The U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause and the actual dynamics between Church & State

      If there were absolute separation of Church and State in America, 
      there would have never been chapels on United States military bases.
      In light of this, consider the following commonly encountered scenarios.

1]  The police officer hired by the State directs traffic solely for the benefit of parish-
      ioners leaving a Sunday church service.  If there were the absolute separation of
      Church and State, there would be

              no police officers directing church traffic anywhere in America, and there
              would be chaos on State roads on Sundays, until the churches themselves
              provided traffic police, thereby taking over State functions.

2]  The detective hired by the state investigates the allegations of clergy abuse com-
      mitted upon parishioners.  If there were absolute separation of Church and State
      in America, the molestation of altar boys would have gone unchecked and have
      become an unstoppable pandemic.

3]  In 1844, Philadelphia-area Protestants, in their paranoiac hatred of a pope they
     never met, torched a Catholic Church.  In fact, they literally fired a canon at it.
     In response, soldiers employed by State rallied to the protection of  Catholics
     who, at the time, were hated with seething ferocity by certain Protestant sects.
     If there were the absolute separation of Church and State, there would have
     been either a massacre in Philadelphia or the start of a literal civil war there.

     The Conclusion is that the First Amendment Establishment Clause requires the
     State to make sure that its citizens are able to freely practice religion. 

     In the alternate:

1] Catholic, Quaker, and Episcopalian schools fulfilled the job of the State in edu-
     cating students in non-religion subjects such as mathematics, science, history,
     art, and literature.  This means that thereare religious institutions functioning
     as the State five days a week.  After all, the State enacted mandatory school
     laws, and religious institutions fulfilled said laws by educating many youth
     above and beyond the topic of religion.

                                                      Added note:

            When a private entity acts as the government, in being the surrogate
             of said government, it's known as  "acting under the color of law."
             You can sue the federal government for a civil rights violations com-
              mitted by a private institution acting under the color of law.

2] Catholic and Protestant charities of varying sort fulfill the job of the State in going
     to the aid of hurricane victims, even to the point of receiving federal dollars in the
     process.  In fact, the Catholic Church, for years, received taxpayer dollars through
     social service government contracts.  In this capacity, churches have acted under
     the color of law.  Churches have become the surrogate of the government.

3] Catholic, Jewish, and Protestant medical facilities act under the color of law each
     time their facilities treat a patient sponsored by the medicaid program.

4] Catholic, Jewish, Moslem, Protestant, Hindu, Wicca, etc, chaplains are hired by
     the U.S. government, to care for the spiritual well-being of U.S. military person-
     nel.  They are not hired to establish any one religion.  Rather, they are paid to se-
     cure the religious rights of the military personnel who need chaplains, in order
     for their religious rights to be something real to them.

     During WWII, there were priests at the war fronts giving last rites to mortally
     wounded American soldiers and to anyone else caught in the line fire.  The gov-
     ernment of the United States funded the priests and the chaplains behind the
     front line, as well as the military chaplains in the States.  These chaplains
     were given military ranking.  They were a part of the government.
 
    Other observations involving the relationship between Church and State:

1] The television broadcast of Midnight Mass somewhere on Earth is governed by
     the FFC in America.  If there were the absolute separation of Church and State,
     the church would have to intrude on frequencies designated by the government,
     in order to broadcast to humanity.

2] The private jet which flew John Paul II and Benedict XVI throughout portions of
    America flew solely under the law of the FAA.  If there were the absolute separa-
    tion of Church and State, the jet carrying a pope would have crashed into another
    jet liner eventually, or else such a jet would have created aerial havoc.

3] The priests and nuns made homeless by a hurricane have the right to seek help
     from FEMA.  If there were the absolute separation of Church and State, then
     priests and nuns would freeze to death during blizzards, drown during floods,
     and remain without shelter after tornadoes. 

In addition:

It is a well known practice to begin a congressional session with a chaplain praying
before the session.  If there were the absolute separation of Church and State, then
no prayer of any kind would be heard in a congressional chamber.  It's simply that
the religions take turns in delivering the opening prayer in American congressional
chambers, because there is no established religion in America.

The Federal Judiciary Conclusion:  The phrase "Separation of Church and State"
is a misnomer.  Mention of it does NOT appear anywhere in the United States Con-
stitution.  Rather, the United States Bill of Rights has the Establishment Clause
which forbids the federal government or any State to establish an official state re-
ligion.  The same clause protects a citizen from having his religion outlawed, un-
less the religion involves criminal activity.

The First Amendment Establishment Clause guarantees that NO person will have
to support or adhere to a religion to which he does NOT want to belong.  It also
guarantees that a person willing to adhere to a specific religion will not be re-
quired by the government to violate his conscience in matters of faith & morals,
provided that the matter of conscience is in the religion's official doctrine. 

One more thing:

If the practice of a religion involves doing something illegal, then the religion is not
permitted to practice it.  The example classically used in federal court was the practice
of bigamy.  If a religion allows bigamy, members of that religion are not permitted to
practice bigamy in the United States.

In the inverse, if an activity mandated by the State is NOT permitted by a person's
religion, then the individual has the right to not be a part of the activity declared
sinful in his religion.  The most obvious example is war and the Quakers. 

