May 17, 2016

The Frequency of Executive Orders through the Centuries.

Perhaps you are familiar with the right wing radio diatribes which claim that Obama
is going to be a despotic dictator, reducing all federal law to presidential executive
orders.  In the history of executive orders, he hasn't even made the top 15.  Instead
of listening to the same ole same old on the radio and FoxNews TV, simply look at
the stats yourself, to see if Obama actually is the mad executive order signer:

We start with President Barack Obama, himselfAt of the end of 2012: 147.
                                            His second term, unto December 7, 2014:   44.

Let us compare this stat with that of the Ronald Reagan whom the Republican Party
has been praising, as he if were the divine Alpha & Omega of all existence, greater
than the Eternal God:  In eight years, the Ronald Reagan who tripled the national
debt signed into law 381 exec orders, ranging from E.O. #12287 to E.O. #12667.
In the first four years, the Ronald Reagan who had an exceptionally low compre-
hension of economics, as was evidenced by the 10.8% unemployment rate in the
second calendar year of his administration, issued 211.  The Univ. of Calif., Santa
Barbara set the number at 213, incidentally.  You at least have the ballpark figure.

The summary of each president's first four years in office is :  Reagan 211.  
                                                                                                    Obama 147.

In Reagan's first two years of the SECOND term, there were 82 executive orders.
   With Obama.  but only until December 7, 2014, there were 44

Below is a list of the presidents who issued over 200 exec orders.

  1} Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the WWII President, issued                Time in office
       .............................................................................................3,551 - 12 yrs, 1 mo.
  2} Woodward Wilson, the WWI President, issued
       .............................................................................................1,803 -   8 yrs   ------
  3} Calvin Coolidge, the Roaring Twenties President, issued
       .............................................................................................1,203 -   5 yrs, 7 mos
  4} Teddy Roosevelt, the Monopoly Buster President, issued
       .............................................................................................1,081 -  7 yrs,  5 mo
  5} Herbert Hoover, the Great Depression President, issued
       ...............................................................................................968 -  4 yrs   -------
  6} Harry Truman, the Korean War President, issued
       ...............................................................................................907 -  7 yrs, 9 mos
  7} William Taft, the Sixteenth Amendment President, issued
        ..............................................................................................724 -  4 yrs   ------
  8} Warring G. Harding, the Teapot Dome President, issued
       ...............................................................................................522 -  2 yrs, 4 mos
  9} Dwight Eisenhower, the Interstate Highway Pres, issued
       ...............................................................................................484 -  8 yrs   ------
10} Ronald Reagan, while tripling the National Debt, issued
       ...............................................................................................381 -  8 yrs   ------
11} William Clinton, the NAFTA President, issued
       ...............................................................................................364 -  8 yrs   ------
12} Richard Nixon, the Watergate President, issued
       ...............................................................................................346 -  5 yrs, 6 mos.
13} Lyndon Johnson, the Vietnam War President, issued
       ...............................................................................................325 -  5 yrs, 1 mo.
14} Jimmy Carter, the Iran Hostage President, issued
       ...............................................................................................320 -  4 yrs   ------
15} George W. Bush, the War Crimes President, issued
       ...............................................................................................291 -  8 yrs   ------
16} Ulysses S Grant, the 15th Amendment President, issued
        ..............................................................................................217 -  8 yrs   ------
17} John F. Kennedy, the Missiles of October President, issued
       ...............................................................................................214 -  2 yrs, 11 mos.

Plus:   - Madison, Monroe, and John Adams issued one order each.

           - John Quincy Adams issued only three.
           - Thomas Jefferson issued only four.
           - George Washington issued eight.

The Obsolete Nature of Austrian Economics: Otto von Bismark Economics. Rand Paul's Illusion.

Applying Austrian Economics in the States would rust out America.
Let's address the obsolete nature of Austrian Economics, being that Rand Paul
followers herald it as the newest and latest thing that will save humanity.

Of course, Rand Paul is one sick joke, from A to Z.  Firstly, he advocated abolish-
ing the Americans with Disabilities Act, in the spirit of an Adolph Hitler who could
only think of sterilizing Germany's mentally disabled, followed by exterminating
its physically disabled.  Rand Paul also hadt on his payroll the "Southern Avenger"
and neo-successionist John Hunter who wrote, John Wilkes Booth Was Right.

Plus, plus, plus, Rand doesn't know economics in the least.  And concenring the
20something-year-olds who follow his dad and him, they're the religious fanatics
of greed, thinking that economic anarchy, aka deregulation, will actually make
them insanely wealthy.  They don't realize that deregulation caused the George
Bush Economic Crisis and that a Rand Paul or Ron Paul presidency will econom-
ically destroy America for all time, guaranteed.

Incidentally, if you'rer smirking at the above-statement, you can write to me about
your smirking if and only if  you had your 100% test score in Ivy League account-
ing testing and were inducted into anyhting similar to the Phi Sigma Iota honors
fraternity.  I can't waster my time on arrogant idiots who can't even draw and X
on a sheet of Cartesian paper.  There are basic rules in automechanics, in order
to get an engine to operate.  The same goes with Economics.  These Rand Paul
types are complete illusionists, giving you the carrot and the stick game which
will leave you on the outside, cold and abandoned.  After all, Ron Paul Econom-
ics is nothing more than Dog-eat-Dog-Wild-West-Economics, wheere workers
will be used, abused, and discarded.  And the Ron Paul followers want to be the
abusers.  Let's review the great Rand Paul Illusion called Austrian Economics:

For the record, Austrian Economics is simply Marginalism, and it was founded in

1871, under the influence of Otto von Bismark.  It's nothing more than an offshoot
of Adam's Smith Superlative Advantage treatise which was blown out of the water
decades later by David Ricardi's Comparative Advantage thesis.  Thus,  Austrian
Econ is older than Keynesian Economics, JFK's economics policies, and Theory Z
which was widely popular in the 1980s.  Anyone who follows Austrian Economics
is the backwards one.

The bottom line is this:  Someone should remind Rand Paul that this is 21st Century
America and that we really didn't appreciate politicians such as he who turned the
United States back into a Frick/Carnegie Oligarchy.

Now, the greatest year of revolution in Europe, for the 19th Century, came in 1870.

And why?  ANS:  Because the Vatican, at Vatican Council I, defined an infallible
church doctrine known as Papal Infallibility, and the northern countries freaked.
Even France.  They did NOT want there to be any moral authority in Europe who
would check and balance their lawmaking decisions.  Thus, Otto von Bismark and
confreres wanted to have established theories that accentuated individualism.  Thus,
Austrian Economics was meant to fit into an already existent prejudice.  It was not
a mathematical discovery.  

Furthermore, if Austrian Economics is the answer to life, then there would not have

been the economics disasters that Europe saw in the 20th Century.  Thus, Austrian
Economics is a proven failure.  There was a time in the 20th Century when you lit-
erally had to take a wheel barrow full of cash to the bakery to buy a couple loaves
of bread.  This gave rise to Hitler.  

There's more.  Just keep in mind that neither Ron Paul nor Rand Paul were econom-

ics students.  Rand is so vicious that he proposed the repeal of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Let's Review Economics:

In Econ, the first steps are 1} the circular flow of money and 2} the marginal utility

curve which is simply a visual way to show what price a potential customer is will-
ing to pay for one product, and then what he's willing to pay for two of the same
products, and for three ... so on and so forth. 

To start, I'll call Austrian Economics AEcon for short.  At least for now.  

When you're dealing with Austrian Econ, you're dealing with focus on the marginal

utility curve out of the starting gate.  That's the center of AEcon.  Now, AEcon states
that price is more properly determined autonomously by the individual's personal pre-
ference for a product and not by the state.  This is where AEcon lacks an essential
variable its in general equation.  There is a major determinant in what a person is
willing to pay that has nothing to do with personal preference in how he/she values
something.  And that one thing is:

The person's income, ... in relation to something known as the marginal propensity to

consume (the amount of income that the person spends as opposed to saves) and the
person's sum total of liquid savings (the amount of savings he can immediately spend.)  

Very simply, a poor person has a different valuation system  than does a rich person.

This is why price determination is never subjective.  It has its constraints, because the
consumer has the constraint of a limited money supply.

In addition, another determinant in a person's willingness to pay a certain price for a

product is none other than ... the price of the competition's similar products.  But, this
involves the supply curve ... not marginal utility curve ... not the demand curve.

The other factor in price determination is substitute products.  An example is:  A sub-

stitute for vegetables would be bread or fruit.   The price of the substitute products has
 caused a phenomenon, in times of economic crisis, where the increase in a product's
price doesn't result in a decrease in demand, but rather an increased demand for the
higher priced edition of the same one product.  This occurs simply because the price
of the substitute products, such as steak and fruit, have also risen at the same time.

This shows that price determination is never subjective and never autonomous.

Prices are a dominoes effect.  Thus, the marginal individualism of Austrian Eco-
nomics is invalid.

Now, the difference between Austrian econ price determination and the Keynesian

model thereof is that the Keynesian model deals with the aggregate sum of humanity;
a total society, not merely one individual's personal preference.  The Keynesian model
simply determines how many people can afford to buy the product at such-and-such a
price and how many cannot afford to buy it at that same price.

The very first determinant of the price of product is the cost of the good, in terms of

manufacturing, transporting, warehousing, and insuring.  The cost of the good is the
"benchmark" . . . the index constraint.  You cannot set a price lower than cost of goods
sold divided by the quantity being sold.

Now, original economics was called mercantilism, and in those days, the determinant

of the price was labor costs and a fair markup.  That's the foundation stone.  That part
is not subjective in the least.

Here goes a vague conclusion:  

AEcon attempts to apply micro-economic math to macro-economic models.

Now, I have a lot of explanations of economic functions and phenomenon at 

"Humanity at the 11th Hour."  It's found at:

I wrote those articles so that people will understand the basic motions of economics

which, according to my definition, is the Science of the Flow of Money.

May 15, 2016

Cpt Ray Lewis of Occupy Wall Street, in light of nationwide police protests

This article was written during the Occupy Wall Street days.  HOWEVER, it is
more pertinent today than is was then, in light of the nationwide protests against
deadly police discretion.  Yet, that state of existence was guaranteed to come to
America, for a number of reasons, each one of which I addressed previously.

At this point, I want to make a preliminary statement:  Before I left the Carolina
Coastline permanently, I was speaking with a Pennsylvania State Trooper who
was on vacation at the time.  He said to me that America was going to become
a police state.  He was 100% correct.

Concerning the officer, know that he and I were extremely friendly to each other.
There was no animosity.  As this site shows, I have three active security clearances
and I know what it is to be admitted into secured sites.  This means that I am very
well versed at being friendly with police, compound guards, checkpoint attendants,
government administrators, the feds, and other government officials.  If they are
northerners, I have an easy time befriending such people, especially those who are
natives of Western Pennsylvania.  I've done well in the social skill departmet with
Philadelphians, too.

All in all that Pennsylvania State Police officer was 100% correct in what he pre-
dicted in the Year 2012.  Let us now focus-in on another Pennsylvania public
servant, the retired Captain Ray Lewis:

Becoming heroic consists in showing up at a place where you're needed and stand-
ing your ground when you're there.  The result is that the life of at least one other
person will never be the same again.  Ray could have stayed home, watched TV,
and consumed chips.  He traveled to New York, as if to be on a mission, instead.
The message which he came to convey was:

                      "All the cops are just workers for the one percent,
                      and they don’t even realize they’re being exploited.”

For those unfamiliar, Ray Lewis appeared at Zuccotti Park on a Tuesday, in police
uniform.   He was arrested at 1:00 PM.  He later called the NYC police conduct
something disgusting and uncalled-for.  This constituted an expert opinion.  In as
much, the presence of Ray Lewis comprised a hands-on endorsement of the gen-
eral OWS movement, giving the defamed movement credentials.

Remember, Ray went the extra distance to get there, as if he were delivering a
page of the Magna Carta.  His psychological constitution appeared to be that of
a compassionate man, evidenced by his following statement:

            "I have tremendous sympathy for those who suffer.  These 
             people are suffering while the bankers and Wall Streeters 
            are drinking champagne, while looking down on us."

In light of the Zuccotti Park transpiration, what is this "OWS vermin" that the
radio talk show host banned in England kept repeating like a broken LP?  What
is this "fringe of a fringe of a fringe" thing that the right wing corporate adver-
tising dollar leeches of FoxNews have been saying about the 1st Amendment
People at Zuccotti Park?  This was a worldwide movement.  Parasites?  Not
the former Philly police captain.  In fact, the sweatshop profiteers are the
ultimate parasites, leeching off of exploited workers.

FoxNews was not and is not a news agency.  It's a a propaganda unit who has
repeatedly been wrong in their assertions and declarative statements.  Proof
that it's a propaganda unit, no different than Hitler's machine, is that the Fox-
News personnel give commentaries, instead of objective, narrative, line-item
newscasts.  As far as being wrong, the FoxNews people were 100% wrong
about their assessment of the harmed 9-11 cleanup crew members who devel-
loped Small Airways Disease and Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome.
Plus, Occupy Wall Street was not a  fringe.  The OWS Movement's downfall
was that it did not have pivotal leaders.  One of whom should have been cap-
tain emeritus Ray Lewis.  In fact, he should have been the central leadership
of the movement.  He should have been drafted into service.

Ray Lewis' cavalry-like timing showed the world that the OWS Movement is
far from over.  The event of 2011 was a milestone in history, and when the cor-
rect leaders fall into place, things will change for real.  Don't look for youth to
run it.  Look for those weathered with track records of being altruistic.  In as
much, a lot of the OWS people had the ulterior motive to have their outrage-
ously high college loans debts mitigated ... lessened ... reduced ... payable.
They also wanted jobs.  The thing is that you need to go one step further.
You have to have proved selflessness and looking out for the underdog,
instead of being motivated by your personal gain.  That was the folly of
the OWS movement.

It was like Ronald Reagan in one aspect.  Reagan vehemently campaigned,
in order to lower the tax rates of the wealthy, because he wanted his own
personal tax rate lowered.  And remember, Reagan only got rich, by hold-
ing onto land until its sale would produce a windfall.  He never started an
assembly line.  He never invented and/or patented anything.  He neither had
a medical or a law degree.  He didn't start a co-operative, nor an import com-
pany, nor founded a professional sports team.  He was never a city builder.
He simply bought land less expensively, horded it, and then sold it when the
price was high enough for him.  NO WORK was involved.  In as much, the
OWS people were in NYC mostly for each one's individual self.  This is why
it failed.

There are more effective and less expensive ways to put Wall Street and the
1% on their knees.  Half of what the people in 2011 did was vent.  They were
also hoping to get the same amount of help from the public as did a Caesar
Chavez who orchestrated a successful grapes and lettuce boycott.  Concern-
ing those days, Walter Cronkite of CBS news would report on the status of
the boycott everyday while it was occurring.

The Polish trade unions had success with Strike & Boycott.  The Polish did
not fire a shot.  Another cute trick, in putting the rich on their knees, then oc-
curred during the largest corporate takeover of an insurance company up to
that time.  Of course, stating specifics will put the enemy on guard.  But, I
was surprised when I learned of the tactic which resulted in a hostile corpor-
ate takeover.  I know about this, because I once worked for the insurance com-
pany who did the taking over.

If people can act in unison, it will be a done deal.   Concerning the 1%, the next
9% are their servants and an added 9% are their beneficiaries.  This means that
it's not actually 99% vs the 1%.  It's actually the 81% vs the 19%.

Concerning the motivation of the OWS Movement, it was two-fold.  One mo-
tivation was the burden of college loan debt in the presence of high unemploy-
ment.  The other one was military service performed in the absence of gratitude
by the war monger Republican Party.  It's interesting how politicians and radio
talk show hosts who never saw battle are so obsessed with high military spend-
ing.  In fact, these people neither worked with the Army Corps of Engineers nor
with the Peace Corps nor any point in between.  Yet, they are so militaristic and
goose-stepping tough, with the blood of other men.

Concerning Ray Lewis, he served the function of  late-hour reinforcement ... a
one-man cavalry.  Him being put in jail, it was a bit of a Calvary.  A small sacri-
fice, in comparison to those people throughout the world who suffered the hor-
rendous misfortune of Newt Gingrich supporters ... of the pig-man Gingrich and
the unconscionable, income disparate 1%.   But a sacrifice none the less, with a
clear statement attached to it.

And remember, there were Chinese sweatshop workers who actually did slit their
wrists, being that the labor abuse imposed upon them was so intense.  Therefore,
very few types of sacrifices can compare to what citizens of Communist China
often endured, for the profits of the 1% ... in America.

May 14, 2016

Duress Pricing: Exxon's $41 billion profit for 2012 and the 2015 petroleum price cliff-dive proves that high gas prices were unjustified.

Duress Pricing:  Imposing a high price to those
in dire need of the overpriced product.  It's de
facto extortion.  In as much, Exxon's $41 billion
profit margin in 2012 proves that the price of gas
has been unjustifiably high.  Now, OPEC does
NOT operate  according to c"market  forces." It
artificially causes the price to "initiate" where it
does.  Plus, Exxon spent $3 billion in 2013 buy-
ing back  34 million shares of stock, to an 18%
decrease in profit

Then come the speculators ...

None the less, the sudden cliff-dive of petroleum prices shows that the former-
ly high price of fuel was artificially contrived, all along, and that FoxNews was
100% WRONG in its explanation for the high price of gasoline.  For the record,
FoxNews presented people who claimed that the price of petrol would no longer
deceases and that it was due to rising demand in China.  Well, the price dove
downward in an instant.

Once again is another instance to show that FoxNews is utterly worthless and
even a detriment to humanity.  That news entity is nothing more than a propa-
ganda machine for the exceptionally greedy.   To follow its on-air voices is to
be a gullible puppet without a mind of his/her own.  God provided you with a
mind, so use it for a change.

To start, know that there's a blatant piece of public evidence which proves that
the FoxNews network and other right wing pro-corporate media outlets have
been lying to you all along, in having stated that the sharp rise in oil/gasoline
prices was the result of "market forces:"  The proof is OPEC.  It's the cartel
designed to set oil prices according to an artificial monopoly pricing schematic.
It has been in operation for decades.  Monopoly pricing sets prices higher than
they would be IF natural market forces would prevail.
In light of present gasoline prices, the article linked immediately below is still
pertinent.  It was written February 2012, but its subject matter remains current.

Keep in mind that, during February of 2012, demand for oil was at a 15 year low 
in the U.S.  Yet, oil was at a record high in price, for the same time span.  If you
already know how the oil price manipulation works, then feel free to proceed to the
following article which was written in the Winter of 2012.  In it are numerous links
to articles on the 2012 gasoline price gouging spree, written by those reasonably
versed in the topic:
          Petroleum Products: #1 U.S. export at record high prices for Winter,
                                      despite a 15 year low in demand.


