SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (82159)4/5/2010 2:20:27 PM
From: longnshort4 Recommendations  Respond to of 224717
 
the Dow after the Clinton depression and 9-11 went from 9000 to 13000 then Reid and Pelosi took over and the Dow crashed. Is the DOW back to 13000 when Bush had everything under control ?



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (82159)4/5/2010 3:15:56 PM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 224717
 
Aftershocks Rattle Mexico-California Region Hit by Quake
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER 12:54 PM ET
A 7.2-magnitude quake on Sunday that killed two people in northern Mexico and injured at least 100 was felt in Los Angeles.
God punishes baby killer demorats



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (82159)4/5/2010 7:15:47 PM
From: chartseer  Respond to of 224717
 
oh bummer! Does that mean it is making new all time highs? Why has gold tripled?

Don't worry! Be happy!

the hopeless comrade chartseer in the new era of hope



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (82159)4/6/2010 8:12:55 AM
From: lorne3 Recommendations  Respond to of 224717
 
philips..."The Dow, which actually fell under Bush, is up a cool 40% under President Obama"....

Not likely any of this will get through to you but it may be useful to others.

No inflation? What about price hikes of 30%?
April 05, 2010
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
wnd.com

"Where's the inflation you've been warning us about, Porter?" So says the imaginary chorus of readers who follow me around, haunting the quiet and introspective moments of my life.

I can't ignore them ... and so I answer: Right in front of you! Then, my wife asks me, "Porter, who are you talking to?"

Here are the facts. An index of producer prices (the PPI) fell 0.6 percent last month – the biggest drop in wholesale prices. This small decline in prices along with the Fed's recent comments that it sees no reason to raise interest rates anytime soon has led stock investors to believe we may be back in what's commonly called the "Goldilocks scenario."

In this situation, the economy is not too hot or not too cold – it's just right.

Folks who believe in Goldilocks (and other children's fantasies) would have you think the Fed can continue to inflate the U.S. economy through massive manipulation while the U.S. government continues to borrow 10 percent or more of GDP per year – forever – without any negative consequences. And therefore, equity prices should go much higher. That's why we've seen stocks move relentlessly higher. The S&P 500 is now up about 70 percent since the bottom last March.

What most people don't understand about inflation is it's not really a measure of commodity prices. That's only how the government chooses to measure inflation. Inflation has one true meaning: the increase of the money supply above the savings rate. Inflation isn't caused by a shortage of wheat or corn or oil, it is caused by one thing and one thing only: central bankers shrinking their reserve ratios.

One year ago the grand total of the Federal Reserve's bank credit was $1,989,877,000,000 – including $508,592,000,000 of securities (of dubious value) it purchased on the open market. Today, the Fed's total bank credit is $2,234,676,000,000 – including $1,912,690,000,000 of securities it purchased on the open market. The Fed, as promised, has spent an enormous amount of money buying mortgages and Treasuries over the last year. When central banks buy government debts or other credits, economists call it "quantitative easing," or monetizing. But you and I would simply call it printing money.

So over the last year, we've seen the Fed inflate by at least $250 billion. An increase of $250 billion in bank credit is roughly a 10 percent rate of inflation, based on the Fed's total credit. During this period, foreign holdings of our government's Treasury obligations increased by roughly $500 billion. (Our government debts far exceeded our domestic savings.) Thus, it's clear that, as a nation, we had zero net savings and the entire expansion of the Fed's balance sheet was inflationary. The impact of this inflation could be mitigated by increases in productivity. According to the latest data, productivity increased at almost a 6 percent rate in the most recent period, adjusted for various seasonal factors.

You, too, can be an economist ... if you were going to guess what the likely effect on prices would be, across the entire economy, what number would you come up with? You've got 10 percent inflation minus about 6 percent productivity growth. That would leave you with about a 4 percent change in prices, right? So what was the change in PPI prices over the last year (not just the last month)? The PPI was up 4.4 percent compared to a year ago. Bingo.

