–What is nature’s saddest failed experiment?

14 thoughts on “–What is nature’s saddest failed experiment?”

1. How the Koch brothers embrace anti-science in education — Kansas style.

   LikeLike

   Reply

2. Roger, in and of itself, ignorance and stupidity aren’t the issue. People have the right to believe what they want. It becomes problematic when ignorance and stupidity becomes the basis of policy that affects us all: e.g., Rep Lamar Smith (R-Texas) serving as the chair of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

   But the situation is not hopeless. This has been going on since before Martin Van Buren perfected the political party system; and our Nation has, in spite of the ignorance, stupidity, corruption, and graft, endured and progressed. I would like to think humanity can continue to progress, eschewing austerity for prosperity. I’m encouraged by the increased awareness of inequality, and that monetary sovereignty is the model for change.

   Best wishes in this new year for prosperity for all.

   “There’s enough for everyone’s need, not everyone’s greed.” -M. Gandhi

   LikeLike

   Reply

3. — Off topic–Off topic–

   A QUESTION FOR RODGER’S READERS

   Who is the most blatant toady for the rich? Who is the most shameless user of the Big Lie to widen the gap between the rich and the rest?

   Paul Ryan? Obama? Simpson and Bowles? Pete Peterson? John “Weepy” Boehner? Larry “Sleepy” Summers? We could mention hundreds of names, but I say the award should go to David Cameron, who in April 2009 vowed that if he ever became British Prime Minister, he would usher in an “age of austerity.”

   Cameron became PM in May 2010 and kept his vow, but what earns him the coveted prize is that he has mentored all the above thieves, plus many more. Whenever these vampires spout a new lie, or adopt a new strategy to widen the wealth gap, Cameron likely thought of it first, and applied it first. In terms of mass privatization, and slashing social programs, Cameron has outdone everyone, including Margaret there-is-no-alternative Thatcher.

   True, Obama has threatened to cut Social Security as part of his “grand bargain” (e.g. “chained CPI”) but Cameron has actually done it with his “welfare reform” (more about that below).

   When Cameron took office a year and a half after Obama did, he changed Obama and many other government leaders into dedicated austerians.

   Here’s how…

   The crash of key Wall Street firms (e.g. Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns) triggered a recession by the end of 2008. On 20 Jan 2009, Obama became the US President, and almost immediately signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Unfortunately this “stimulus package” was far too small to jump-start the US economy. Moreover Obama did nothing to stop banks from illegally throwing millions of Americans out of their homes. Nor did Obama stop the off-shoring of jobs, nor slow the financialization of the economy, nor do anything about skyrocketing student loan debt, nor order the Justice Dept. to prosecute any Wall Street fraudster – and so forth.

   By November 2009, so many Americans felt abandoned by Obama and the Democrats that they angrily voted a Republican majority into the House, and into the state governorships.

   In doing so, the masses stampeded into the Age of Austerity — but the hysteria would not reach a fever pitch until six months later when David Cameron became prime minister (May 2010).

   Between the crash of 2008 and the coming of Cameron in 2010, there were three G-20 summits. At all three, the heads of governments (including Obama) agreed that more stimulus spending was needed to counter the recession.

   In June 2010 at the G-20 summit in Toronto, the heads of state once again agreed on the need for more stimulus spending – at least in their preliminary statements.

   Enter David Cameron, who had become British Prime Minister a few weeks before the Toronto G-20 summit, during which time he had imposed the worst tax increases on the British masses in 50 years, plus the most radical cuts in social programs.

   Cameron arrived and too the Toronto summit by storm. Right away he encouraged the other leaders to abandon their stimulus plans and instead do what he had done: exploit the recession and make it stretch out forever. Why not use the Big Lie to widen the gap between the rich and the rest? Why not destroy the “welfare state” by harping on the need to cut the deficit and the “national debt”? Why not blame unemployment on social assistance, rather than the lack of jobs? Why not portray austerity as a mathematical necessity, rather than an ideological choice?

   Yes, these lies would worsen the recession, but why not simply erase the recession by calling it a “recovery”? The worse the recession, the more it could be said to be in a “recovery.” And since this magical (non-existent) “recovery” would be fueled by austerity, why not claim that austerity is prosperity?

   Cameron’s snake-oil pitch was so diabolically simple that it changed the entire mood of the June 2010 G-20 summit. Suddenly the recession was “over.” Suddenly lies were truth, up was down, black was white, stimulus was bad, and austerity was good. Suddenly rich parasites became “makers,” and their victims became “takers.”

   The corporate media praised this hucksterism. Pundits celebrated the Toronto G-20 as the “austerity summit.” A delighted Jim Flaherty (Canada’s finance minister) told reporters, “The top issue of the G-20 is the need for countries to find ways to deal with their spending and debt problems.”

   Meanwhile Mr. Flaherty’s servant, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, praised David Cameron for imposing brutal austerity on the U.K., saying it was the kind of fiscal constraint that the rest of the G-20 nations should adopt.

   At the Toronto G-20, Flaherty, Harper, Cameron, and George Osborne (Cameron’s finance minister) became the Four Horsemen of the Austerity-clipse, urging all government leaders to cut their budget deficits in half by 2013, and continue toward a “balanced budget.”

   Leading “experts” were already in agreement. A month before the Toronto G-20 summit, Harvard professors Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff published their infamous paper “Growth in the Time of Debt,” which used lies and distortions to justify austerity.

   However Obama hesitated, knowing that extreme austerity would make him despised by the American public. True, the peasants would not make Obama rich after he left office, nor build him a presidential library, but Obama was nonetheless concerned about the public’s reaction.

   Indeed, two months before the Toronto G20 summit, Obama had formed his National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (the Simpson-Bowles cat-food commission) to threaten austerity, so that the public’s reaction could be studied. Nancy Pelosi (then Speaker of the House) initially opposed the cat-food commission, but she later adopted austerity mania.

   Let’s repeat this: In mid-2010, Obama still believed in the need for stimulus spending. (At least, he did not preach that austerity equals prosperity for the masses.) News articles from that time portrayed the Toronto G-20 as “Obama versus the world.” Not until another year had passed did Obama fully adopt austerity mania with his “grand bargain” of mid-2011.

   Back at the Toronto G-20 (June 2010) one person who hesitated like Obama was Brazilian finance minister Guido Mantega. He loved David Cameron’s scheme of using the Big Lie to engineer the greatest heist in world history, but Mr. Mantega knew that such a crime would make him despised by the public. Mantega said that the “debt-reduction” targets could compromise economic growth, and would be “too draconian” for some countries to meet. He was eager to crush the Brazilian masses with gratuitous austerity, but he was not sure he could get away with it.

   Meanwhile in Washington DC (mid-2010) Peter R. Orszag was head Obama’s Office of Management and Budget. As a member of Obama’s cabinet, Orszag counseled Obama to not only turn to austerity, but to “go big” with deficit reduction (as Republicans were fond of saying). The quickest way to destroy or privatize social programs was to defund them. Later the rich would reward Obama by making him a multi-millionaire after he left office, just like they did with Bill Clinton.

   Mr. Orszag was forward-looking bureaucrat who even got the jump on David Cameron. In a November 2009 speech in New York (seven months before Cameron became prime minister) Orszag claimed that US government deficits are “serious and unsustainable,” and would add $9 trillion to the “national debt.” Orszag said that deficit spending is only necessary when the “official” unemployment was over 10 percent.

   Ironically, Orszag was countered by Lawrence “Sleepy” Summers, who was director of Obama’s National Economic Council. Summers cautioned that if Obama crushed the masses too quickly with austerity, then the masses might wake up from the Big Lie. It was much safer, Summers counseled, to crush the masses step-by-step, relentlessly and systematically.

   Larry Summers’ “weakness” angered Orszag, and caused him to resign as head of the OMB and accept a job as a vice-chairman at Citigroup, plus a membership of the Board of Directors of the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

   At the next G-20 summit (Seoul, South Korea, November 2010) government leaders renewed their vows to impose austerity (i.e. to cut their deficits).

