It takes only two things to keep people in chains:
The ignorance of the oppressed
and the treachery of their leaders.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Here is when the world will end. I read it in the October 4th, 2017 issue of NewScientist Magazine, and if it’s printed, you know it’s right.

The end is nigh.

What a surprise – the end of the world has been delayed, again
The planet Nibiru was meant to wipe us out on Saturday. Undeterred by a no-show, doomsday theorists are already peddling more nonsense
By Geraint Lewis

CONGRATULATIONS, you have survived the latest prophesied doomsday. For weeks, the darker corners of the media have been abuzz with predictions that the end of the world was coming.

Some suggested it would coincide with the 21 August US total solar eclipse. Others plumped for 23 September, for no other reason than 33 days would have passed since the eclipse.

Always keen to move on from a no-show, conspiracy theorists have revised the big day to 21 October.

Prophecies of doom aren’t new. At the turning points of centuries or millennia, someone always comes out of the woodwork to claim that the end is nigh.

Others predict the end of days based on how immoral and violent society has become, although recent decades have been relatively peaceful compared with most other historical periods.

In 2012, we were told that the ancient Mayans had predicted the demise of the world on 21 December, 2012, when some cosmic event, such as a rogue planet called Nibiru.

But in 2017, the doomsayers said Nibiru was back and headed our way again. Predictably, some corners of the media lapped it up.

With a heavy sigh, science brushed off and recycled the same messages as in 2012, pointing out that if Nibiru was wandering the solar system, we would know.

Prophesies of doom do frighten people, so we must continue to call out nonsense and pseudoscience when we see it.

The media also has a part to play inaccurate and balanced portrayal of science. There is enough scary stuff without imagined threats.

O.K., so there have been a few world ending “no-shows” –a actually quite a lot of “no-shows — but that won’t stop the claims.

Image result for end of the world prophet

The end is till nigh.

Fortunately, you are too smart to fall for that “nonsense, pseudoscience, and imagined threats.” You have seen the multitude of “Henny, Penny, the sky is falling” predictions, and none of them have come true.

Repeated no-shows are a pretty good indication of no-sense. So, you’re not going to be taken in again.   You know, “Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice; shame on me.”

Ah, but would you like to know when the world really will end? I’ll give you a hint. It will be shortly after September 26th, 1940.

You read right: 1940. How do I know? Click the link to see the first of my sources:

Federal Debt, A “Ticking Time Bomb”.

Sept 26, 1940, New York Times: “Deficit Financing is Hit by Hanes: ” . . . unless an end is put to deficit financing, to profligate spending and to indifference as to the nature and extent of governmental borrowing, the nation will surely take the road to dictatorship, Robert M. Hanes, president of the American Bankers Association asserted today.

He said, “insolvency is the time-bomb which can eventually destroy the American system . . . the Federal debt . . . threatens the solvency of the entire economy.”

Oops. Apparently, “the insolvency of the entire economy” wasn’t a “time bomb,” and it didn’t destroy the American system.  We still are here.

The same claim has been made repeatedly — almost daily — since 1940, and it has been a repeated no-show, since 1940.

Perhaps the prediction was a tad premature for, at the time, the federal debt was only $40 BILLION. But now, the federal debt is $14 TRILLION, 35,000% larger, so here, in the next link, is an update:

From “ticking time bomb to “looming collapse.
(Excerpts from an April 27, 2017 article in the American Institute for Economic Research, by by Max Gulker, PhD – Senior Research FellowTheodore Cangero)

The Federal Reserve will create problems if it prints money to purchase Treasury securities. First, by stepping in and buying Treasury securities, it might disincentivize Congress from putting the budget on a sustainable path.

Second, monetizing the government debt will likely cause inflation. The government receives the new money first, spending it and pushing up prices.

International investors will see the Fed buying Treasury securities. This will likely cause them to demand higher interest rates. Since many consumer interest rates are linked to Treasury rates, interest rates would rise across the economy.

See, the budget is not on a “sustainable path,” and “monetizing the debt will cause inflation” and that will cause “interest rates to rise.”

Uh, but isn’t that what Robert M. Hanes, president of the American Bankers Association, said back in 1940, when the federal debt was 1/350th of what it is today? Isn’t that what the debt scarers have been saying for the past 77 years?

Surely, 77 years of exactly the same failure — the same no-show — would convince any intelligent person, that these debt scarers don’t know what they are talking about.

Nobody would be stupid enough to keep falling for the same “Henny Penny, sky is falling, nonsense, pseudoscience, and imagined threats.” You know, ” . . . fool me twice, shame on me.”

No-shows for 77 years. At least, you won’t fall for it. Right?

Marc Goldwein: National Debt: Yes, Rising Annual Deficits Threaten the U.S. Economy
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) September 5, 2017

The U.S. debt load will reduce private investment, slow wage growth, raise interest rates, shrink the economy and increase the likelihood of an eventual fiscal crisis.

(But the debt load is up 35,000% and interest rates are low, the economy has grown, and we are not in “fiscal crisis).

High debt levels also force the government to spend more on debt service leaving fewer dollars available to finance new investments, national defense, anti-poverty programs or tax relief.

“But the debt level is up 35,000% and the government has unlimited dollars available to “finance new investments, national defense, anti-poverty or tax relief.”)

Perhaps most significantly, debt cannot forever rise faster than the economy; and with debt growing unsustainably, the country is making promises we simply cannot keep.

(But for 77 years — actually for more than 200 years — the debt has risen faster than GDP, and we still are keeping whatever promises Marc Goldwein is referring to.)

A combination of thoughtful entitlement reform, tax reform, immigration reform, regulatory reform and deficit reduction will put the country on a more sustainable path and at the same time grow the economy and increase wages and income.

(Ah, and then there is that inevitable word, “sustainable.” What does it mean? No one knows.)

The United States can’t forever spend far more than it brings in, and we can’t indefinitely borrow our way to prosperity.

(How far in the future is “forever”? When is “indefinitely”? Next month? Next century? We never are told. Marc Goldwein and the CRFB have no idea. But they keep saying it, anyway.)

And there it is, folks. The CRFB, an organization that has been spewing exactly the same end-of-the-world nuttiness since it was founded in June 10, 1981.

That’s for THIRTY-SIX YEARS — the CRFB has given you exactly the same “debt cannot forever rise faster than the economy,” exactly the same, “debt growing unsustainably,” exactly the same threats about higher, “ interest rates, shrinking economy, and “fiscal crisis.”

And it all never happens, not in the past 77 years and not in the past 367 years.

Image result for aliens on an alien world

The end of the world is really, really nigh. We mean it this time.

Just more no-shows, day after day, year after year after year.

Amazingly, there still are those who believe planet Nibiru is about to wipe out the earth.

They are the types who also believe the nonsense and imagined threats” coming to them from the CRFB, and from the bribed-by-the-rich politicians, and from the owned-by-the-rich media, and from the the employed-by-the-rich economists for THIRTY-SIX years (or for the SEVENTY-SEVEN years since 1940).

And, they do not allow historical fact to influence them. They are not dissuaded by no-shows.

Hey, maybe these guys also come from planet Nibiru, and they know something we lowly humans don’t.

Or not.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

THOUGHTS

•All we have are partial solutions; the best we can do is try.

•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 no matter how much it taxes its citizens.

•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.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Progressives 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 the rich and the rest.

•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between the rich and the rest.

•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY