reduce countries to socialism and eventually under communism. I refer readersback to this column and the book by Gus Hall, head of the Communist Party USA for decades: Ecology, Can we survive under capitalism? published in 1972.

While the news media in this country saturated the air waves over Michael Jackson's death last Friday, a real battle was going on in the House of Outlaws in Washington, DC. Comrade Pelosi was absent most of the day breaking arms to get the required number of votes to save the planet!

Those of us who have actually taken the time to do the research fully understand global warming is a monstrous hoax against the world. Master of hustle and bull, Al Gore, has cleaned house promoting global warming. It has been his cash cow to an estimated $100 million dollars into his bank account. Usurper, Obama/Soetoro, believes the propaganda, too: Scientists: Obama document is 'scare' tactic. "This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA," said meteorologist Joe D'Aleo, the former chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting."

Let me say as someone who has been an activist full time going into my 20th year, next to NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, our unlawful participation in the communist United Nothing (UN and the phony "hate crimes" bill sitting in the senate), this so called energy bill ranks at the top. It will further destroy the economy of this country, our rights, run rough shod over the states, destroy more jobs that will go to commie China and destroy businesses.

Below are learning links that tell you the truth instead of the bald faced lies from Gore, Obama/Soetoro, Clinton, Comrade Pelosi and those who stand to rake in big bux from the fruits of your labor, bleeding this country dry.

First, let me comment on the hypocrisy of the Republicans; I belong to no party. This dangerous bill went from 936 pages to 1,201 pages and who knows what the final one looks like? H.R. 2454 morphed into an even more draconian piece of legislation and at 3:00 am, June 25, 2009, another 312 pages were added. The vote was scheduled for late in the day on June 26, 2009.

I watched quite a bit of the live coverage C-SPAN. Every Republican gave the number of people who would lose jobs in their districts based on the language in the bill; all in the thousands. More jobs that will go to commie China. The Democrats got up and lied about what you could read with your own eyes in the bill.

At one point, Rep. Gomert addressed one of the stupidest, most politically correct air heads in Congress, Ellen Tauscher, who was the chair woman while Pelsoi was making back room deals with the question: There is another 300+ pages added, but where is it? How do I get a copy before the vote?

This arrogant nit wit said Gomert didn't ask a proper parliamentary question! After Gomert persisted, where can I get a copy, she replies it's in the Rules Committee Report, an amendment voted on earlier.

Rep Barton then asks the same question: Fine, but where do we get a copy? How can we vote on 300+ pages added to the bill when we don't even have a copy of the text? (Not that any of them read this stuff in its entirety anyway.)

This arrogant female, and you should see her presiding over the house like some sour puss Queen, said once again, it's in the Rules Committee Report and that it's not her job to provide a copy.

Rep. Ike Skelton, another putrid Democrat from MO, popped up out of his stupor and said, "The bill isn't perfect, but we need to pass it and move on."

Rep. John Boehner had a go around with an old burned out, empty headed fool, Henry Waxman. Yeah, Boehner, it is an outrage what went on last Friday and your party has done it in the past to the Democrats. Do we all remember what happened over the draconian "Patriot Act" bill? Here's a refresher from 2002:

"In an interview with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), The Beacon has uncovered at least one Congressman that admits that Congress sometimes passes unconstitutional laws. Furthermore, Congressmen know that these laws are unconstitutional at the time that the bills are passed. In addition, Rep. Paul revealed that laws are sometimes passed without the bills being available for reading and that often bills are passed on a "voice vote" (not a roll call vote) so that people back home will not know how a specific Congressman voted.

"A recent example cited by Rep. Paul is the USA Patriot Act. This bill violates several constitutional protections and defines a "terrorist" as anyone who opposes a federal government program or policy. According to Rep. Paul, this means that a person who differs with the government on issues such as abortion, gun control laws, Free Trade Agreements, the United Nations, or any number of programs and activities could be defined as a terrorist and investigated by the government even though no crime is committed. The USA Patriot Act also gives the government the authority to establish a National ID Card for tracking and surveillance.