   A month after that (Dec 2010) the Simpson-Bowles cat-food commission released its final report, but Congress failed to adopt it, because the report said the federal government should cut everything, including its massive welfare handouts to military contractors.

   Paul Ryan opposed the commission’s report, saying it did not cut “entitlements” enough. (Translation: no Democrat-appointed commission will ever out-do Ryan and the GOP for cutting social programs.)

   Meanwhile David Cameron continued with his Global Quest to widen the gap between the rich and the rest. In his New Year message of 31 Dec 2010, Cameron said, “I didn’t come into politics to make cuts. This is about the national interest, not personal agendas. We’re tackling the deficit not out of some ideological zeal, but because we have to. This is a government led not by ideology, but by people with a practical desire to sort out this country’s problems.”

   It was absolute lies, and it proved that human civilization had entered a new Golden Age. The rich and their toadies, using the Big Lie, had the means to finally destroy “entitlements” and to widen the wealth gap forever.

   By mid-2011, austerity mania was truly global, and Obama was fully on board. On 2 August 2011, Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011 which mandated “sequesters” beginning in January 2013.

   (The across-the-board sequesters caused military contractors to whine. How would the contractors pay bribes and kick-backs to politicians if they had no money to do it with? Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel gave countless interviews saying that if the military sequester was allowed to stand, it would doom America. Therefore on 10 December 2013 the “Bipartisan Budget Deal” made sure that the sequesters only cut social programs, and never again threatened military contractors. This will make average Americans poorer than ever, but it will also “save their homeland.” National security means an ever-widening gap between the rich and the rest.)

   In November 2011 the G-20 summit in Cannes, France reaffirmed the global orthodoxy of ever-increasing welfare for the rich, plus ever-increasing austerity for the masses. Obama boldly vowed to slash the US government’s budget deficit to 3 percent of GDP or less by fiscal year 2015 (which will begin on 1 Oct 2014).

   Cameron had triumphed. His “Age of Austerity” was here, and it will stay here forever — or until the masses awaken from the Big Lie.

   But lo! Cameron is only beginning! Now at the halfway mark of his coalition’s five year term, Cameron (the “Great Reformer”) has vowed to triple austerity, and make sure it continues forever. On 11 Nov 2013 he gave a speech at a banquet for Catherine Woolf, the new Lord Mayor of the City of London (the UK’s Wall Street). This was at the luxurious Guildhall Palace, which has hosted balls and banquets for England’s richest fat-cats since 1411 AD.

   In the Great Hall (the palace’s most opulent room) Cameron stood from a golden chair and spoke from a golden lectern to 900 well-pampered guests, insisting that austerity be made permanent and ever-increasing.

   His blatant candor caused the lowly waiters to pause as they scurried about. In response, Cameron lied to them, claiming that government spending “comes out of the pockets of the same taxpayers whose living standards we want to see improve.” (Cynical chuckles in the audience.)

   Among the esteemed guests was Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, who heads the Church of England.

   As the London parasites (the “makers”) bloated themselves on free food, they cheered for austerity, and condemned the victims (the “takers”) created by austerity. Above them, the sinister David Cameron vowed to further eradicate the “takers.” He demanded a “fundamental culture change in our country,” so that it “values that typically British, entrepreneurial, buccaneering spirit” (that is, so that society continues to worship pirates and thieves). He said that “We” (meaning the lower classes) “need to do more with less. Not just now, but permanently.”

   For Cameron, it is not enough to have the total privatization of all prisons, schools, hospitals, and social programs. No, austerity must be forever, in order to ensure that populism never again rises from its grave. The price of austerity is eternal vigilance.

   Cameron told his London superiors, in essence, that the gap between the rich and the rest is never static. It is either widening or narrowing. To make sure it is always widening, it is up to all rich people to assist Cameron in his glorious campaign.

   He said the British minimum wage should be cut by 30 percent to £4.42 ($7.25) so that it is on par with the USA. (Applause.)

   He denounced those “who think the way to reduce the cost of living in this country is for the state to spend more and more of taxpayers’ money.” (Wink, nudge.)

   He boasted of having cut spending on social programs by 30%. (Hooray!)

   He said the cost of living keeps going up because spending on social programs was still “out of control.” (Laughter.)