There should be a law forbidding anyone to purchase oil unless he/she is going
to use the oil he purchases.  This is because the pivotal trick of the oil speculator
is to artificially cause a shortage of oil by requiring numerous barrels of it to sit
entirely immobile, in the wait to honor the futures contract delivery date.  The oil
remains all dressed up with nowhere to go, being that the typical oil speculator has
no intention to warehouse and use the oil.

The original article:

2012 Gasoline prices were a déja vu of those of 2008.  Thus, knowing the cause
of the rise in prices then might might might help you understand one thing:

Simply because FoxNews states something, it doesn't mean it's anywhere near
true.  The Fox network claimed that the drastic rise in 2008 gasoline prices was
due to increased demand.  No.  It was oil speculators who horded the oil supply,
via futures contracts.  This meant that the needed oil sat idle, in order for the sup-
pliers to honor the delivery of future oil that was intended to go nowhere, being
that the oil speculators had no intention to use said oil.  They only wanted to sell
it at an inflated price.

This covers a very brief and rudimentary review of the following:
1) Selling Short,  
     2) Put and Call Options,
          3) Oil Speculation in futures derivatives. 

Selling Short

In brief, the terminology refers to a broker leading you a block of stock of which
you are short and don't yet own.  The full amount of stock that you borrow is im-
mediately sold by you.  Yet, you intentionally remain in debt to the broker.  You
pay the broker for the stock later, at a designated time.  You hope that, by that
time, you will have to pay for the borrowed stock at a lower price.  One sells
short when he/she is gambling on the price of the stock to go down.

Selling short consists in:

1} literally borrowing a block of stock from a broker and immediately selling it
     to someone else,
2} followed by buying an equal amount of stock at a later time, at a different price,
3} thereby paying the broker.

This means that:

1} if the price of the stock goes down, you re-purchased it at a price cheaper than
     the price by which you previously borrowed it and then immediately sold it. 
     You have made a profit.

2} if the price of the stock goes up, you end up losing money, because you have
     to pay for the block of stock that you owe at a higher price.

Example:  You borrow 1,000 shares of Widgetville Inc. which cost $100 per
share.  You immediately sell that block of stock at $100 per share, for a price
of $100,000.  Thus, you have $100,000 on hand, to buy an equal amount of the
same stock later.  Then, when it comes time to buy an equal amount of Widget-
ville stock, it's price has already dropped to $90 per share.  This means that you
buy the 1,000 shares of stock for $90,000 and keep $10,000 for yourself.

Of course, you give the 1,000 shares of Widgetville to the stock broker who
originally lent you 1,000 shares of it.

The previous example in review:  1,000 shares of Widgetville borrowed ... You
immediately sold it at $100 per share for $100,000 ... 1,000 shares are purchased
by you later at $90 per share ... You paid $90,000 for the 1,000 share ... You keep
$10,000 for yourself, minus any fee and applicable dividend reimbursement.  The
1,000 shares of Widgetville Inc. are given to the broker who originally lent you
the 1,000 shares of it in the first place.

Remember If the stock price rises, you lose money.  For example, if the price
was hypothetically $110 at the time you purchased the new set of shares that
were to be given to the broker whom you owe 1,000 shares, you had to pay
$110,000.  You lost a hypothetical $10,000.

Until 2007, investors were forbidden to sell short, unless the price were above
the present stock price, or unless the previous stock price was lower than the
present price.  This was the uptick rule.  You could only sell after the price in-
creased, or you increased the price yourself, thereby permitting you to sell.

Calling the Short

Note that the broker may instantly require you to cover the price of the stock
you  borrowed.  It is solely done at his/her discretion.

Put and Call Options

Concerning a Put Option, it's a contract which grants the contractee the option
to sell a block of 100 shares of stock at a specific price, if the contractee elects
to do so.  The price is known as the Strike Price.   A Call Option consists in
having the option to buy a 100 shares of stock at the designated Strike Price. 

Oil Futures Derivatives

Oil Speculation, in the form of oil futures derivatives, is what artificially caused
the price of oil to skyrocket in 2008.  During this time, FoxNews had guests go
on air, stating the wrong reasons why the price of gasoline skyrocketed. 

The news show guests continued to state that supply and demand market forces
caused the sudden rise.  The invalidating feature of the FoxNews claim is that,
in the Year 2006, the oil supply was at an eight year high.  Yet, the price of oil
started its ascent into economic havoc.  The price should have dropped.  Thus,
FoxNews perpetuated a lie until a Senate hearing uncovered the true cause of
the price hike.

Oil futures consist in making a binding pledge to buy oil at a specified price at
a specific future date.  The 2008 crisis consisted in investors not looking to buy
oil, but to merely buy oil futures.  This is referred to as paper oil   This meant
that significant amounts of oil needed to be reserved for investors who had no
intention to use the oil.  This was the delivery aspect of futures derivatives.

This meant that oil was going to be kept away from oil consumers, in order to
honor the contractual obligation of the futures contracts.  As a result, a reduc-
tion in the oil supply was being artificially induced.  This, in effect, was the
hording of oil.   It was a game of keep-away from the oil consumer.   It was
the ploy of reducing supply, artificially.   The barrels of oil attached to spec-
ulator futures contracts were all dressed up with nowhere to go.  They were
the collectors' dolls never taken out of the box.

Deregulation, and NOT regulation, caused the price of oil to skyrocket.  In fact,
the Enron Loophole was basically the oil speculators' reporting exemption.     

Incidentally, Texas Senator Phil Gramm's late night Enron Loophole simply
made it that oil futures contracts didn't have to be monitored by the CFTC
(Commodities Future Trading Commission.)  Thus, no one could tell if prices
were being manipulated, until it was too late.  As a result, the price of oil rose
to $137.11 in July 2008, and later to $147.27 a barrel.  Gasoline reached $4.09
a gallon.  Even in April 2011, the price of a barrel of oil was $113.93 or so.

Keep in mind that it was the deregulated speculators who caused oil prices to

May 13, 2016

Clinton was the one who had fiscal surpluses. Reagan never did.

  Concerning the National Debt in Relation to Gross Domestic Product

      To Whom it May Concern:

1}  The national debt was NOT reduced to zero during the Clinton Administration.
      Rather, it rose approximately $1.6 trillion, from $4.1 trillion to $5.7 trillion.  In
      as much, Clinton did NOT erase the national debt, as certain people claimed.

2} Nor did the national debt decrease during the Clinton Years.  Instead, the rate
     of increase slowed-down as the Clinton years progressed.  What is significant
     about the national debt during the Clinton years is this:

Firstly, Clinton enjoyed budget surpluses from three out of his eight  in office,
and ...

The National Debt, as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, dropped by 9%
during Clinton's last term.   It went from 65.4% of GDP to 56.4% of GDP.  If
Clinton didn't acquiesce to NAFTA, things would have been much better than
what resulted during his administration.  He sabotaged his own administration
and all of America, for the years to come.  None the less, Clinton did produce
a surplus in terms of the yearly (fiscal) budgets for fiscal years 1998, 1999, and
2000.  The numbers respectively are $69, $77, and $46 billion, if you use the
accrual accounting method is coming to the conclusion.

The accrual method simply records expenses at the time the charge/debt occurs,
as opposed to when the expense is paid.   In accounting a charge/debt is known
as an account payable.  It's regarded as a liability ... a subtraction from wealth of
the company accruing the charge.

Recent Presidencies

In recent presidencies, the Carter administration started with a national debt that
was 35% of GDP and it ended at 32.5%.  Under Reagan, it went from Carter's
32.5% to 53.1%.   Thus comes more evidence that Reagan was NOT the model
of fiscal responsibility that Fox News and the Republican Party make him out to
be.  After all, the national debt ceiling limit was elevated 18 times under Reagan.

Under George Bush I, the national debt's percentage of GDP elevated from 53.1%
to 66.1%.   Under Bush II, it went from Clinton's 56.4% to 84.2%. 

The Post WWII & Vietnam War Presidencies

At the start of 1945, the national debt was 117% of GDP.   The war was still rag-
ing.   Then, in 1949, the national debt was reduced to 93% of GDP.   In 1953, it
was reduced to 71.4%.   Under Ike, it went from 71.4% to 55.2%.  Then, under
Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter it went from 55.2% to 35.8%.  Thus,
Ronald Reagan and the two George Bushes were responsible for significantly ele-
vating the national debt in relation to the GDP.   Under them collectively, the na-
tional debt rose 61.4 percentage points.  This illustrates that the Republican Party
is not the party of fiscal responsibility.  It's campaign platform has been a lie.

Obama walked aboard a sinking ship.  American economic history from 1945 to
1980 shows that there is hope.  However, if the Trade Balance Deficit doesn't end
now, then it will soon be over for the entity once known as the United States gov-
ernment, even if it decides to become Argentina the Second.  Keep in mind that,
during the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, the manufacturing base was in America, and
not in overseas sweatshops.   NAFTA, CAFTA, and any other pending AFTA
must be repealed immediately.   Foreign trade in itself is NOT the problem.  The
problem is trading with a protectionist dictatorship whose workers cannot afford
to buy American products in the same degree that Americans can afford to buy
the products of the protectionist dictatorship.   There must be fair exchange be-
tween trading nations.

The U.S. National Debt

To start, Concerning the Debt-to-GDP Ratio, the United States' National Debt
reach 99.25% of United States' Gross Domestic Product in 2011.

Under Jimmy Carter, the debt went to $1 trillion.
Under Ronald Reagan, it was tripled to $3 trillion.
Under George Bush Sr, it crawled to $4.18 trillion.
Under Bill NAFTA Clinton, it went to $5.72 trillion.
Under George Bush Jr, it skyrocketed to $10.62 trillion.
As of October 2014, under Barack Obama, it's $17.8 trillion.

May 10, 2016

If they would reduce their prices,
a reduced tax rate for them would be justified

Keep in mind the following:  A de facto tax im-
posed upon the poor is price rises for essential
commodities.   When prices rise, the poor get
taxed as effectively as if their tax rate rose.

When George WMD Bush took office, a gallon
of gas hovered in the vicinity of $1.69 to $1.89.
Then came Phil Gramm's Enron Loophole, fol-
lowed by the circus of oil futures speculators.
Gasoline skyrocketed to the $4.00 range.   It
was proven that the price of gas was artificially
manipulated.  Yet, today, the price isn't much
different than it was during the 2008 economic

Food prices suddenly started rising in 2008.  In five years, how much have the prices
subsided to any reasonable level?  Think.  Higher prices yield higher sales tax reve-
nue ... only for each unit sold.  In sequence, higher prices yield less sales and less
instances of sales tax revenue.  In as much, let's do the following:

Devise a code where the tax rates of entrepreneurs and for-profit corporations 
will incrementally decrease with a decrease in the prices they charge for their 
products.  Provide ample tax incentives which consist in rewarding these entities 
for creating livable waged jobs.  Such a thing is known as returning to the 1960s 
and 1970s.   In the 1970s, the U.S. was the #2 importer nation.  Even at the start
of the 1980s, America was the top creditor nation.  Reagan ruined the trend.

Involved is also something known as price elasticity, previously explained on this site.
As a quick review of it,  lowering the price of a product or service can result in  more
sales and therefore more financial revenue.  Of course, it depends on the product's or
service's demand curve;  the amount of demand that increases as the price decreases.

As a definition, Price Elasticity is the change in demand in relation to the change of
price ... of a product or service.

A demand curve is fashioned according to something known as Marginal Utility.  Mar-
ginal denotes 'per added unit,' while Utility denotes 'usefulness.'  Thus marginal utility
is the degree of usefulness that an added unit of a product or service is perceived as pos-
sessing, by the person demanding the product or service.  As an example, the first glass
of water is far more valuable to a human than the fifth one.  In fact, the fifth glass can be
injurious, thereby creating negative marginal utility.  This is the essence of the art of de-
signating the slope of a product's or service's demand curve.

For the record the definition of Price Elasticity is simple.  It's the Change in Demand in
relation to the Change in a product's or service's price.  In as much, lowering the price
of a product can result in more revenue ... more profit.

CEO Wage History

In 1980, the average CEO made 42 times more than the average worker.  Today, the
average CEO makes 380 times more than the average worker.  These people are tak-
ing far more than they have the right to be paid.  Yet, they demand a lower tax rate.

