The Daily Bell is a blog, the ostensible purpose of which is to promote libertarianism, though if you read their articles and examine the background of its founder, Anthony Wile, you might get the distinct impression their fundamental purpose has been to sell gold to Wile’s customers.
There was a time when I tried to educate Wile about Monetary Sovereignty, but he banned me from his blog. No surprise, given that MS explodes the myths about owning gold.
How does one sell gold? One creates scare stories, saying the dollar no longer will be accepted, or the U.S. is going bankrupt or there are Martians landing in Area 52 (one more than Area 51), or that some other calamity lurks just around the bend.
Then, all the innocents jump in and gold hawkers make a fortune — which they hold in “worthless” dollars.
Recently, The Daily Bell published another scare article. This one doesn’t mention gold, but it fits in with the gold bug’s mantra (“A disaster is coming and “paper” dollars will be worthless, so you better buy, buy, buy gold.”)
STAFF NEWS; ANALYSIS
New US Civil War? A Clinton Presidency Will Alienate Tens of Millions, Perhaps Violently
By Daily Bell Staff – June 10, 2016
President Barack Obama’s endorsement of Hillary for president may well mean that Hillary Clinton becomes President of the United States. And given the polarizing nature of the Clintons, Hillary’s ascension might usher in a kind of subdued, domestic civil war.
The resistance would be covert but continual.
First, they scared their readers with a bang: “US Civil War” and “Violently.” The rest of the article involved a whimper: “subdued” and “covert.” Conspiracy theorists love the word, “covert.”
No doubt it would lead to a much harsher federal stance as regards civil liberties and presumptive constitutional rights. The authoritarian and repressive trends now percolating in the US would be considerably aggravated by a Hillary presidency.
Ah, how the right wing hates authoritarianism and repressiveness — such as the forced deportation of 11 million Mexican men, women, and children (many of whom are citizens). Is that authoritarian and repressive enough?
Or does “authoritarian and repressive” refer to laws against abortion, laws against gay marriage, the infamous bathroom laws, anti-Muslim laws, refusal of the Senate to consider any Supreme Court justice, voter ID laws to prevent the poor from voting, or states costing taxpayers millions just to avoid expanding Medicaid?
Those kinds of authoritarian and repressive laws?
So, exactly which authoritarian and repressive laws is the Daily Bell talking about? They never say. Nor do they say whether the loss of constitutional rights includes ending birthright for children born in the U.S. to foreign parents.
The ironies just won’t quit.
President Obama huddled with Attorney General Loretta Lynch in an Oval Office meeting closed to the media.
Ooohh . . . A conspiracy. The President talked with someone in the Oval Office, and it was closed to the media. And here we thought Presidents always had the media present when they talked with people in the Oval Office.
Do you think the media were present when Cheney told Bush torture of prisoners was the American way ? Or was Trump in on it? (He wants to impose even more extreme torture.)
No doubt Obama emphasized to Loretta Lynch that even if the FBI suggested Hillary’s indictment on charges of espionage and public corruption, Lynch ought not to take action.
“No doubt”? “Even if”? The right wing loves to create, out of vague terms, conspiracies, most of which involve taking your guns. One of my favorites was Jade Helm 15, a conspiracy that drove right-wing governor Greg Abbott so insane he called out the Texas National Guard.
It is said there are elements within the FBI that feel very strongly about a Hillary indictment. Even before the larger, public controversy, a kind of internal, federal civil war may commence.
“It is said there are elements . . .” Who said? Which elements? Daily Bell has no idea. It’s just doing its usual conspiracy-mongering.
Loretta Lynch refused to bring indictments against the Internal Revenue Service for its mistreatment of Tea Party groups. And it is likely Lynch will not issue a criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton.
It’s not that she just didn’t bring indictments; she refused to bring indictments. Whom did she refuse? Anthony Wile?
Anyway, why would an Attorney General not bring an indictment?
This may be a longshot, but . . . Could one reason be lack of evidence? To the utter dismay of the right-wing, there also was no indictment in the ridiculous Benghazi “scandal” (the only scandal being the right-wing’s wasted money and 11-hour grilling of Clinton that produced nothing).
By the way, there also was no indictment of Bush and Chaney for lying about the Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the resultant Iraq war, which claimed so many American lives and led to the absolute chaos in the Middle East. Just sayin’.
