Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘2008’

Gerald CelenteTo blow off ritualistic steam about our financial and political problems, watch Gerald Celente, like in this April 25, 2013 interview with Alex Jones, where he was in true form.

Immediately following the September 2008 U.S. and global financial meltdown, Gerald Celente was a welcome voice in the wilderness of those who understood the failed policies of the banking elite, and could articulate them in a captivating way. The problem is, he’s been repeating the same talking points ever since.

Hardly an interview goes by when he doesn’t blast the same old “white shoe boys,” and telling us for the zillionth time, incorrectly mind you, that Mussolini knew something about fascism, and that it’s the merger of government and corporations. That, despite Italian speaker, Webster Tarpley, pointing out that Mussolini said no such thing, and that the word Mussolini used — corporazione — referred to guilds, where owners took personal responsibility, as opposed to modern corporations , where directors have unlimited liability, except for very, very rare circumstances where the “corporate veil” is pierced.

And, as George Whitehurst-Berry has stated, whatever fascism is or isn’t, it is intensely nationalistic. Conversely, what we are seeing these days is intensely internationalistic, and therefore fails the fascism test, among other reasons.

For real solutions, watch serious monetary reformers, Wayne Walton and Tom J. Kennedy, and see my interviews with them here and here, respectively.

Read Full Post »

My first-ever interview was exposing the AIDS scam on George Whitehurst-Berry’s Crash! Are You Ready? on the Genesis Communications Radio Network, four years ago today, on October 1, 2008.

At the time, George’s show had already reached the number two position among online listeners among nearly 40 shows, just behind Alex Jones.

He eventually went on to conduct a total of 33 interviews on the scam, which can be found here.

Read Full Post »

Seal of the United States Internal Revenue Ser...

From the IRS’ Fall 2010 publication, Individual Income Tax Returns, 2008, we see that the “progressive” federal income tax ceased to be so for those who made more than $2 million in 2008.

The effective tax rates for those who made at least $200k were (from page 11):
$200k to $500k – 19.5%
$500k to $1m – 23.9%
$1m to $1.5m – 24.7%
$1.5m to $2m – 24.8%
$2m to $5m – 24.6%
$5m to $10m – 23.8%
>$10m – 20.9%

The 13,000 who made more than $10 million paid a lower effective tax rate in 2008 than the 578,000 who made between $500,000 and $1 million.

The reason for this is made clear in the same chart, showing a steady increase in the proportion of “unearned” income from capital gains and dividends, which were taxed at a top rate of 15%, compared to the top rate of 35% for “earned” income.

Read Full Post »

Previously, I uncovered that the CIA is overstating Canada’s government spending by more than 200%, by inconsistently reporting all government spending for Canada, and only federal spending for the U.S., despite both having a federal system of government.

Looking through Canada’s numbers again, I noticed its massive exports hemorrhage from 2008 to 2009. This time, the CIA’s numbers are correct.

From Canada’s entry in The World Factbook:

Exports:
$323.4 billion (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 11
$459.1 billion (2008 est.)

Exports decreased by a whopping 30% from 2008 to 2009, despite the downturn not hitting Canada hard until September 2008, when, as one example, the Canadian dollar declined by 20% relative to the USD in less than a full month.

By comparison, U.S. exports “only” fell by 14% from 2008 to 2009, despite officially being in recession since December 2007.

The CIA states that export figures are stated in U.S. dollars based on the official exchange rate. Given an estimated GDP of $1.335 trillion for 2009, Canada’s exports only accounted for 24% of its GDP. Imports for 2009 were estimated to be $327.2 billion, resulting in net exports of -$3.8 billion.

In a forthcoming article, I’ll expand on my discussion from July 1 on “Crash! Are You Ready?” on why claims of a higher dollar being bad for exports are overly simplistic, and how it’s been completely counterproductive for Canada’s central bank and leading politicians to be slavishly devoted to keeping the Canadian dollar below par with the USD. In doing so, they argue for and support government intervention for 24% of the economy at the expense of the other 76%.

Read Full Post »

History shows that when the CAD was in the low 60-cent USD range in 2002, it was a great time for those holding USDs to convert some of them into CADs, as in just five years, the CAD reached parity with the USD, for an annualized gain of over 12%.

Then there was the 20% drop in the CAD in less than a full month from September to October 2008, which made it another great buying opportunity.

However, given a CAD in the mid 90-cent USD range, I don’t see many gains coming from the CAD in the medium or long-term, and the reason is the historical policy of the Bank of Canada in intentionally keeping it below parity with the USD.

Here is an article from January about the Bank’s current governor, Mark Carney, chiding a reporter expressing comfort with a 96 cent CAD. The Bank governors, prime ministers, and unfortunately, most Canadians, have this unfortunate notion that the CAD should stay below the USD in value, since it “hurts exports,” despite the fact that exports account for less than half of Canada’s total GDP.

For short-term hedging, it’s possible for the CAD to go on a tear, up to $1.10 USD, as it reached in November 2007, but personally, I wouldn’t count on getting many gains from that versus other investments, until the CAD is down into the 80-cent and low 90-cent USD range.

Read Full Post »

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) reports the following information as of April 7, 2010:

FDIC-insured institutions: 7953 (as of April 1, 2010) – down by 331 or 4% since the end of 2008
Total assets: $13,132,190,000,000 (as of December 31, 2009) – down by $773.769 billion or 5.6%
Total deposits: $9,242,378,000,000 (as of December 31, 2009) – up by $173.192 billion or 1.9%

Here are their numbers for 2008.

Read Full Post »

In November 2009, I first heard about the Ontario “Provincial Benefit.”

The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) states: “The Provincial Benefit ensures reliability by providing adequate generating capacity for Ontario. It accounts for differences between the spot market price and the rates paid to regulated and contracted generators. As a result, its value may be positive or negative, depending on the fluctuation of prices in the spot market.

In other words, if Ontario pays more to your electricity supplier than the market price, you pay the difference, otherwise, you receive a credit.

Here are the average annual provincial benefits I calculated from 2005-2010 to date, in cents per kilowatt-hour, from the IESO’s monthly numbers:

2005    -0.6175
2006     0.229167
2007     0.438333
2008     0.530833
2009     2.9075
2010     2.97

It’s no accident that I didn’t hear about it until 2009. That’s the year the “benefit” exploded in cost to around half of the price of the first 1000 kWh of electricity. It’s been Orwellian since its inception, with the potential to be a charge, not a benefit, and has since been a charge every year since 2006.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »