Author Archives: Lila

“Meltdown” by Thomas Woods

Posted on by

“The media tells us that “deregulation” and “unfettered free markets” have wrecked our economy and will continue to make things worse without a heavy dose of federal regulation. But the real blame lies elsewhere. In Meltdown, bestselling author Thomas E. Woods Jr. unearths the real causes behind the collapse of housing values and the stock market – and it turns out the culprits reside more in Washington than on Wall Street.

And the trillions of dollars in federal bailouts? Our politicians’ ham-handed attempts to fix the problems they themselves created will only make things much worse. Woods, a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and winner of the 2006 Templeton Enterprise Award, busts the media myths and government spin. He explains how government intervention in the economy – from the Democratic hobbyhorse called Fannie Mae to affirmative action programs like the Community Redevelopment Act – actually caused the housing bubble.

Most important, Woods, author of the New York Times bestseller The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, traces this most recent boom-and-bust – and all such booms and busts of the past century – back to one of the most revered government institutions of all: the Federal Reserve System, which allows busy-body bureaucrats and ambitious politicians to pull the strings of our financial sector and manipulate the value of the very money we use…”

Comment:

That’s the blurb to Thomas Woods’ new book, “Meltdown,” which gives a classic Austrian rebuttal of the notion that lack of regulation of the economy is the sole reason for the current economic crisis, rather than the corrupt nexus between government and business in a managed economy. According to his blurb, Wood correctly assesses the current problem as a problem of cheap money, induced by Federal Reserve policies.

I have Woods’ previous book on the US constitution on my desk since I intend to review it.  I thought it was both mostly right at one level and partly wrong at another.*  I wonder if that will be the case with this book too. Still, as a contrarian and critic of establishment propaganda, I have to pull for any book brave enough to fly in the face of  academic orthodoxy. (Judging by Woods’ popularity, though –  a Google search of his name turns up millions of hits – he has a legion in tow to keep up his courage: here’s a link to his  impassioned speech at the Ron Paul Rally for the Republic (September 2008) on The Stupid Party versus the Evil Party)

“IF YOU WANT TO STOP THE WAR MACHINE, YOU HAVE TO GO AFTER THE MONEY MACHINE.”

**********
*In that respect, let me link a piece by Cathy Young of Reason magazine. Young’s conclusions strike me as owing more to ad hominem than logic, but they aren’t without merit if you consider the moral issues at stake. On that, more at another time…

Paul Street On “Status Quo-Bama”

Posted on by

“CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN” FROM STATUS QuOBAMA?

 Fiscal Czarism and Status Quo Appointments

Will the “deeply conservative” Obama break from deepening authoritarian  capitalism in regard to the current economic crisis? The signals he has sent so far are less than encouraging. Late last summer, candidate Obama joined John McCain in supporting the original George W. Bush-Hank Paulson bailout plan, replete with its dictatorial demand (explicitly laid out in a hastily constructed three-page bill) that Congress supply the banks with hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars without any public oversight, hearings and investigation ever.  When public outrage forced Congress to reject rejected Bush and Paulson’s (and Obama and McCain’s) Czarist proposal, Obama gave his “progressive” imprimatur to a subsequently passed version that cloaked the authoritarian bailout deal in oversight measures loaded with loopholes leaving big banking capital free to do pretty much whatever it wished with its new taxpayer injections.

This move apparently came without remorse. As veteran liberal-progressive Washington- and Obama-watcher David Sirota recently noted, Obama’s “first exercise of presidential power was, right before he came into office, he threatened to veto any bill that Congress passed rejecting or limiting more bailout funds from going to Wall Street.”

Obama’s economic appointments do not bode well. His top economic advisor, former chief World Bank economist and Harvard University president Lawrence Summers and his Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are both veteran implementers of the basic “neoliberal” tenet:  state protection and subsidy for the Few and market discipline for the Many. Working in the Clinton administration under Treasury Secretary (and Goldman Sachs CEO) Robert Rubin (Geithner’s mentor), Summers helped develop and advance the very financial -de-regulation that was a major contributor to the current crisis. Geithner shares with Summers a history of responding to economic crisis by bailing out large financial institutions with no serious questions asked, something that helps explain the popularity of his appointment on Wall

Obama’s Inaugural Address absurdly claimed that the economic crisis was partly the consequence of the “collective failure” of the American people “to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.” This ignored the fact that, as Krugman notes, “this is first and foremost a crisis brought on by a runaway financial industry.  And if we failed to rein in that industry, it was wasn’t because Americans ‘collectively’ refused to make hard choices; the American public had no idea what was going on, and the people who did know what was going on mostly thought deregulation was a good idea.” 

Paul Street at Z Mag.

You That Build The Big Guns…

Posted on by

Masters of War

Come you masters of war
You that build the big guns
You that build the death planes
You that build all the bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks

You that never done nothin’
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it’s your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly

Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain

You fasten all the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
While the death count gets higher
Then you hide in your mansion
While the young people’s blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud

You’ve thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain’t worth the blood
That runs in your veins

How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I’m young
You might say I’m unlearned
But there’s one thing I know
Though I’m younger than you
Even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do

Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul

And I hope that you die
And your death’ll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I’ll watch while you’re lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I’ll stand o’er your grave
‘Til I’m sure that you’re dead
— Bob Dylan

Media-Trix: Dead Men Photoshopping….

Posted on by

Vanity Fair is in trouble for some digital touching up that crossed the line:

“In the mag’s March issue, famed photographer Annie Leibovitz snapped shots of acclaimed actors and their directors. Kate Winslet and hubbie Sam Mendes, who teamed up for “Revolutionary Road,” strike a pose. There’s Sean Penn and Gus Van Sant, who worked together on “Milk.” And, oddly, there’s Heath Ledger and Christopher Nolan of “The Dark Knight.” Of course, Mr. Ledger died more than a year ago, so one may be inclined to ask where the photo came from.

The answer: 2005. The shot of Ledger was apparently taken while he was promoting “Brokeback Mountain.” Editors digitally added Mr. Nolan and voilá. Some might say the digital redux is in questionable taste, but magazine reps insist they took great care and worked “with permission.” We’re a little fuzzy as to who, exactly, gave the OK. A Ouija board, perhaps?

Less controversial but still bizarre was Vanity Fair’s cover shot of President Obama from the same March issue. The photo was originally taken back in 2007 and was actually on the cover for a special issue on Africa. We’re not sure why Vanity Fair recycled, but we assume the leader of the free world was just too darn busy to come in and pose. Interestingly, unlike the Ledger photo with a second added subject, Obama’s photo redux digitally removed actor Don Cheadle. Don’t take it personally, Don. It’s just show business…..”

– “Vanity Fair’s Digital Redux,” Mike Krumboltz at The Buzz Log

Comment:

That’s our show-and-don’t-tell business for you…

Ron Paul Revolution: END THE FED

Posted on by

Statement by Congressman Ron Paul (US House of Reps)

 On Abolition of Federal Reserve Board Act

February 3, 2009

Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America’s economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.
From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial “boom” followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America’s exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.

Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.

In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end
to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans’ standard of living, enlarges big
government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal
Reserve.

— Ron Paul’s Speeches and Statements

Digg This Article |

Activism: Journalists Threatened By Maoists in Nepal……

Posted on by

 From Nepal:

“Among genuine Maoist cadre – for they exist amidst the mass of opportunists who have signed up – there is the belief that the journalist stands in the way of change. They have been taught that journalism can never be independent and must be part of the effort to fight a class war as directed by the party.

Five journalists around the country presently face credible death threats, and the sense of insecurity in the districts is much more palpable than in Kathmandu Valley. A senior editor was recently asked pointedly and ominously, “How long do we have to suffer this indignity of criticism. Tell us, kati samma sahera basne hamilay?”

As per their politico-military training, Maoists workers as a whole continue to regard those who disagree with them as the enemy, and the critic can variously be labeled feudal, anti-people, anti-national. The leadership has done little to change this self-serving mindset, and so cadres everywhere feel confident in exhibiting hostility. If a sense of fear can be created leading to self-censorship, then regardless of what this does to the image of the party it can be useful for developing a pliant society. But the matter may spiral out of even Maoist control, for the party´s attitude towards media is being internalized by violent groups in the mid-western Tarai and elsewhere.

Amidst the violence-puja that has overtaken the country, who we had thought represented ‘civil society’ are yet to awake to the dangers, the business community seeks accommodation amidst rampant extortion, and the state administration and security mechanisms are subdued by the extremist sloganeering of Maoist leaders and ministers. For now, the journalist, human rights defender, local politician and activist stand at the frontline on behalf of the citizenry, vulnerable amidst daily threats and intimidations, beatings and attacks. Everyone understands that the attacks on the media are meant to send a message to the rest. Everyone also understands that the fall of free media will be a harbinger of years of unrest, derailment of governance, crash of the economy, and pushback of development….”

Kanak Mani Dixit, “Independent Press: Learning From Uma” in MyRepublica.com

Comment:

The Uma referenced in the article is Uma Singh, a young Nepali journalist who was murdered, according to this BBC report:

“Uma Singh, a radio journalist in her 20s, was hacked to death by between 12 and 20 men in her room in the southern city of Janakpur. Ms Singh is believed to be the first female reporter killed in the country, although journalists have long lived with violence or the threat of it.A friend and fellow journalist told the BBC there was no part of her body that was not covered with blood. She died on the way to the capital after attempts locally to help her failed. “

                      What did Uma do to get herself hacked to death?

Ameet Dhakal writes:

“Uma was a gutsy lady—sharp and fearless. It takes guts to be a woman journalist in Madhes, and you need an extra dose of it to move away from your home to another district, to live by yourself in a rented room, and do journalism while braving the likes of Matrika Yadav,* Babban Singh and others of the criminal groups mushrooming in Madhes. She wrote articles exposing Matrika Yadav, and in one of the public functions when Babban Singh was speaking on women’s rights she reprimanded him for the rape cases he was implicated in. Such examples of her audacity are aplenty.”

  *Maoist leader

Arrests have been made in the case, according to this piece at the Nepali newspaper, eKantipur.com.

Money From Madoff: Class Action Suits To Recover Investor Losses

Posted on by

The depth of the SEC’s corruption was the target of vehement attacks by house lawmakers  today, says AP:

“Because of the SEC’s inaction, “I became fearful for the safety of my family,” Markopolos said.

“The SEC is … captive to the industry it regulates and is afraid” to bring big cases against prominent individuals, Markopolos said. The agency “roars like a lion and bites like a flea” and “is busy protecting the big financial predators from investors.”

While the SEC is incompetent, the securities industry’s self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is “very corrupt,” Markopolos charged. That organization was headed until December by Mary Schapiro, President Barack Obama’s new SEC chief.

Markopolos discovered additional funds that funneled money to Madoff — whose managers he said willfully turned a blind eye to his improprieties because they were paid generous fees. Markopolos said he will present his findings to the SEC’s inspector general. If proven, they would substantiate the assertions of many analysts that the alleged fraud was far too large for Madoff to have conducted alone.

In New York, a trustee liquidating Madoff’s investment firm told a federal judge Wednesday that nearly $950 million in cash and securities has been recovered for investors. Trustee Irving Picard said $111.4 million in cash had been recovered from financial institutions and about $300 million in securities were identified although it was unclear what they were worth.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Bank of New York Mellon Corp. last week said they would transfer a combined $534.9 million from Madoff’s investment firm accounts to Picard. Investors have until July 2 to place their claims.

European investors who feared they lost millions investing with Madoff have a chance to recoup some or all of their money from the banks that marketed the stricken funds, according to lawyers in Europe who are preparing a possible U.S.-style class-action lawsuit….”