Now, let me ask you a simple question. Today, the yield on 10-year U.S. government bonds is around 3.65 percent. You know for a fact the Federal Reserve monetized a huge amount of debt over the last year, increasing the size of its balance sheet by roughly 10 percent. You know the U.S. economy – despite shedding a huge number of workers – wasn't able to keep up with that inflation in terms of productivity. As a result, the value of our currency in our own economy fell by roughly 4 percent. Why on Earth would you buy the securities of a deeply indebted nation when the yield on its bonds doesn't even cover the rate of depreciation of its currency? You wouldn't, of course. That's why China, among other foreign creditors, has begun to sell.

Now, if you're not going to buy Treasury bonds because the yield isn't keeping pace with inflation, what else might you purchase? The U.S. has a tremendous account deficit because we continue to consume far more than we produce. The most recent figure I could find was $108 billion from the third quarter of 2009. So our foreign creditors have to buy something with their dollars, roughly $100 billion worth each quarter. If they're not going to buy Treasury securities, you might expect them to buy commodities, gold, or maybe even equities.

Over the last year, gold is up about 20 percent. Silver is up about 30 percent. Copper is up 95 percent. Oil is up 64 percent. U.S. stocks are up 70 percent. What's down? Government bonds, about 10 percent. Where in our economy would you say inflation is affecting prices? When people tell you there's no inflation, try telling them to look anywhere besides the official government statistics.

My warnings about inflation aren't because I fear a 10 percent increase in the Fed's balance sheet. If increases of that size continue year after year, we'd eventually get in trouble, but the bigger risk is the effect of the U.S. government's fiscal policies. Quite simply, we are unwilling to pay for the size of the government we're demanding. Our government's soaring debts will have very real consequences.

Putting additional strain on our government's credit rating is the fact that over the last two years, we replaced so much of the country's private balance sheets with the public balance sheet. GE, for example, relies on a $500 billion guarantee for access to the credit markets. Fannie and Freddie underwrite 90 percent of mortgages. GM required a $100 billion bailout, as did AIG, Merrill Lynch, and Bear Stearns.

Sooner or later, our government's creditors are going to be struck by the fact that not only are they not being paid a fair rate of interest for our Treasury bonds, they are also unlikely to ever be repaid the principal amounts of their loans. When that realization hits, the Federal Reserve will be forced to monetize a substantial portion of the Treasury bond market. That will be a very bad day for investors...

When is this going to happen? Yogi Berra famously said predictions are hard to get right, especially about the future. And I would posit the Stansberry Corollary to Berra's maxim, "It's even more difficult when the Federal Reserve is manipulating the future." So I can't tell you when. It all depends on how fast our debts grow compared to our economy and how long our creditors remain willing to take a chance on us. But when I'm asked this question, I simply point out what's obvious to me: If you knew you were riding with a drunk driver, when would you ask to be let out of the car?



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (82159)4/6/2010 9:58:03 PM
From: Ann Corrigan2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224717
 
R they enslaved to the Dems,Ken?

>Black conservative tea party backers take heat

Apr 6 06:07 PM US/Eastern
By VALERIE BAUMAN
Associated Press Writer

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - They've been called Oreos, traitors and Uncle Toms, and are used to having to defend their values. Now black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white tea party movement—and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation's first black president.

"I've been told I hate myself. I've been called an Uncle Tom. I've been told I'm a spook at the door," said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a group of black conservatives who support free market principles and limited government.

"Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks," he said.

Johnson and other black conservatives say they were drawn to the tea party movement because of what they consider its commonsense fiscal values of controlled spending, less taxes and smaller government. The fact that they're black—or that most tea partyers are white—should have nothing to do with it, they say.

"You have to be honest and true to yourself. What am I supposed to do, vote Democratic just to be popular? Just to fit in?" asked Clifton Bazar, a 45-year-old New Jersey freelance photographer and conservative blogger.

