Eminent Domain...again

[Sassy]

I'm still studying the Federal Reserve/Central Banks etc & how they're effecting our economy the way they are currently run... I still think the August Review website is excellent for an overall picture of the various money systems that in place around the globe... their credo is:  "Follow the Money...Follow the Power"

Here is a link to  National Heritage Areas & Corridors

Again, this might sound like  

Re: Sustainability
Reply #1 - Mar 20th, 2006, 11:53am Quote Quote
A bit frothing at the mouth, some of it, but interesting.  I don't tend to believe that They are as organized or as good at planning as some of those articles would have it.  Not that this makes Them nicer or less needing to be watched, of course.

(by the way, the quote is by Ailsa

But worth being aware of... anyone else know much about these?  

[Sassy]

I'm still studying the Federal Reserve/Central Banks etc & how they're effecting our economy the way they are currently run... I still think the August Review website is excellent for an overall picture of the various money systems that in place around the globe... their credo is:  "Follow the Money...Follow the Power"

Here is a link to  National Heritage Areas & Corridors

Again, this may sound like

Quote from Ailsa:
"A bit frothing at the mouth, some of it, but interesting.  I don't tend to believe that They are as organized or as good at planning as some of those articles would have it.  Not that this makes Them nicer or less needing to be watched, of course."

Nations, empires, kingdoms... have been built up & destroyed countless times throughout the ages, I think it is the legacy we leave that makes a difference...  :-/  if I could remember some good song lyrics, I'd add them here  

[bartholomew]

Sassy, you probably won't be surprised to learn that I don't think much of AFR's Pillar 1. Pillar 2 has more substance, and I agree with the general objectives.

Pillar #1 -- RESTORATION OF A "GOLD-ORIENTED" MONETARY SYSTEM

Obviously AFR and I disagree on whether currency needs to be backed by gold, and whether having a central bank helps or harms the economy. That's ok. My big problem with this pillar is that AFR is whitewashing history and twisting facts in order to support its argument:

History clearly teaches us that no stable, prosperous country can remain so very long if it leaves the control of its money supply up to the machinations of corruptible men in power at the government's Treasury and central bank. The temptation is simply too great for such men to promote excessive monetary expansion in order to create an illusion of prosperity so that the electorate will reward them with four more years in office.

Such temptation began in 1914 the minute the ink was dry on Congress' legal authorization of the Federal Reserve banking system. It was then greatly expanded with Roosevelt's confiscation of gold from Americans in 1933, along with his initiation of J.M Keynes' "new economics." This led to the disastrous spending policies and inflation-deflation cycles that we now endure.

AFR implies that America did not experience economic cycles or experience periods of severe inflation or deflation before 1913. That is just not true... there were severe economic "panics" in 1819, 1837 (leading to a 6-year long depression comparable to the depression of the 1930s), 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1907. The increase in gold following the California discoveries also led to significant price inflation. Aside from the 30's depression, the recessions since then have been relatively mild compared to those before the Fed was created. It is pretty widely accepted that the Fed bungled by contracting the money supply during the depression instead of increasing it. Since then, the Fed seems to have been pretty successful in reducing both the frequency and severity of downturns.

The theory that governments juice the economy before elections is not a new one; this is the "political business cycles" theory. However, the growth of the money supply does not show any pattern of regular increases on 4-year intervals. That is because the Fed controls it, not politicians. If politicians are juicing things, they are doing it by spending (using either tax dollars or borrowing).

The Keynesian monetary philosophy of trying to increase demand with increases of fiat money is what led to the runaway inflation of the 1970's

The high inflation of the 70's was due to the OPEC oil price shocks of 1973 and 1979. There was also high inflation in 1813 (13.7%), 1863 (23.3%) and 1864 (27%). Those all topped the 13.5% of 1980, the year of highest inflation due to oil prices.

For example, America's GDP increased over 500% in just the years 1870 to 1914, averaging 4.3% annual growth

AFR has cherry-picked a period when the largely agrarian economy was rapidly industrializing. There was the Civil War recovery, a boom in railroad construction, electrification, and great industrial expansion.

As a result from 1915 to 2001, the CPI has risen 1,663% from 30 to 529.

That works out to an average 3.3% per year. Since WWII in particular, inflation has generally been held in the 1% to 4% range, excluding the oil shock inflation. I believe that a little bit of inflation is a small price to pay for that kind of stability, compared to the pretty wild oscillations from deflation to inflation and back of the 1800s.

Pillar #2 -- ENACTMENT OF AN "EQUAL RATE" TAX

I certainly agree that the income tax system should be simplified. I think it is wrong that the tax system has gotten so complex that most individuals can no longer really understand it, that it takes people hours to complete their returns, and that so many give up and turn to accountants to do it for them. I'm not sure that a flat tax is the best answer, but it could be.

The argument that a flat tax would help limit spending was interesting but I'm not convinced by it. There will always be some people who pay more in taxes than they get back in benefits, and others who benefit more than they pay. I don't think a flat tax will make anyone forget which category they fall into.

A shift from income tax to a consumption tax would be good economic policy. Taxing income reduces the incentive to work. Taxing consumption increases the incentive to save, especially for one's own retirement.  I'd like to see income taxes shifted to consumption taxes to at least the extent that more was collected from consumption than from income.

However the tax system is arranged though, I would absolutely oppose disenfranchising the poor.

The Two Fundamental Third Party Mistakes

I think AFR has nailed the problems with previous alternatives. Badnarik came across as a nutjob to most Americans. However, I don't foresee AFR having a whole lot more success.

[glenn kangiser]

Sassy had to go to work for a few days, but I'm sure she'll be checking this out if she  gets a break.

This is deep stuff, Bart.  Is this a specialty for you or just a great interest?

[bartholomew]

Glenn, it used to be a job, years ago before I headed into something else, so now it's just an interest.

[Sassy]

Ranchers recruiting help to block Pinon Canyon plan

"For the record, what the Army officially has requested is to expand the 235,000-acre training area by an additional 418,000 acres. Whose land they would purchase is not known because Army officials say no plan is final"

from the Pueblo Chieftan - Colorado 10/12/06

[Sassy]

The state can take your dreams, too   by Debra J. Saunders

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/07/15/EDG3IQ8JHE1.DTL

"JOHN REVELLI vividly remembers the day the U.S. Supreme Court issued its infamous Kelo decision that allowed local governments to condemn private property under eminent domain, not only for public uses such as roads and schools, but also to accommodate private developers. "The Kelo decision," the former owner of Revelli Tires in Oakland noted over the phone, "that came out on June 23 of '05, and the deadline that the city put up against us to move out was July 1." The 5-4 ruling spelled curtains for Revelli Tires.

The U.S. Constitution states, "Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." The big bench wrongly ruled that "public use" could be whatever states want it to be -- including private developments designed to expand the tax base. The ruling allowed the City of New London, Conn., to seize the land under Susette Kelo's "little pink cottage" and hand it over to a private developer for a development featuring high-end waterfront homes. "

[Sassy]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html

Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq


RSS Feed  White House News

    Fact sheet Message to the Congress of the United States Regarding International Emergency Economic Powers Act

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)(NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that, due to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy con't at link above...

What does this mean?  Who are they talking about?  US citizens!  What type of contributions to what organizations do they mean?  Anything that doesn't agree with Bush & Cheney?