Do not be deceived.  Lobbyists haunt the minds of congressional members, as Bob
Dole honestly stated during his honorable 1996 presidential campaign.  The logical
surmise is that a congressional member doesn't make a decision without first consid-
ering the money supplies handed out by the various lobbyists.

The use of lobbyists, to advance a self-seeking agenda, is an act of usurpation which
leaves out of the politcal process those without money ... especially those who didn't
have 24, 30, 75, and 85 cent-per-hour sweatshop workers making their wealth for
them.  This constitutes cheating.  Anyway, even the Wall Street Journal and CNN's
Money section chimed-in on the subject of income disparity.

Concerning this, keep in mind that it's the CEO's workers who work hard, no matter
what Romney the Menace stated during his vicious 2012 campaigning.  If you're too
young to remember the other presidential campaigns of the past 50 years, Romney
was, by far, the worst, in that he was the most defamatory, dishonest, and divisive
of all the presidential nominees.  The second worst would be the 1936 Republican
nominee, Alf Landon, of Kansas, incidentally.

1980 CEO avg pay =   42 times more than the average employee's income.
2012 CEO avg pay = 380 times more than the average employee's income.

May 7, 2016

The one thing needed to bring back the American Dream

If economic fairness is ever achieved in America, it will be more beautiful than this
California mountain range I passed while doing my 12000 mile road trip in 2012.
Preliminary note:  To start, all of the economics article here come from Humanity
at the 11th Hour.  When you add the pageviews of that site with this one, you have,
at the time of this writing, exactly 259,230 hits.  This means that at least a few people
have been paying attention to the content within those two Pontillo sites.

Now, the author of all of the economic articles in Humanity at the 11th Hour has an
economics and foreign language collegiate background, even to the point  of scoring
a 100% on a national standardized accounting exam issued by the Ivy League, and
also to the point of being inducted in the Phi Sigma Iota language honors fraternity.

In fact, the Humanity at the 11th Hour author once earned four insurance licenses
in three weeks, comprising Life & Annuities, Property individually, Casualty indi-
vidually, and Medical insurance.  Of course, the author is yours truly.  In as much:

This is an academic background that the fraud, Rush Limbaugh, can never boast.
Nor is it one that the sophomoric congressman, Paul Ryan, can claim, either.  So,
why waste your time listening to them?  They're entirely worthless.  If you need
to read economics from a Republican, then read David Stockman, former budget
director of the Reagan administration.

Of all the right wing radio talk show hosts, no one is more worthless than Rush
Limbaugh.  You know, Michael Savage (Weiner) does have a ethnobotany de-
gree.  Ann Coulter and Neal Boortz do have law degrees, while Laura Ingraham
has a Dartmouth degree, in addition to her law degree.  So, why do people waste
their time with the ultimate on-air fraud, namely, Rush Oxycontin Limbaugh who
apparently isn't as manly as he makes his Viagra-dependent self out to be.

In the name of all that you regard holy, stay away from Limbaugh's voice patterns.
He's beyond worthless and he's an accomplished drug addict who used an employee
to be an accomplice to his drug crimes.   He is a college fail out, as well as a liar on
air.  That which he alleges to be fact is often outright falsehood, statistical speaking.

Why disgrace yourself by being Limbaugh's dupe?  You have a mind.  Use it, for a
change.  A ditto head is an inarticulate air head who cannot form his own thought
patterns.  If you have to be a right wing adherent, at least listen to Laura Ingraham.
Not Limbaugh.  Never Limbaugh.

Remember that, once upon a time, I was a registered Republican.   But, no more ...
... in no way ... never again.  Incidentally, if it's any consolation, I'm not a registered
Democrat, either.  Nor am I registered with a third party.  Neither am I any type of
avowed Communist, nor any type of Socialist, nor any type of Oligarchist which is
what Ronald Reagan was,

If I am to be labeled in this label-obsessed society, it would be that of a Federalist
who believes in enforcing the Declaration of the Rights of Man via a chancellery
system and via government agencies.  Such enforcement is known as administrative
law, and such a system will spare common citizens of the obscenely price-gouger
attorney fees that we see today.

I believe in the Uniform Commercial Code and things similar.  That is to say that I
find state's rights to be the manipulation of the greedy, as well as an asinine idea in
an era when a person can travel to three states in one day.

In fact, in less than one day's time, I once traveled from South Carolina  to Georgia
to Alabama to Mississippi  to Louisiana to Beaumont Texas.  That's six American
states in less than a 24 hr period. That's a thousand miles.  Let us begin ... if you're
still here, reading:

The Science of the Flow of Currency

Economics is the science of the flow of currency, and nothing in the U.S. economic
circular flow is more important than the need to end the continuing escalation of the
U.S. Trade Balance Deficit.  In October of 2011, while Occupy Wall Street was the
only show in town, a former chief economist of the United States International Trade
Commission stated that:

... the manufacturing bust from offshoring by multinationals is at the core
of why the economy remains sluggish.   It explains why government opera-
tions are harder to fund and people can’t find jobs.

Throughout 2012, people were stating that the rate of job growth wasn't sufficient
enough for continentwide America.  Well, sending multitudes of jobs to overseas
sweatshops caused an abridged growth rate in America.  Now, in 2014, the remedy
of ending sweatshop merchandise importation needs to be activated, and the model
for such as activation is the famous Grapes & Letuce Boycott of the later half of the
1960s.  However, the next political effort in the making is the Trans-Pacific Trade
Pact which, according to time-honored journalist, Bill Moyers, will be the Death of
Democracy.  It will be the opposite of remedying the slow growth rate in America.

Mr. Moyers has been covering the Trans-Pacific Trade Pact for a while.  So, his
observations are paramount for us to read  and/or hear:

Concerning the former chief economist mentioned above, he turned out to be 100%
correct in having stated following:

“Every dollar which goes abroad to purchase oil or Chinese consumer goods an
does not return to purchase exports is lost purchasing power that could be creat-
ing jobs.  Halving the nearly $550 billion annual trade deficit would create at least
5 million jobs.”


Now, it was repeatedly stated that Chinese currency manipulation is what caused Amer-
ica to lose sales revenue and jobs in the United States.  That IS a LIE.  The truth is that
it was the hideously low wage rates of the foreign workers which did so.  Finding low
waged scenarios was a corporate work assignment.  I met a couple of the assignees
through the years.

Think:  Why did numerous American corporations move their manufacturing to over-
seas venues?  For Chinese Currency Manipulation?  No.  It was done for the low-wage
labor markets.

PLUS, Chinese Currency Manipulation isn't the reason why the tags on your clothing
sometimes read, MADE IN Indonesia, Bangladesh, Guatemala, El Salvador, Vietnam,
etc. Be on the lookout for deceptive propagandists.

Plus, cultural exchange and foreign relations is important.  The error of the inhabitants
of certain red states of America is the presumption that America has to shut its doors
and become an isolationist nation, reminiscent of inbreeding States.  In as much, take
the following to heart:
Keep in mind that the medical price gouging of the past several years elevated the
costs of medicare and medicaid.  This also contributed to the leak from the finan-
cial circular flow.  Plus, U.S. military spending is way over the top, especially when
considering that the U.S. was spending six times more than was China and twelve
times more than was Russia.  In fact, the U.S. has been spending three to four times
more than both of those nations combined.  Yet, the U.S. has NATO allies and isn't
in need of the ridiculously high amount of spending that is helping to destroy the
American economy, especially in light of the fact that all military spending yields
negative returns on investment, unless you are going to use your military to pillage,
plunder, and putting nations conquered into slavery.

However, the empires of pillagers never last very long.  Just ask Attila.

Corporate profits as a percentage of GDP reached record high. Employee income, as a percentage of the same, reached record low, in 2012.

The rich and poor pay the same
price for a gallon of gas.  Even
though the price be the same,
the burdens caused by inoppor-
tune price-hikes are different,
creating burdens upon the work-
ing poor, disabled, aged, and
businesses which have high
fuel operating costs. 
To start, proportionality, as opposed to linear arithmetic, is how to detect any wide-
spread motions toward a state of renewed economic imbalance and yet another eco-
nomic crisis.   In the third quarter of  2012, American corporate net profits reached
their highest percentage of GDP, either since 1968 (according to the reasonably
credible Barron's Magazine) or  since the beginning of the United States (accord-
ing to other credible sources.)  Yet, it was during the 2012 election when Romney,
Ryan, and the roster of right wing radio talk show hosts lied to America about the
economy, in making very profitable corporations sound as if they were on the
verge of failing.

Truth & American AM radio have become oxymorons.  Truth and AM radio have
become mutually exclusive.  In fact, truth on AM radio, outside of sports shows,
farm reports, and weather reports, is non-existent for consecutive hours at a time.
This includes the pro-Reagan prince of virtual psychosis and observed non-reality,
George Norry of the Coast to Coast AM talk show which preoccupies its air time
with claiming that humanity was an extra-terrestrial test tube invention, while nev-
er stating who created the extra-terrestrial test tube jugglers, in the first place.

But, in all reality, the Coast to Coast show is a long campfire story for those bored
to death with life and who are in need of science fiction entertainment & conspiracy
theories.  The problem is that fantasy is presented as fact on that show.  However,
I can assure you that there is no Howard Johnson's or Holiday Inn on the dark side
of the moon.  Nor is there any UFO filling station there, where you can get a free
mug with every third fill-up.  Norry needs to quit interviewing psychotics such as
those who claim to have time traveled as part of a U.S. military project, lest he be
counted amongst those psychotic.  The show is a twisted circus, as it is.

2012 Net Profits

Whatever be the correct benchmark, 3rd Q net profits of 2012 were 18.6% higher
than profits of the year prior.  Simultaneously, workers' wages fell to their lowest
percentage of GDP, ever.  In fact, household spending in August of 2012 rose .5%,
while wage & salary income only rose .1%.   That's Point 5 Percent vs. Point 1%.

More importantly, gasoline prices rose 9.0% during August 2012, logically explain-
ing the rise in spending.  In as much, while corporations were raking in record prof-
its, Romney, as presidential candidate, was lying to America, claiming that corpora-
tions were being suffocated into bankruptcy and economic ruin.

The only thing consistent about Mitt Romney (the descendant of cultic polygamy
who changed his political platform more often than square dancers change their
partners) was that consistently lied to the world.  Anyone who lies as often as did
Romney is literally a danger to society.  He was and is inconsistent in all things.

Barron's Counterpoint, in that it's at variance with the other reporting agencies:

The following is absolutely essential to memorize, if you are an honest person who
seeks truth in matters of economics and accounting.  If you're a lying propagandist,
the following is something that you want to hide from civilization:

A de facto tax exacted upon the poor, which adds to their burden, is a cost of living
increase, whenever the poor are not compensated.  A double taxation effect on the
poor is a sudden retail price hike in addition to any uncompensated cost of living in-
crease, Such was the case in August of 2012.  In this instance, a de fact tax is under-
stood to be something taxing and burdensome, as opposed to something which turns
into government revenue.  Keep this in mind.  Also keep in mind that cost-of-living
increases in Social Security are only paid-for, in part, by those businesses who cause
the increases.  Payroll taxes are also paid-for by the employees who have to face the
cost of living increase.  The bottom line is this:  

It's the wealthy business owners who end up taxing the poor, in a de facto fashion.
In the alternate, you can call it draining the poor, instead of taxing the poor.  What-
ever you call it, it necessitates cost of living increases to Social Security Insurance
recipients.  This burden factor is one of the reasons why a flat tax will turn a nation
into a monopoly board, comprising:  1} the very rich, 2} a class of staff managers
who will serve the roles of white collar task masters, 3} and the poor.  In as much,
when the rich complain that the poor aren't paying enough taxes, the response is that
the poor pay de facto taxes every time they purchase any product or service marked-
up by the rich who have other  people doing the hard work for them.  This especially
the case, as it applies to gasoline and home heating prices.  That is to say, the money
needed for the poor to pay added taxes is already in the hands/pockets of the rich.

The other reason why a flat tax will be disastrous is something known as marginal
utility.  Marginal Utility is defined as the incremental increase in usefulness for ev-
ery added unit of use of something.  To the poor, a small amount of burden is pro-
portionally worse than a much larger sum exacted upon the wealthy.   One example
is the rise in the price of gasoline.  Rich and poor pay the same price for a gallon of
gas.  It takes more of a bite out of the poor.  Therefore, you need to gauge things ac-
cording to proportionality and "comparative disadvantages," in order to detect when
an economic crisis is en route to your society.