Opponents have branded the tea party as a group of racists hiding behind economic concerns—and reports that some tea partyers were lobbing racist slurs at black congressmen during last month's heated health care vote give them ammunition.

But these black conservatives don't consider racism representative of the movement as a whole—or race a reason to support it.

Angela McGlowan, a black congressional candidate from Mississippi, said her tea party involvement is "not about a black or white issue."

"It's not even about Republican or Democrat, from my standpoint," she told The Associated Press. "All of us are taxed too much."

Still, she's in the minority. As a nascent grassroots movement with no registration or formal structure, there are no racial demographics available for the tea party movement; it's believed to include only a small number of blacks and Hispanics.

Some black conservatives credit President Barack Obama's election—and their distaste for his policies—with inspiring them and motivating dozens of black Republicans to plan political runs in November.

For black candidates like McGlowan, tea party events are a way to reach out to voters of all races with her conservative message.

"I'm so proud to be a part of this movement! I want to tell you that a lot of people underestimate you guys," the former national political commentator for Fox News told the cheering crowd at a tea party rally in Nashville, Tenn., in February.

Tea party voters represent a new model for these black conservatives—away from the black, liberal Democratic base located primarily in cities, and toward a black and white conservative base that extends into the suburbs.

Black voters have overwhelmingly backed Democratic candidates, support that has only grown in recent years. In 2004, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry won 88 percent of the black vote; four years later, 95 percent of black voters cast ballots for Obama.

Black conservatives don't want to have to apologize for their divergent views.

"I've gotten the statement, 'How can you not support the brother?'" said David Webb, an organizer of New York City's Tea Party 365, Inc. movement and a conservative radio personality.

Since Obama's election, Webb said some black conservatives have even resorted to hiding their political views.

"I know of people who would play the (liberal) role publicly, but have their private opinions," he said. "They don't agree with the policy but they have to work, live and exist in the community ... Why can't we speak openly and honestly if we disagree?"

Among the 37 black Republicans running for U.S. House and Senate seats in November is Charles Lollar of Maryland's 5th District.

A tea party supporter running against House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Lollar says he's finding support in unexpected places.

The 38-year-old U.S. Marine Corps reservist recently walked into a bar in southern Maryland decorated with a Confederate flag. It gave his wife Rosha pause.

"I said, 'You know what, honey? Many, many of our Southern citizens came together under that flag for the purpose of keeping their family and their state together,'" Lollar recalled. "The flag is not what you're to fear. It's the stupidity behind the flag that is a problem. I don't think we'll find that in here. Let's go ahead in."

Once inside, they were treated to a pig roast, a motorcycle rally—and presented with $5,000 in contributions for his campaign.

McGlowan, one of three GOP candidates in north Mississippi's 1st District primary, seeks a seat held since 2008 by Democrat Travis Childers. The National Republican Congressional Committee has supported Alan Nunnelee, chairman of the state Senate Appropriations Committee, who is also pursuing tea party voters.

McGlowan believes the tea party movement has been unfairly portrayed as monolithically white, male and middle-aged, though she acknowledged blacks and Hispanics are a minority at most events.

Racist protest signs at some tea party rallies and recent reports by U.S. Reps. John Lewis, D-Ga., and Barney Frank, D-Mass., that tea partyers shouted racial and anti-gay slurs at them have raised allegations of racism in the tea party movement.

Black members of the movement say it is not inherently racist, and some question the reported slurs. "You would think—something that offensive—you would think someone got video of it," Bazar, the conservative blogger, said.

"Just because you have one nut case, it doesn't automatically equate that you've got an organization that espouses (racism) as a sane belief," Johnson said.

Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, suggested a bit of caution.

"I'm sure the reason that (black conservatives) are involved is that from an ideological perspective, they agree," said Shelton. "But when those kinds of things happen, it is very important to be careful of the company that you keep."

___

Associated Press writers Brian Witte in Maryland and Emily Wagster Pettus in Mississippi contributed to this report.<