Comment:

That’s a typically American- style solution – class-action lawsuits.  And normally, that would not be a bad thing. But  there is something deeply troubling and suspect about the way the SEC’s actions are being represented as mistakes…as though changing a few rules will improve things.

These people are corrupt…..sell-outs…swindlers…what other words can I muster?

This isn’t about rules. It’s about culture.

We don’t need new laws. We need new people.

No Fly, No Gun? NO WAY!

Posted on by

On youtube recently, a video of  Congressman Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL) speaking on May 15, 2007 at DC’s annual Stand Up For a Safe America, sponsored by the Brady Center for Gun Control letting citizens know that, should they wander onto the government’s no-fly lists, they’ll be unable to purchase a hand gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vp7f1QKYmg.

Note: In September 2007, the Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center ( an FBI run group that consolidates terrorist watch list information) had over 700,000 names  (on April 2007), with the number growing by over 20,000 records on average per month.

Note:  this US Dept. of Justice report indicates over a million names.

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/plus…

And commentary from the ACLU:

http://www.aclu.org/privacy/spying/wa…

 Comment:

You do  know that you could get on those no fly lists for some very minor reason. Especially now that practically everything you said on the phone or on the ‘net has entered the government’s data base with every prospect of staying there forever.

This means, in effect, that any citizen could be disarmed forcibly without having done anything to warrant it – on some mere technicality, on a  suspicion of wrong doing, or worse yet, for no reason but bureaucratic imbecility — as in this infamous case noted by BoingBoing:

“A five-year-old boy was taken into custody and thoroughly searched at Sea-Tac because his name is similar to a possible terrorist alias. As the Consumerist reports, “When his mother went to pick him up and hug him and comfort him during the proceedings, she was told not to touch him because he was a national security risk. They also had to frisk her again to make sure the little Dillinger hadn’t passed anything dangerous weapons or materials to his mother when she hugged him.”

Rahmbo  – you should have stuck to plie-ing and pirouetting.

But if you haven’t forgotten how to do it, I suggest you take a grand jete into the nearest body of H2O.

Libertarian Living: The Best US Internet Law….

Posted on by

“#1: 47 USC 230

This law was enacted in 1996 (as part of the Communications Decency Act, discussed below) during the heyday of the cyberspace exceptionalism movement—about the same time as Barlow’s Declaration of Independence and Johnson/Post’s Internet self-governance article. Indeed, this law is one of the most conspicuous examples of how a legislative body has set different rules for physical space and cyberspace. In this case, the law provides websites and other intermediaries a near-absolute immunization from liability for their users’ content—even if offline publishers would be liable for publishing the exact same user content in dead trees.

It’s hard to overstate the importance of this law to the Internet’s evolution. Without this law, all Internet content probably would be subject to a notice-and-takedown regime like we have for copyright law (see discussion about the DMCA Online Safe Harbors below). If websites had to remove user content upon notice to avoid liability, they would act conservatively, quickly pulling down complained-about content without much fuss. So, any company unhappy with negative consumer comments could simply contact the web host, claim that the comments were defamatory (making the web host potentially liable for the content), and expect the web host to scramble to take down the user’s comment.

But in this takedown melee, only negative remarks would be targeted (there would be no legal grounds—or reason—to target positive comments). Thus, notice-and-takedown rules would result in “lopsided” databases in which only positive opinions/commentary would remain, but many negative comments could be quickly excised. This would ruin the capability of the consumer opinion sites (for example, eBay’s feedback forum and Amazon product reviews) to hold people and companies accountable for their choices. Indeed, by undermining the credibility of Internet content generally, a notice-and-takedown scheme could diminish the Internet’s vitality as a mainstream information resource.

47 USC 230 eliminates the notice-and-takedown option for people and companies trying to escape accountability. As a result, 47 USC 230 is a big part of the reason why the Internet became such a massive success.”

From, “The Best and Worst Internet Laws,” Eric Goldman, Informit.com