"I've heard many conservative Congressmen expressing disappointment in themselves for voting in favor of this bill now that the American people are beginning to realize that this is a bad bill", said Rep. Paul. Rep. Paul also stated that the USA Patriot Act was not available to read or study before it was voted on and passed.

"Another example cited by Rep. Paul is the recently passed Campaign Finance Reform Bill. This bill will silence groups from reporting on information such as how our federal elected officials have voted on important legislation anytime within 60 days of an election or 45 days before a primary. "Many Congressmen are now saying that they know it is unconstitutional but that is up to the courts. That, to me, is one of the most despicable arguments I've ever heard", said Rep. Paul. "What's the sense of taking an oath of office if you're going to pass things that are unconstitutional and hope the courts will save you from yourself", Rep. Paul continued."

In 2002, Congress was controlled by the Republicans with a Republican president. A crook by the name of Dennis Hastert was Speaker of the House. He is a Republican. Now he's living the high life off the fruits of your labor when he should have gone to jail. The point is that the Republican leadership pulled the same shenanigans in 2002 as the Democrats did last Friday. They also shafted their own at the same time who would have voted against that bill.

Boehner is in his 10th term in Congress and he was there when the Republicans did the very same thing to the minority Democrats. While these outlaws play their stupid political games, we the people are being crushed and driven into poverty. While Boehner deserves credit this round - ("Byimposing a tax on every American who drives a car or flips on a light switch, this plan will drive up the prices for food, gasoline and electricity," said Boehner...") - where were the Republicans from January 1995 until November 2006?They had ample time to address the energy problems and take them one at a time, intelligently, thoughtfully and in the best interests of the republic and cost to we the people with a GOP controlled Congress and White House.

The vote was 219-212, a margin of only seven votes. Eight Republicans voted for this unconstitutional mess. While every member of Congress should be thrown out on their backsides in November 2010 (except Ron Paul and which clearly won't happen because millions of Americans are drowning in stupidity), these eight should be top of the list:

Mary Bono Mack R (CA); Mike Castle R (DW); Mark Steven Kirk R (IL); Leonard Lance R (NJ); Frank LoBiondo R (NJ); John McHugh R (NY); Dave Reichert R (WA); Chris Smith R (NJ)

The Internet is buzzing there is one more chance to stop this in the House:

MOTION TO RECONSIDER

"A motion to reconsider is a parliamentary practice that gives the House (or Senate) one opportunity to review its action on a motion, amendment, or measure.

"Motions to reconsider are routinely laid on the table -- or killed. If a motion to reconsider is adopted, it requires a vote be held again on whatever the House has voted to reconsider.Only Members who voted on the winning side may move to reconsider a vote. (Emphasis mine) Members have been known to change their votes at the last minute in order to be eligible to offer the motion.

"If the original vote on a question is close, enough members might be persuaded to change their position, or absent members could come to the floor, vote to reconsider, then reverse the outcome of the original vote.

"Typically, however, after announcing the result of a vote, the Speaker states that, "without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table." This uses up the one opportunity to reconsider, and makes the result of the vote final."

However, the link "laid on the table" may end any hope of a motion to reconsider:

LAY ON THE TABLE

"A motion to lay on the table a bill, resolution, amendment, point of order, appeal or another motion disposes of the question immediately and finally and adversely -- it kills it without a direct vote on the substance of the question. A motion to table is not debatable and is adopted by unanimous consent -- without objection -- or by majority vote. It is a "highly privileged motion" -- that is, in the order in which motions are given priority in the House, only a motion to adjourn has higher precedence than a motion to table a measure."

Did Pelosi or her minion, Tauscher, state: "without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table"? In checking theDaily Digest for Friday, I did not see a statement by Pelosi on this, but the record might not be complete. I don't have a video of the entire proceedings.