   He bragged that, “We are putting an end to the poverty and wealth traps that have plagued our welfare system for too long.” (Applause.)

   He said Britain could not succeed if “capable people are paid to stay idle and out of work.” (Cheers.) He said that corporations are what create jobs, and that government spending has nothing to do with it. (More cheers.)

   Finally he raised his fist and shouted that “Profit is no longer a dirty word!” (Ten-minute standing ovation with roars of approval.)

   The next day, tabloids owned by Rupert Murdoch (the billionaire oligarch) praised Cameron’s speech with the headline, “BUCCANEER WE GO—Build business and shrink the State!”

   By bringing in the Age of Austerity, Cameron has destroyed “Great” Britain. The UK’s National Health System was established in 1948, and is now being dismantled. The Health and Social Care Act of 2012 will cut the NHS budget by 20% (i.e. £20 billion, or $32.7 billion) by 2015. Cameron has vowed to increase the cuts to £30 billion.

   Already his cuts have caused a shortage of 20,000 nurses, resulting in much higher mortality rates in hospitals. The goal is to make average Britons so desperate that they beg Cameron for relief, even if it means 100% privatization of British health care.

   The overall plan is to starve public institutions of money until privatization remains the only choice.

   The British Medical Association held its first emergency meeting in 19 years so that members could beg politicians not to privatize health care. They had no effect. If doctors question austerity, then they become “takers.”

   Cameron is also privatizing public education. Teachers are under a three-year wage freeze. Their pensions have already been cut by 12 percent. In November 2013 the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development placed the UK on the lowest ranks of 65 countries on educational attainment, behind Russia, Poland and Hungary. This too is part of Cameron’s plan. Less education means more subservient “takers.”

   Since 2010, Cameron has cut £21.8 billion ($35.7 billion) from welfare (the British equivalent to Social Security). He has vowed many more cuts. Without them, he says, social programs are “unsustainable.”

   Perhaps you are thinking, “All politicians repeat the Big Lie. Why is Cameron supposedly special?”

   If you compare the statements of all politicians, including Paul Ryan, John Boehner, and so on, none of them (NONE of them) are as consistent liars as is Cameron. On very rare occasions, Paul Ryan says something almost lucid before he relapses into his toady-for-the-rich routine. By contrast, David Cameron NEVER lets up. He is the most fanatically right-wing PM in British history. The lower his public approval rating, the higher his rich people’s approval rating, which is all that matters.

   When Obama says something half-logical, it is surreal, because we know that Obama is a slime-ball. This surreal factor never happens with Cameron, since he NEVER tells the truth. Not remotely. Cameron is utterly shameless. Not even Tony Blair was in Cameron’s league. And it’s doubly bad because average Britons are trapped on a miserable little island from which there is no escape. Everything in England is gray, cold, tiny and cramped. When I explored the place, I never saw a single person laugh, and that was before the Age of Austerity.

   And still Cameron marches on. Today in his New Year’s address (1 Jan 2014), he vowed to continue increasing austerity as part of his “vital work on the deficit.”

   He calls this “the plan.”

   “The plan is working. This year, 2014, we are not just going to stick to the plan – we are going to redouble our efforts to deliver every part of it.”

   The more that Cameron uses austerity to destroy the UK economy, the more he claims the UK is “in recovery.”

   “When we came to office, our economy was on its knees. Three and a half years later, we are turning a corner.”

   He warned the people of Scotland to continue submitting to his austerity program, and to vote NO on Scottish independence in the coming referendum (18 Sep 2014). (Some Scots want to break away and create their own currency, so that Scotland controls its own fiscal and monetary policy. This would be a disastrous blow to the City of London’s financial tyranny.)

   As a final insult, this liar, swindler, and parasite vowed to, “Carry on building an economy for people who work hard and play by the rules.” (!!!!)

   And so I congratulate David Cameron on his richly deserved award of “most blatant toady for the rich.” There were many contenders (e.g. the “can-kicks-back” creeps, and the “fix-the-debt” goons), but none are as widely cherished as Cameron, nor as often featured in the media.