Fox commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Thursday that an endorsement by President Obama of Hillary Clinton would be a major conflict of interest. Obama’s endorsement of Hillary sends a message to the FBI that the President of the United States wants Hillary to run and win.
If it comes from Fox, it has to be true. You see, the FBI is so stupid they had no idea a Democrat, President Obama, wanted a fellow Democrat and his former cabinet member, to win. They probably thought Obama wanted Trump to win. Fortunately, Napolitano cleared up that mystery for the FBI. Whew!
Donald Trump has been branded a racist. Business and personal accusations are leveled and repeated every day. The constant drumbeat of accusations – and actions – will keep Trump on the defensive.
Trump has “been branded” a racist? You mean, when a guy says Mexican immigrants are criminals and rapists, and when he says a judge whose parents were Mexican immigrants can’t be impartial, and when he wants to ban all Muslims from America, someone has to “brand” him a racist? Doesn’t he do that bit of branding all by himself?
The whole article is absolute nonsense — typical Daily Bell — but this is my favorite part:
There are even those who suspect Trump entered the campaign to facilitate Hillary’s election in the first place. Trump was friendly with the Clintons; they attended one of his weddings.
Well, that settles it. The Clintons attended one of Trump’s three weddings, ergo Trump wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Some unnamed people suspect it, so how could we not trust it?
Here at DB, we believed that Hillary was not Obama’s first choice to succeed him. And because of what seemed to be Hillary’s obvious mishandling of classified emails, we believed at some point she might be asked to resign in return for a presidential pardon.
But despite mixed signals, Obama’s decision to endorse Hillary seems to indicate that she is safe. Obama may have believed this is his best move not just politically but also personally – as it is possible his own involvement in the email mess could generate criminal charges.
Do you see any facts at all in the above? No?
DB’s beliefs are just a bunch of “seems to indicate,” “may have believed,” “it is possible,” and “could” all in the same sentence — fever dreams by a right-wing conspiracy theorist.
There are larger issues here, of course. Obama is not a popular president at this point. And the Clintons seem actively despised by many millions. Barring some unforeseen development it now looks as if Hillary might be president.
Get it? He’s not popular and she’s actively despised, so it looks like the people will vote for her. That is what passes for DB (Don’t Believe) logic.
A reprise of the Clinton leadership will surely lead to electoral chaos and fury.But the banking interests running the US should be content with this outcome. Perhaps it is part of the plan.
Conclusion: Their slogan is “out of chaos, order.” They may well have their chaos. And no doubt will take advantage of it to create a new and more globalist “order.”
O.K. maybe this one is my real favorite.
DB unearthed this chestnut from of an obscure conversation in which John Kerry lamented the chaos of ISIS and the Syrian war, and the hundreds of thousands of displaced people flooding Europe, and all the other wars around the world. He said he wanted to make some order out of all this chaos.
Doesn’t that make sense to you?
It does to me, but not to the DB. They twisted his words to say the U.S. wanted to create chaos so that we could impose something the right loves to fear (though they never say what it is): A new world order.
What exactly is the new world order? A Big Mac, perhaps? No one knows, but it’s bad. Real bad.
Or, perhaps it means forcing all of Wile’s customer to buy gold.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. ELIMINATE FICA (Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA )
Although the article lists 10 reasons to eliminate FICA, there are two fundamental reasons:
*FICA is the most regressive tax in American history, widening the Gap by punishing the low and middle-income groups, while leaving the rich untouched, and
*The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, neither needs nor uses FICA to support Social Security and Medicare.
2. FEDERALLY FUNDED MEDICARE — PARTS A, B & D, PLUS LONG TERM CARE — FOR EVERYONE (H.R. 676, Medicare for All )
This article addresses the questions:
*Does the economy benefit when the rich afford better health care than the rest of Americans?
*Aside from improved health care, what are the other economic effects of “Medicare for everyone?”
*How much would it cost taxpayers?
*Who opposes it?”
3. PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC BONUS TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN AMERICA, AND/OR EVERY STATE, A PER CAPITA ECONOMIC BONUS (The JG (Jobs Guarantee) vs the GI (Guaranteed Income) vs the EB) Or institute a reverse income tax.