Congress is now out of session until July 6, 2009. The next step is the U.S. Senate and numbers. As far as I can tell, there is no resolution to the putrid Franken/Coleman senate race in Minnesota; click here. Franken is the buffoon a lot of people in Minnesota voted for - a comedian who made his living telling foul jokes. Franken became even more famous for his jokes about raping women. But, since he's a Democrat, that seems to excuse his filthy mouth, authoring porn and outrageous behavior. I can only say shame, shame on any American in Minnesota who voted for the equivalent of dirty pig. Oh, and one more thing: Franken committed adultery with hard core socialist, Arianna Huffington according to her; click here. But, then again, Huffington's husband left her to have sex with men. Does it get any more revolting?

Liberal Democrat, Arlen Specter, most certainly a perfect vision of a corrupt politician, finally gave up his phony Republican label and went home. There are two "independents" - Comrade Bernie Sanders (VT) and the doddering old fool, Joseph Liberman (CT). There isn't a single, real constitutionalist in the U.S. Senate and many of the freedom hating Republicans, i.e., Juan McCain (Create green jobs! In favor of cap and trade), Olympia Snow (Voted yes on factoring global warming into federal project planning), Susan Collins (Voted yes on factoring global warming into federal project planning) will support this nonsense. The next step is to bombard the Senate with phone calls, faxes and snail mail (they ignore emails and respond with blather form letters) from now until the vote. I cannot stress to you how critical it is that we stop this from getting to the desk of the usurper Obama/Soetoro. Here is the list of senators and their web sitesto contact after July 6, 2009. Also, remember that only 1/3 of the senate will be up for reelection in 2010.

This bill - the largest tax hike in the history of this country - cannot get to Obama. This bill will kill 2 1/2 million jobs and most will go to commie China. How do I know? I listened to Boehner on C-SPAN for over an hour go through the amendment - a never ending horror story. There is a provision for extended unemployment for those who lose their jobs! Yes, that is right. These craven power mad politicians already know millions of jobs will be lost while we're heading for Depression Two, but don't worry! There's lots of unemployment to replace paychecks. Where is your outrage, America?

I'm going to cover sections of that bill on my radio show tonight. Our very survival is on the line and we need to inform as many Americans as possible so the roar when the senate returns week after next is deafening. Here are a few bullet points provided by American Solutions (check their web site here and look at the big map):

Destroy an average of 1-3 million jobs, every year
Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500 annually
Increase the federal debt by 26 percent, which is $29,150 per person

State legislators also need to understand this bill stomps on states rights and goes right into neighborhoods. Please get informed. Talk to friends, neighbors and family. We must bury the senate in constant protest. Tell your senator/senatorette that we the people (and most likely some of the states) will bury the courts in lawsuits to gut the bill if it becomes law. Tell them this:

"Arizona is now close to becoming the first state to outlaw climate change legislation. "The state Senate voted Monday, 19-10 to approve a bill banning the Department of Environmental Quality from enacting or enforcing measures with language pertaining to climate change. The bill is now awaiting Houseapproval." Now that Arizona got rid of their former nit wit governor, Janet Napolitano, sanity is returning. Be sure to call your state legislator and senator and thank them for voting the right way. These legislators need to know you're behind them.

Here's the other message to the U.S. Senate: We are warriors and we will fight.

On live radio: Solutions Not Politics
Monday-Friday
6:00 pm PST, 8:00 pm CST and 9:00 pm EST
Listen live: 
Podcast:
Eagle 104 FM Tampa/Ocala

(Show notes from last week as promised: The Praetorian Guard: The U.S. Role in the New World Order by John Stockwell; A Foreign Policy of Freedom by Ron Paul; Defrauding America - A Pattern of Related Scandals by Rodney Stich (Dirty Secrets of the CIA and other Government Operations; The Big White Lie by Michael Levin, former DEA Agent. The CIA and the Cocaine Crack Epidemic.)