   Under Cameron’s austerity, average Britons must now spend all their wages on food and shelter. They no longer work to advance themselves, but merely to postpone an agonizing death. In the real world, this is called slavery.

   And yet, despite all of the above, average Britons blame their misery on (wait for it)…IMMIGRANTS!!!!

   Happy New Year Cameron! Dude, you rock!

   LikeLike

   Reply

   1. Although she’s long gone, I’m sure Thatcher is at the top of your “liar” list. Here is a chart worth looking at, capitalist leaning UK vs socialist heaven France.

      http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/04/how-margaret-thatcher-turned-around-great-britain-in-one-chart/

      Interesting that the UK overtake France in terms of real GDP in a mere 20 years, with the Brits going from 10% poorer to 10% richer than their French counterparts. And before you blame the Euro, the trend change started right with Tatcher at the helm in the late 70s early 80s.

      The reason the British accept “austerity” (whatever that is) is because lower government spending is actually beneficial to the economy. I am really unsure as to which country is “listening” to Cameron – not one of the major economies is implementing “austerity” measures, most are either increasing spending or leaving spending as is. Other than countries who can no longer borrow from the credit markets to take the next shot of heroin (Greece, Cyprus), name one country and I will proof to you that there hasn’t been any “austerity” measures.

      SNAP benefits more than doubled from 2000 to 2007 and again more than doubled between 2007 and 2013. And the socialists are calling a 5% reduction a “cut”. Sounds like an old car dealership scam to me – and it is.

      As I have said before, not one of these programs will work because they fail to address the source of the issue. All they do is mask the issue and destroy the middle class.

      Keep in mind that France is the mother-ship of socialism on earth. So Quat, without resorting to name calling, can you tell us why UK seems to be improving while France is falling way behind? (Let me guess: France’s stimulus package has not been “large” enough)

      LikeLike

      Reply

      1. How does a euro nation increase spending without also increasing taxing and borrowing. From where do the additional euros come?

         LikeLiked by 1 person

         Reply

      2. 1. You claim to not know the definition of austerity

         2. You claim that not one of the major economies is implementing austerity measures

         2. You claim that lower government spending (i.e. austerity) is beneficial to the economy.

         4. You claim that it is a scam to call cuts in the SNAP program “cuts”

         5. You claim that social programs destroy the middle class

         6. You claim that the UK is “improving.”

         Oh well. Thanks for commenting.

         LikeLike

         Reply

4. This can’t go on forever. There is something called Emerging by means of Emergency. We have to try all the wrong models before we know what the right one is. Remember all that old film footage of the pre-flight attempts of trying to make humans fly like a bird. They were funny to us but dead serious to the inventors at that time.

   We will continue to crash but hopefully not burn. It’ll be touch and go right down to the wire, no guarantees we’ll succeed. All we can do in the meantime is stick to our guns and tell the truth as best we can.

   LikeLike

   Reply

5. Republicans are increasingly becoming a Party inhabiting an alternate universe

   LikeLike

   Reply

   1. Regarding alternative universes…

      The more right-wing a person is, the more irrational he or she tends to be. That is, the more everything in his universe is “faith based.”

      Thus, in the right-wing universe…

      There is no such thing as evolution. Species do not adapt to changing environments, since environments do not change.

      Abortion is evil. So are government programs that keep children alive (unless the parents are rich, in which case their government handouts are a “God-given right”).

      Lazy, parasitic rich people are “makers.” Toiling slaves are “takers.”

      If the US government ran its finances the way that Rodger Mitchell explains, there would be hyper-inflation.

      The best way to grow the economy is to starve it of money.

      The best way to create jobs is to eliminate social programs.

      The best way to cure an anemic economy is to apply leeches, called austerity.

      The best way to make Social Security “sustainable” is to raise the FICA tax, and thereby destroy money, while crippling workers and employers alike.

      Austerity is a mathematical necessity, not an ideological choice. It brings prosperity to all, especially the lower classes. No amount of austerity is sufficient for the 99%. They must always have more austerity.

      America’s children will have to pay back all the money that investors ever deposited into their own private Fed savings accounts. The best way for America’s children to pay back this “debt” is to let politicians eliminate or privatize all social programs.