This article is the fifth in a series about direct financial assistance to Americans:
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Employer of Last Resort is a bad idea. Sunday, Jan 1 2012
MMT’s Job Guarantee (JG) — “Another crazy, rightwing, Austrian nutjob?” Thursday, Jan 12 2012
Why Modern Monetary Theory’s Jobs Guarantee is like the EU’s euro: A beloved solution to the wrong problem. Tuesday, May 29 2012
“You can’t fire me. I’m on JG” Saturday, Jun 2 2012
Economic growth should include the “bottom” 99.9%, not just the .1%, the only question being, how best to accomplish that. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) favors giving everyone a job. Monetary Sovereignty (MS) favors giving everyone money. The five articles describe the pros and cons of each approach.
4. FREE EDUCATION (INCLUDING POST-GRAD) FOR EVERYONEFive reasons why we should eliminate school loans
Monetarily non-sovereign State and local governments, despite their limited finances, support grades K-12. That level of education may have been sufficient for a largely agrarian economy, but not for our currently more technical economy that demands greater numbers of highly educated workers.
Because state and local funding is so limited, grades K-12 receive short shrift, especially those schools whose populations come from the lowest economic groups. And college is too costly for most families.
An educated populace benefits a nation, and benefiting the nation is the purpose of the federal government, which has the unlimited ability to pay for K-16 and beyond.
5. SALARY FOR ATTENDING SCHOOL
Even were schooling to be completely free, many young people cannot attend, because they and their families cannot afford to support non-workers. In a foundering boat, everyone needs to bail, and no one can take time off for study.
If a young person’s “job” is to learn and be productive, he/she should be paid to do that job, especially since that job is one of America’s most important.
6. ELIMINATE CORPORATE TAXES
Corporations themselves exist only as legalities. They don’t pay taxes or pay for anything else. They are dollar-tranferring machines. They transfer dollars from customers to employees, suppliers, shareholders and the government (the later having no use for those dollars).
Any tax on corporations reduces the amount going to employees, suppliers and shareholders, which diminishes the economy. Ultimately, all corporate taxes come around and reappear as deductions from your personal income.
7. INCREASE THE STANDARD INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, ANNUALLY. (Refer to this.)
Federal taxes punish taxpayers and harm the economy. The federal government has no need for those punishing and harmful tax dollars. There are several ways to reduce taxes, and we should evaluate and choose the most progressive approaches.
Cutting FICA and corporate taxes would be an good early step, as both dramatically affect the 99%. Annual increases in the standard income tax deduction, and a reverse income tax also would provide benefits from the bottom up. Both would narrow the Gap.
8. TAX THE VERY RICH (THE “.1%) MORE, WITH HIGHER PROGRESSIVE TAX RATES ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME. (TROPHIC CASCADE)
There was a time when I argued against increasing anyone’s federal taxes. After all, the federal government has no need for tax dollars, and all taxes reduce Gross Domestic Product, thereby negatively affecting the entire economy, including the 99.9%.
But I have come to realize that narrowing the Gap requires trimming the top. It simply would not be possible to provide the 99.9% with enough benefits to narrow the Gap in any meaningful way. Bill Gates reportedly owns $70 billion. To get to that level, he must have been earning $10 billion a year. Pick any acceptable Gap (1000 to 1?), and the lowest paid American would have to receive $10 million a year. Unreasonable.
9. FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF ALL BANKS (Click The end of private banking and How should America decide “who-gets-money”?)
Banks have created all the dollars that exist. Even dollars created at the direction of the federal government, actually come into being when banks increase the numbers in checking accounts. This gives the banks enormous financial power, and as we all know, power corrupts — especially when multiplied by a profit motive.
Although the federal government also is powerful and corrupted, it does not suffer from a profit motive, the world’s most corrupting influence.
10. INCREASE FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE MYRIAD INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT AMERICA’S 99.9% (Federal agencies)Browse the agencies. See how many agencies benefit the lower- and middle-income/wealth/ power groups, by adding dollars to the economy and/or by actions more beneficial to the 99.9% than to the .1%.
Save this reference as your primer to current economics. Sadly, much of the material is not being taught in American schools, which is all the more reason for you to use it.
The Ten Steps will grow the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and you.
THE RECESSION CLOCK
Recessions begin an average of 2 years after the blue line first dips below zero. A common phenomenon is for the line briefly to dip below zero, then rise above zero, before falling dramatically below zero. There was a brief dip below zero in 2015, followed by another dip – the familiar pre-recession pattern.
Recessions are cured by a rising red line.
Vertical gray bars mark recessions.
As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.
•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes..
•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.
•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
•Deficit spending grows the supply of money
•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
•The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.
•Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
•The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between rich and the rest..
•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between rich and poor.
•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..