Listen and Learn:

This is a superb video that everyone must watch

1 - The Great Global Warming Swindle
2 - Video from your fellow American (short and heart breaking)
3 - Highly recommend you read: Green Hell by Steven Milloy
4 - Chu couldn't find his backside with dual mirrors
5 - Here is the beauty of ice caps and none of us want to see them melt

The BIG hoax called global warming:

1 - Sue the people who sell carbon credits
2 - 31,487 Real Scientists that don’t seem to agree with Al Gore’s Inconvenient Lie!
3 - Prominent Scientist Fired By Gore Says Warming Alarm ‘Mistaken’ 
4 - 35 Inconvenient Truths The errors in Al Gore’s movie 
5 - Short video: Stupdity of Al Gore and Hollywood
6 - Democrats Refuse to Allow Skeptic to Testify Alongside Gore At Congressional Hearing 
7 - Clinton Vows to Use Cabinet Position to Push for Climate Treaty
8 - EU’s new figurehead believes climate change is a myth 
9 - EPA's own research expert 'shut up' on climate change
10 - Record cold temperatures - where's the global warming?
11 - Shocker: 'Global warming' simply no longer happening
12 - Why Third Year Arctic Ice Will Increase Next Year 
13 - Climate Provision Would Allow Global Warming 'Victims' to Sue
14 - NOAA Meteorologist Claims 'Gross, Blatant Censorship' by Media for Speaking Out Against Climate Change Alarmism 
15 - Warmists deny Copenhagen access to polar bear scientist
16 - The Ice in Greenland is Growing
17 - Global Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979
18 - Facts Continue To Mock 'Global Warming'
19 - Obama’s Energy Czar: Socialist Agent For World Government 
20 - Polluters to pollute more through the purchase of emission carbon credits or offsets

© 2009 - NewsWithViews.com - All Rights Reserved

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country as well as her own; ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

It isn't possible to respond to 20,000 emails a month. Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site; it has been updated and filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources

E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net

Banks: Regulations Could Stifle Recovery
BusinessWeek - USA
"While supporting the [European Union's] proposal for better cross-border co-ordination on systemic issues and between the many regulators, there is little ...
See all stories on this topic