      The more the financial economy sucks life out of the real economy, the more the real economy is in “recovery.”

      …and so on.

      All of these lies are faith-based, and they are spouted by everyone from bible-thumping preachers to Harvard “experts.”

      On a related note, some people claim that rich people and their toadies (preachers, pundits, professors, and politicians) simply “misunderstand” government finances.

      Such claims ignore the fact that for rich people and their toadies, everything is faith-based (not only their explanations of government finances).

      In the faith-based universe, everything is suffused with greed, hate, selfishness, and self-righteousness.

      To claim that that faith-based fanatics “don’t get it” is to excuse their crimes. Indeed, the very claim that they “don’t get it,” is itself faith-based, with no connection to logic or objective fact.

      LikeLike

      Reply

6. Nature’s saddest failed experiment indeed. When it comes to politics and society overall, humans never learn fromt the past.

   Consider the euro currency. No matter jow many problems it causes, the nightmare keeps spreading. On 1 Jan 2014 it was Latvia’s turn to adopt the euro.

   Are we a messed-up species, or WHAT?

   LikeLike

   Reply

   1. So you think giving up the single most valuable asset any nation has — its Monetary Sovereignty — and adopting a currency over which it has no control — a currency that prevents the nation from combating recessions, depressions, unemployment, stagflations and inflations — is a bad idea?

      I wonder why..

      LikeLike

      Reply

      1. It’s only a bad idea for the masses, Rodger. It’s a great idea for the rich. They and their toadies support the euro because it widens the gap between the rich and the rest. That’s why the nightmare continues to spread. Estonia already has the disease, which has now infected Latvia. Who is next? Lithuania? Poland?

         Austerity and inequality are a global plague. Wherever the disease spreads to, it widens the gap between the rich and the rest. That’s why politicians in the infected nations support the disease.

         Austerity means a widened gap between the rich and the rest, and between the financial economy and the real economy. The euro currency makes austerity obligatory and permanent. Obligatory austerity wipes out social programs, and hollows out the middle class. It forces mass privatization, in which privileged individuals acquire public assets for free, or at fire-sale prices. It spares politicians from having to compete during elections (as long as euro-zone politicians support the euro, they receive funding from the Troika). It causes a reduction in wages, and makes workers more subservient. It is a fast-track toward feudalism, in which nations consist of peasants and lords, with nothing in between.

         Average Europeans support all this. They bicker and whine about everything EXCEPT the euro currency. They condemn anyone who exposes the truth as “insane,” or a “socialist,” or simply, “Hitler.”

         +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

         –Off topic – Off topic —

         WHO IS A PEASANT?

         In my comments, I use the term “peasant” to refer to mental condition, not a material one. If a person is hurt by the Big Lie, and he defends it, then he is a peasant, regardless of his income.

         By contrast, if a person does NOT defend the Big Lie, then he is NOT a peasant, even if he lives in a cardboard box. He is simply a victim of the herd.

         Therefore, among the masses as a whole, MATERIAL poverty is sustained by MENTAL poverty.

         Some individuals are not peasants (they are not MENTALLY impoverished), yet they remain MATERIALLY impoverished because of the mental poverty around them. They are cast out by society.

         +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

         AUSTERIANS AND DRUG LORDS

         Suppose we become toadies for the rich, seeking to improve our lot by championing the Big Lie, and by cheering for austerity. What would this be like? I submit that it would be like becoming a drug dealer, with all its perks and its perils.

         Drug dealers dispense poisons that their suicidal clients demand. Austerity toadies dispense poisons that their suicidal constituents demand. Publicly the toadies seem united. Privately they compete to become the biggest austerian, often attacking and undermining each other. Since there is no shortage of toadies, the rich take their pick. Hence the toadies bicker. For example, Paul Ryan attacked the Simpson-Bowles cat-food commission, even though they all pushed for austerity. Democrat and Republican politicians bicker, even though they both want austerity. Each side wants to be more favored by the rich. And each politician has his “turf.”