The treble (triple) burden effect on the poor comes into play when the following

1} a drain of disposable income,
               when is caused by a decrease in working citizens' income,
                                                                                       as a percentage of GDP ...
2} while corporate profits,
                  as a percentage of the same GDP,
                                                                  increase ...

3} and while consumer prices rise.

Concerning the complaint that the working poor get total income tax refunds, if it
weren't for the poor and middle class working citizen, the wealthy would have zero
income.  After all, the wealthy don't make those Mac Trucks, Ipods, Master Locks,
grocery products, automotive parts, paved highways, and latté drinks on their own.
Without the working man, there is no rich man. 

May 5, 2016

As he dissolved the FCC Fairness Doctrine, Reagan sought to destroy equality in American communications.

America is not to operate according to Lies, Injustice, and the Nazi Way.
Reagan put the US on that path, while waving the national  flag in front of your face.
This doctrine was part of the American Way, after gerrymandering was curbed and until
Reagan became president.  Implementing this doctrine is how to neutralize the propagan-
da being disseminated by the Koch Brothers (heirs of a massive fortune).  Their needs to
be a check and balance on all of the lying propaganda being tossed about by the right wing
and left wing and fear-mongering conspiracy theorists.  It has gotten ridiculous, as of re-
cent.  This included the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq fraud.

Implementing this doctrine can level the playing field that was hideously skewed on ac-
count of the Citizens' United case.

This doctrine is how to stop in his tracks the Marco Rubio who was allowed to lie on
the Fox Network, in telling America that he was against the shutdown, after it failed.

The same doctrine could have shut down Betsy McCaughey's "Death Panel" myth of
1994 that was resumed by Sarah Palin after her loss in the 2008 election, by which the
American electorate let her know that it does NOT want someone as dim-witted and
dishonest as her anywhere near the White House, except for taking tours of it.

The same doctrine would quickly let people know that the "substantive law" (minus
titles and subtitles) in the Affordable Care Act is shorter than Harry Potter and the
Order of the Phoenix

As recently as October 2013, the Red State question was asked

On national television, someone  asked why the poor of the red states vote against their
interests, thereby sabotaging their chance at the American dream.  An answer wasn't
given.  However, words of clear wisdom were spoken, in response.  None the less, the
reason why the working poor and other poor give their vote to those who keep them in
poverty goes as follows:

The undereducated who simply didn't have the money or time or giftedness to attend
college are told that, if the rich don't get richer, the working poor will lose their jobs,
along with their shopping plazas.  These poor individuals don't understand the concept
of Stock Ownership and Corporate Bond Distribution.  They don't understand that any
one corporation is owned by hundreds or thousands of people.  If the FFC Fairness Doc-
trine existed, counterpoint could be spoken on those right wingair waves that suppress
uninterrupted speech and unridiculed speech.  The cultic Koolaid culture of FoxNews
would be as neutralized as caustic acid.

In the 1970s, it was a nightly thing to see Americans exchange point/counterpoint on
even local television stations.  The time reserved for airing the pro and cons of a pre-
vailing issue was usually shortly before prime time and shortly after the 11 O'clock
news.  Depending on the station, such a thing was even aired close to signing-off time.
However, the last thing aired each night was the sermonette.  In the 1970s, television
stations were not 24 hour operations.

The practice of airing point/counterpoint was actually started in 1949.  Known as the
Fairness Doctrine, it was a regulation of the Federal Communications Commission.
Its purpose was to prevent the Big Four networks from holding a monopoly on pub-
lic opinion.

Keep in mind that the year prior was the publication of George Orwell's  1984.  The
Nuremberg trials began the year prior also, and it highlighted the intense repression
of freedom of speech.  Soviet Russia had invaded Czechoslovakia in 1948, and it be-
gan its blockade of West Berlin in the same year.  In 1949, Mao's communist revolu-
tion would reach fruition in October.  So, the U.S. Congress saw that, throughout the
world, freedom remained in jeopardy, despite the destruction of Hitler, Mussolini,
and Tojo in World War II.  Incidentally, in 1949, the Big Four networks were ABC,
CBS, NBC, and DuMont.

Now, the Fairness Doctrine required broadcast licensees to cover issues of public im-
portance and to do so in a fair manner.   Twenty years later, in 1969, Red Lion Broad-
casting sued the FCC, because of being mandated to give equal time to a gentleman
whose reputation was severely attacked on a Red Lion station.  Red Lion refused to
give equal time to the man defamed, and the case found its way to the United States
Supreme Court.

The ruling of the court was that the FCC had the legal right to require the Fairness
Doctrine to be observed by Red Lion Broadcasting, for the sake of the civil rights
of the viewers.  Radio listeners and TV viewers have the right to hear both sides of
a controversial topic.   In addition, the court noted that there were not very many
broadcast stations at the time.   This meant that the FCC had the duty to prevent
the airwaves from being monopolized.

The Fairness Doctrine was seen as essential for the sake of the viewers.   So, there
was America in the 1960s and 1970s, openly exchanging a balance of opinions on
air, on a nightly basis.  Then came the Ronald Reagan presidency.   In 1987, after a
4-0 vote, the Federal Communications Commission repealed the Fairness Doctrine.

This was anticipated.  So, the U.S. Congress passed the Fairness in Broadcasting
Act, two months prior to the FCC's repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.  It was all for
naught.  Reagan vetoed it.  He tossed out the door a post-war American institution.

It is neither propaganda nor hype to claim that Reagan despised equality and fair-
ness.  After all, he was living comfortably in Hollywood, while men were dying
and risking their lives by the thousand, all the while not living a comfortable life.
That was not fair.  See:  (S. 742, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. [1987]).

The importance of the Fairness Doctrine is that a person needs to hear the pros and
the cons of a topic in one sitting, due to the frailty of human memory ... in order to
prevent confusion of mind.  More importantly, the observance of this regulation pre-
vented the complete polarization of America. Today, America is extremely polarized,
in an Us vs Them scenario.  It has gotten to the point, where there has been the emer-
gence of neo-confederatism and talk of a second American civil war.

Ronald Reagan was the president of division.  George WMD Bush adhered to Rea-
ganomics unto the end, bringing to America the greatest economic crisis since the
Great Depression.  Its aftermath is still smouldering.  Occupy Wall Street proved
this to be the case.  Today, due to the policies of Reaganism, America is a house
divided.  A house divided will fall.