Wednesday, July 1, 2009 It doesn't seem like the '30s...at least, not yet... Gloomy view for housing and jobs in the United States... Is Obama the next Roosevelt? And is that a good thing? Thomas DiLorenzo on never-ending government lies...and more! --------------------- Special Offer --------------------------- With Gold, Who's Laughing Now? With all the flak you've taken for singing gold's praises, wouldn't it be nice to laugh back? Well, today's your lucky day... an opportunity to make up to 20X your money. We only have 15 spots left - so get in now! --------------------------------------------------------------- Crumbling Cornerstones of Middle Class Wealth by Bill Bonner London, England Last night, we went to an awards ceremony for the magazine publishing industry in Britain. Our title, MoneyWeek, had been nominated as "best weekly business magazine." It was a sparkling affair...with hundreds of attendees dressed in black tie and gowns. There were showgirls too - dressed in a pert '20s style...somewhere between the Great Gatsby and the Ziegfeld Follies. Short, tight dresses with shimmering fringes...hats with feathers...the girls served champagne and did dance numbers. "I see the publishers association has chosen a '20s theme," began the emcee. "What is wrong with you people? Don't you know what came after the '20s? The '30s!" It doesn't seem like the '30s...yet. Ask the man on the street and he will tell you what he's heard on TV: the worst of the crisis is over. According to Bloomberg: "Wall Street's largest bond-trading firms say the worst may be over for investors in Treasuries after government securities posted their biggest first-half losses in at least three decades. "The 16 primary dealers, which trade directly with the Federal Reserve and are obligated to bid at Treasury auctions, forecast the benchmark 10-year note yield will finish the year little changed at 3.58 percent, after rising from 2.21 percent at the end of 2008, according to a survey by Bloomberg News." Stocks will keep going up until 2010, says money manager John Dorfman. The "crisis management" phase is behind us, says Jeff Immelt. But this only reminds us of...1930. Let us wake up the ghosts just so we can laugh at them: "The spring...marks the end of a period of grave concern...American business is steadily coming back to a normal level of prosperity," Julius Barnes, Head of Hoover's National Business Survey, March 16, 1930. "We are now near the end of the declining phase of the depression," the Harvard Economic Review, November 15, 1930 In 1930...as in 2009...the average fellow thought the crisis had passed. "Well...depression wasn't so bad," he said to himself. Is it possible that the credit expansion that began after WWII and lasted until 2007...taking the debt-to-GDP ratio from about 150% to 360%...has contracted in the space of 24 months? Have the mistakes of the Bubble Epoque been corrected already? Are household balance sheets back in balance? The markets continue their daily hum... The Dow fell 81 points yesterday. Gold dropped $12. Oil traded at $69. And bonds fell a little - the 10-year yield rose back above 3.5%. Meanwhile, the economy continues its work...correcting...paring...amputating...discarding...destroying the illusions of the bubble years...to bring things back in balance. "Gloomy US consumers clip housing recovery," begins a Reuters article. Another report, at MarketWatch, blamed the gloom on a "gloomier jobs view." Housing and jobs are the two cornerstones of American middle class wealth. If they can't hold the weight of a building economy, there is little chance of a broad recovery in the United States...or Britain. "Last week, I hosted a meeting of mortgage lenders," continued last night's emcee. "They got together all the mortgage lenders in Britain who are still in business. I felt sorry for the guy. All alone... "Today, a guy goes into a bank and he says... 'I'd like to talk to you about a loan...' and the banker says to him, 'Great...how much can you lend us?' Net mortgage lending in Britain is the weakest it has been since they began keeping records in '93. And today's news tells us that the UK economy is shrinking faster than people thought. In the first quarter, the UK GDP fell by 2.49%. In Britain as in America, the real economy is falling off just as investors, analysts, and commentators think they see a recovery. They think rising stock prices - US stocks are up 40% since March 9th - predict and precede a growing economy. Stocks, they say, "look ahead." People will believe anything. If stocks had been watching where the economy was going they never would have traded at such high levels in '07. They clearly had no idea what was ahead. Nor do they now. And although we can't offer our readers a crystal ball, we can make sure that you are as prepared as possible for the secondary downturn, which is looming in the not-so-distant future. Get a special report that will help protect yourself (and help you make a buck or two) here: 7 Super Shields Against the Next Round of Market Wipeouts. More below...but first, we turn to The 5 Min. Forecast for more news: Ian Mathias reports, "Adios, first half of 2009. Quarters three and four, mucho gusto. "Although stocks drifted down yesterday, the S&P 500 finished the second quarter of 2009 with a 15.2% gain, its best quarter since 1998. Since March lows, the index is up nearly 35%. For all of 2009, the S&P is just above break-even. "So the obvious question: Where do we go from here? Was the second quarter a fluke - a simple snapback of oversold stocks? Or a new bull market? For an answer, we sought out the 'stars' of the second quarter...take a look: "Heh, let's see: US auto and manufacturing, financials, commercial real estate, retail, insurance and healthcare... all dead, dying, disabled or at least dubious sectors of 2009. Of all the 10 