         Black conservatives get in on this game, (e.g. Ben Carson, who Rodger discussed on 31 Dec.) Like drug dealers, they stake their “claim” and defend their “turf,” which includes segments of the Black population, plus Tea Party morons who imagine that they are not racists. Black conservatives advance themselves by dispensing poison in their “turf” (i.e. by championing the Big Lie).

         Whether we speak of austerity or illicit drugs, the kings (drug lords) are rich people.

         Next down are middle men, i.e. major drug traffickers and prominent austerity toadies. For example, the Koch brothers are major drug lords. Below them, Paul Ryan is a prominent drug trafficker who works for the lords.

         Farther below Ryan (i.e. below the drug traffickers) are regional and neighborhood drug dealers who dream of moving upward, and becoming major drug traffickers (perhaps even drug lords). These are the local pushers of the Big Lie. They include mayors, city councilmen, city managers, county sheriffs, local banking executives, newspaper editors, members of the state legislature, and so on.

         Some local drug dealers / austerity toadies have connections with big drug traffickers, and even with drug lords. For example, Rahm Emanuel of Chicago is a petty drug dealer, yet he has power because of his connections. However, Mr. Emanuel is not invulnerable. He can be knocked off by a rival drug dealer, i.e. a rival austerian toady.

         Finally there are people who pretend to be drug dealers / austerians in order to deny their own mortality. Senior citizens like Alan K. Simpson (aged 82) push for austerity to fight loneliness. They do it so that young toadies will talk to them. They do it so they will “matter.” They are just as evil as Black conservatives, since they seek to “matter” by casting their fellow senior citizens into poverty. They seek to evade the Grim Reaper by throwing countless other people into the Reaper’s grasp.

         It is the same with all toadies at all levels. They seek to become rich by throwing countless other people into poverty.

         I don’t know if there is an afterlife, but I like to imagine that there is, and that the toadies will be asked, “What did you do with your life?” And they will have to account for their evil. “You accomplished nothing but destruction. What do you have to say for yourself?”

         +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

         ARE GERMAN WORKERS HAPPY?

         When nations collectively surrender their monetary sovereignty, they are reduced to having only two sources of money: a central bank somewhere, plus foreign trade. (They can sell bonds, but the debt load becomes quickly unbearable.)

         The central bank issues money as loans, while direct money (“fiscal-style”) comes only from foreign trade. Thus, the nation with the biggest trade surplus sucks the other nations dry.

         Germany hosts the central bank (the ECB) and also has a whopping trade surplus. Hence, Germany is the loudest champion of the euro-scam.

         However this advantage mainly benefits rich Germans and their toadies. Average Germans, not so much. It is true that German workers experience less unemployment than do workers in Greece, Portugal, or Spain. Nonetheless, German workers, like workers everywhere, face downward pressure on their wages and benefits. They face pressure to have shorter vacations, fewer pensions, less maternity allowances, and so on. They are becoming porrer, since rents in the urban areas keep skyrocketing.

         Thus, the euro scam gives a tremendous advantage to Germany as whole, yet within Germany itself, the gap between the rich and the rest continues to widen, as it does everywhere else.

         This is the purpose of austerity and the euro-scam: to widen the gap between the rich and the rest. It applies even inside Germany.

         Fortunately for rich Germans and their toadies, the average German defends the euro-scam out of self-righteousness. Germany as a whole is a parasitic vampire that is killing its host (i.e. killing the other 17 nations in the euro-zone). Despite this, the average German claims that, “We are carrying the rest of the Europe on our backs.”

         And so, as a righteous “victim,” the average German defends the euro-scam that is widening the wealth gap in all euro-zone nations, including Germany.

         LikeLike

         Reply

7. Have you ever considered creating an ebook or guest
   authoring on other blogs? I have a blog based upon on the same information you
   discuss and would love to have you share some stories/information. I know
   my readers would enjoy your work. If you’re even remotely
   interested, feel free to shoot me an email.

   LikeLike

   Reply

   1. Thank you,

      Near the top of the left hand column, you will find the link, “Every Post from 2009.” Clicking on it will take you to more than 2,000 posts. You have my permission to quote from any (with attribution).

      Rodger Malcolm MItchell

      LikeLike

      Reply