stocks you see above, only Ford is anywhere near a 52-week high. In other words, the leaders of the second quarter were the pariahs of the previous three. Are these the seeds with which market growth is sown? "'The champagne-cork-popping performance of the second quarter,' adds The Rude Awakening's Eric Fry, 'obscures a few trends that should be worrisome to the celebrants. First, the S&P 500 has gained no ground whatsoever since May 8, the first trading day after the Federal Reserve triumphantly announced the results of its banking sector 'stress tests.' "'Second, the BKX Index of financial stocks has DROPPED more than 16% since May 8. As we have noted in prior editions of the Rude Awakening, the finance sector has been leading the overall stock market - both to the upside and downside - for the better part of four years. So the sluggish recent performance of the BKX index is probably not a 'nothing.' "'Lastly, most gauges of investor sentiment - like the VIX Index of option volatilities - are flashing readings of extreme investor optimism. Typically, as contrary indicators, such readings presage a market sell-off.'" You can catch Eric, and the rest of Agora Financial's best and brightest at this year's Agora Financial Investment Symposium in Vancouver, B.C. The symposium promises to be the event of the year - so don't miss out! Secure your ticket now - before the event sells out! See here: Agora Financial Investment Symposium, July 21-24 And back to Bill, with more thoughts: The images of the '30s keep coming back. TIME has put Franklin Roosevelt's picture on its cover, as if he were the man of the hour now. Americans think they are confronted with a challenge, which...with proper leadership...they will overcome. Madoff has been locked up; now it's just a question of beefing up those regulators so it doesn't happen again. The stimulus packages have been set up; now we just have to wait for them to do their work. The Fed has done its part too; it's just a matter of time until all that money and credit it put into the banking system turns up in the consumer economy. And Obama...isn't he just like Roosevelt? Isn't he taking advantage of this crisis to help build a stronger...fairer...US economy? If you read the papers you might think so. In The New York Times, Felix Rohatyn, has written a remarkable essay - remarkable in the sense that he has managed to take up 2/3 of a page without saying anything. To help him do so, he calls on the first Roosevelt, Theodore: "He insisted on government's obligation to regulate the large new business aggregations not so much to address the inequalities of wealth as to police its potential distorting influence...to reinforce the new system, not weaken it." Mr. Rohatyn goes on to advise Obama: The work ahead, he says, "will require difficult and painful actions, which can only come from a multi-year, bipartisan plan, led by the president and the Congress, with the support of business and labor." Blah, blah...blah... What he is urging on the nation is more central planning - with no idea how or why central planners will be better at controlling other peoples' money than people are at controlling their own. And imagine the 'plan' that would have the support of politicians of both parties, business interests and labor; it's bound to be a disaster - like all of Teddy Roosevelt's plans. But it's the other disastrous Roosevelt that catches most looks. The one on the cover of TIME magazine. This was the Roosevelt who, with the help of Herbert Hoover, turned the correction of the early '30s into the Great Depression. Rather than let the markets quickly correct the mistakes of the '20s, he tried to put them in a straitjacket. And rather than let people sort out their own finances, he set up a huge bureaucracy to bring Mussolini-style central planning to America. That bureaucracy is still with us - including Fannie Mae, which was instrumental in creating the housing bubble...and the SEC, which was instrumental in camouflaging the risks of in the investment markets. But there's no point in going on about the two Roosevelts. TIME and the nation believe they were great heroes who practically single-handed saved the country from destruction. No use trying to tell them anything different. So, instead...we will continue our lonely vigil - watching to see what mischief these clowns undertake next...and how we might protect ourselves... One of the best ways you can protect yourself, dear reader, is go against the crowd, which is not a new idea in these pages. See a new special report about a little-known market that could help you stay on top - while everyone else loses their shirt. Get it here. What we see is this: the United States prospered in the 20th century not because of the Roosevelts, but in spite of them. The American economy was expanding... it was still young, strong, competitive and prosperous. The empire grew with economic power. But the years ahead are not likely to resemble the post-Roosevelt years. America's position relative to the rest of the world is weak and in decline. She is not a creditor, she is a debtor. She is not a low- cost competitor; she is a high-cost competitor. She no longer has a free and flexible economy; she has one freighted with central planners, regulators and busybodies. There is a heat wave here in London. At least, that is what you would think if you listened to Londoners. "I can't take this heat," said a friend yesterday. It didn't seem that hot. Compared to Maryland in the summer, it seemed like a winter day. We checked the headlines: "80 Degrees again tomorrow," said one. "No relief in sight." Until tomorrow, Bill Bonner The Daily Reckoning ---------------------- Special Offer -------------------------- Options Made Simple Let's face it - playing options can be tricky. But they can also be incredibly lucrative. Well, in this report, we lay it all out for you. It's quite plainly, the easiest way to play options...ever. And the gains are just as big. Keep reading here. --------------------------------------------------------------- The Daily Reckoning PRESENTS: Throughout history, the US government has...how should we put it...not told the entire truth, especially when it comes to facts about the free market. Thomas DiLorenzo explores, below... Never-Ending Government Lies About Markets by Thomas DiLorenzo Baltimore, Maryland The purpose of government is for those who run it to plunder those who do not. Throughout history, governments have used violence, intimidation, coercion, and mass murder to enforce this system. But governments' first line of "defense" is always a blizzard of lies - about its own alleged benevolence, altruism, heroism, and greatness, along with equally big lies about the "evils" of the civil society, especially the free market. The current economic crisis, which was instigated by the government's central bank and its boom-and-bust monetary policies, among other interventions, has once again been blamed on "too little regulation" and too much freedom. Will Americans ever catch on to this biggest of all of government's Big Lies? When the Pilgrims came to America, they nearly starved to death because they adopted communal agriculture. When William Bradford, leader of the Mayflower expedition, figured this out he reorganized the Massachusetts pilgrims in a regime of private property in land. The incentives created by private property promptly created a dramatic economic turnaround and the rest is history. Most history books ignore this reality, however, and blame the starvation crisis of the Pilgrims on corporate greed on the part of the Mayflower company. "The current economic crisis, which was instigated by the government's central bank and its boom-and-bust monetary policies, among other interventions, has once again been blamed on ‘too little regulation’ and too much freedom." After the American Revolution, it was imperative to build roads and canals so that commerce could expand and the economy thrive. George Washington's Treasury secretary, Alexander Hamilton, declared in his famous Report on Manufactures that private road and canal building would never succeed without government subsidies. President Thomas Jefferson's Treasury secretary, Albert Gallatin, concurred. Meanwhile, private capital markets and the private "turnpike" industry were busy financing thousands of miles of private roads without any governmental assistance. When government did intervene in early-American road building, it was a financial catastrophe almost everywhere, so much so that by 1860 only Missouri and Massachusetts had not amended their state constitutions to prohibit the use of tax dollars for "internal improvements." Americans have been taught by their government-run schools that the post-1865 Industrial Revolution was bad for the working class, which made government regulation of work and wages, and the creation and prospering of labor unions necessary. In reality, people left the farms for factories because the latter offered far better wages and working conditions. Between 1860 and 1890, real wages increased by 50 percent in America, as myriad new products were invented, and made available to the common working person thanks to low-cost, mass production. It was capital investment that dramatically increased the productivity of labor, allowing hours worked to decline from an average of 61 hours per week in 1870 to 48 hours by 1929. Higher worker productivity, fueled mostly by capital investment by entrepreneurs and private investors, also made it less necessary for families to force their children to work. Child labor was on the wane for decades before government got around to regulating or outlawing it. And when it did so it was to protect unionized labor from competition, not to protect children from harsh working conditions. The "robber barons" of the late 19th century robbed no one. Most of them made their money by providing valuable - if not revolutionary - goods and services to the masses at lower and lower prices for decades at a time. John D. Rockefeller, for example, caused the price of refined petroleum to drop from 30 cents per gallon in 1869 to 8 cents in 1885, and continued to drop his prices for many years thereafter. James J. Hill built the most efficient and profitable transcontinental railroad without a dime's worth of government subsidy. In return for their remarkable free-market success the government prosecuted both of these men, kangaroo court style, under the protectionist "antitrust" laws. The real "robbers" were politically connected businessmen like Leland Stanford, a former California governor and senator, who succeeded in getting laws passed that granted his company a monopoly in the California railroad business. The federal antitrust laws were passed beginning with the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 because the government informed Americans that industry was becoming "rampantly cartelized" or monopolized. In reality, prices everywhere were plummeting as new products and services were being invented everywhere. The entire period from 1865 to 1900 was a period of price deflation. As I show in How Capitalism Saved America, all of the industries accused of being monopolies by Congress in 1889- 890 had been dropping their prices for at least a decade thanks to vigorous competition. And it was not a result of the idiotic theory of "predatory pricing." No sane businessperson would intentionally lose money for decades by pricing below cost with the hope that he would somehow frighten away all competition forevermore. Everyone "knows" that President Herbert Hoover was a staunch advocate of laissez-faire economics, and it was his lack of interventionism that caused the Great Depression. This is the biggest governmental lie in the history of America. Hoover was a "progressive" (as today's socialists, also known as "Democrats," have taken to calling themselves). Hoover strong-armed corporate executives into raising wages at a time when wages needed to adjust downward in the free market in order to minimize unemployment. He devoted 13% of the federal budget to a failed "stimulus" program of pork-barrel spending and imposed some of the biggest tax increases in history to fund it all. He was a protectionist who signed the notorious Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which increased the average tariff rate to nearly 60 percent and spawned a worldwide trade war that shrunk world trade by two-thirds in three years. He cartelized the agricultural industry with "farm boards" that began the insane practice of paying farmers for not growing crops or raising livestock. He pioneered the politicization of capital markets by creating the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. And he ranted and raved against "greedy capitalists" while launching numerous government "investigations" of investors and the stock market. FDR's top domestic advisor, Rexford Tugwell, said that his fellow New Dealers "owed much to Hoover," who began many of the policies that they simply extended. Every time the price of gasoline goes up significantly, Congress convenes a Nuremburg Trial-style inquisition of oil-company executives. This practice began in the 1970s when the government's own foolish price controls on petroleum products caused massive shortages, and it needed someone to blame. Oil company executives are never praised when gasoline prices fall, as they have in the past year from over $4/gallon to under $2/gallon in many parts of the United States. Most recently, the current economic crisis is said to be caused by the "excesses" of economic freedom and "too little regulation" of the economy, especially financial markets. This is said by the president and numerous other politicians, with straight faces, despite the facts that there are a dozen executive-branch cabinet departments, over 100 federal agencies, more than 85,000 pages in the Federal Register, and dozens of state and local government agencies that regulate, regiment, tax, and control every aspect of every business in America, and have been doing so for decades. Laissez-faire run amok in financial markets is said to be a cause of the current crisis. But the Fed alone - a secret government organization that is accountable to no one and which has never been audited - performs hundreds of regulatory functions, in addition to recklessly manipulating the money supply. And it is just one of numerous financial regulatory agencies (the SEC, Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, FDIC, and numerous state regulators also exist). In a Fed publication entitled "The Federal Reserve System: Purposes and Functions," it is explained that "The Federal Reserve has supervisory and regulatory authority over a wide range of financial institutions and activities." That's the understatement of the century. Among the Fed's functions are the regulation of Bank holding companies State-chartered banks Foreign branches of member banks Edge and agreement corporations US state-licensed branches, agencies, and representative offices of foreign banks Nonbanking activities of foreign banks National banks (with the Comptroller of the Currency) Savings banks (with the Office of Thrift Supervision) Nonbank subsidiaries of bank holding companies Thrift holding companies Financial reporting Accounting policies of banks Business "continuity" in case of an economic emergency Consumer-protection laws Securities dealings of banks Information technology used by banks Foreign investments of banks Foreign lending by banks Branch banking Bank mergers and acquisitions Who may own a bank Capital "adequacy standards" Extensions of credit for the purchase of securities Equal-opportunity lending Mortgage disclosure information Reserve requirements Electronic-funds transfers Interbank liabilities Community Reinvestment Act subprime lending requirements All international banking operations Consumer leasing Privacy of consumer financial information Payments on demand deposits "Fair credit" reporting Transactions between member banks and their affiliates Truth in lending Truth in savings That's a pretty comprehensive list, the result of 96 years of bureaucratic empire building by Fed bureaucrats. It gives the lie to the notion that there has been "too little regulation" of financial markets. Anyone who makes such an argument is either ignorant of the truth or is lying. Regards, Thomas DiLorenzo for The Daily Reckoning Editor's Note: Thomas DiLorenzo is a professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland, a senior faculty member of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and an affiliated scholar of the research arm of the League of the South and the Abbeville Institute. He holds a PhD in economics from Virginia Tech. DiLorenzo has authored at least ten books, two of which are available here: How Capitalism Saved America, and his latest Hamilton's Curse: How Jefferson's Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution - And What It Means for Americans Today. --------------------- Special Offer --------------------------- Only 63 People Know Why These Six Tiny Companies Will Change the World... You're #64 - and about to become ultra-wealthy. This will go down in history as the "story of our era..." Most importantly, you'll be rich because you took decisive action in 2009.   The Daily Reckoning - Special Reports: Investing in Gold: The 5 Best Ways to Invest in Gold Fiat Currency: Using the Past to See into the Future Introducing the Single Best Way to Make Sure You'll Never Run Out of Money...