In conclusion:

The much controverted United States First Amendment clause is NOT referred to as
the Separation of Church and State Clause, being that there is no absolute separation
of Church and State.  The operative phrase is the Establishment Clause.  This means
that you do not have to join a religion that you don't want to join.  This also means
that you can't force someone to stop practicing his/hers.
_____________________________________________________________________

American Farm Subsidies in Review: Required reading, even for city slickers.

In the modern world, a phenomenon occurred where abundant harvests effected price
decreases to such a degree that the cost of production exceeded any fair market income
from the harvested produce.  There was too much supply for the domestic market, show-
ing how Supply Side Economics is utterly worthless when gauging a national economy.
Thus came the subsidy.  None the less, leftover produce can perhaps find a foreign mar-
ket.  However, the price would be based on demand in the foreign market, in relation to
whatever supply is not demanded in the American market.   Thus, produce surpluses
have a number of remedies.

But first, as an introduction to farm subsidies ...

... the primary purpose for any farm subsidy is to prevent price instability ... to safe-
guard consumers from wildly fluctuating prices ... to hinder drastic and sudden price
changes.

Approximately $30 billion in farm subsidies are targeted for elimination, over the next
ten years.  However, do not be deceived into thinking that the humble sized family farm
is what has been benefiting by agricultural subsidies.  We live in the era of the corporate
farm, and between the Years 1995 and 2010, 10% of the farms were given three quarters
of the $194 billion in farm subsidies that the U.S. federal government appropriated.

Specifically, it was 74%.  The other 26% of subsidies went to 28% of the other American
farms.  In as much, 62% of American farms received zero subsidies ... according to the  Environmental Working Group.

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2012/01/farm-subsidy-research-and-analysis/

The Equation of Near-Economic Disaster, in review

The Trade Balance Deficit had damaging consequences upon America, to the tune of
$500 billion yearly for the past ten years.  In addition, the George WMD Bush tax rate
cuts cost the U.S. federal government $1.8 trillion in lost revenue, between 2002 and
2009.  Plus, Bush incompetently executed two costly wars, one of which was entirely
unnecessary.  Meanwhile, the former employer of Vice President Dick Cheney, name-
ly Halliburton, received no-bid government contracts, despite the conflict of interest.

Add to the equation the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act which used to protect pensions
and the such.  Toss in Phil Gramm's unconscionable Enron Loophole, and throw in the
fad of predatory house loan processing, and voila,  you have the 2008 economic crisis.
In fact, there is something known as the 2007/2008 World Food Price Crisis.  U.S. farm
subsidies didn't prevent food prices from rising more quickly than yeast.  After all, farm
subsidies firstly seek to prevent price crashes.  It then seeks price stability.  The contra-
diction was in the Corn/Ethanol subsidy which resulted in fructose corn syrup replacing
more expensive sugar.  The feds pay the difference in the price discrepancy., none the
less.  Now, it is always important to have safety nets for small business operators and
private citizens.  However, a certain type of corn subsidy had a dominoes effect which
hindered economic growth in the agro department.  When you are hindering markets,
you are preventing a Renaissance from transpiring.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24editorial_graph2/24editorial_graph2-popup.gif

http://farm.ewg.org/region.php

The Types of Agricultural Subsidies  

Direct Payments, aka Market Transition Payments

This type began in 1996, as part of the Freedom to Farm bill.  It's presently targeted for
extinction.   It has cost approximately $5 billion per year.  It was intended to replace the
traditional subsidies which began in the 1930s, and then, it was intended to be phrased
out in the Year 2002.  It never phrased-out.  In addition, the payments made under this
program were not in parity with any production or market conditions.  It was to be the
subsidy to end all subsidies.  It then became yet another subsidy.

Counter-Cyclical Payments, aka Market Loss Payments

Very simply, the federal government calculates recent historic crop yield and price
averages, followed by it setting a projected price for a commodity.  The farmer then
plants and harvests the commodity.  If the actual market price is less than the deter-
mined average price, the farmer is paid the difference.  For example, if the average
price for a bushel of wheat was determined to be $8.40, and the market price drops
 to $7.20, then the farmer is paid $1.20 for each bushel of wheat sold.

Marketing Loans

These are cash advances for harvests to be sold in the future.  Without this type of
subsidy, a farmer would have to sell a harvested crop immediately, regardless of the
price.  If a farmer can wait, perhaps he can sell his grains or non-perishable crops
at a higher price.  Thus, a marketing loan lets the farmer wait.

Disaster Payments

Self-explanatory, be the crop-destroying disaster a tornado, drought, pestilence, etc.
This subsidy had yearly payments in the approximate $1 billion range.

The Crop Insurance Program

Only certain crops in the locale in question apply, being that some crops in some
locales don't stand much of a chance to grow in healthy proportion.

Average Crop Revenue Election, cleverly called ACRE.

This was vetoed by Bush in 2008, yet his veto was overridden.  It serves as an alter-
native to the Counter-Cyclical Payments.  Electing to be part of this program results
in lower direct payments, by 20 or 30%.  This program guarantees a set revenue for
a farm, based on the average crop yields for the State where the farm is located and
the national market price.  Yet, the payments are based on the average crop yield of
the farm combined with the average State yield.  It's known a State-level and Farm-
level planted yield times the national market price for the crop in question.
___________________________________________________________________

There are many creative solutions to the present economic situation of the United
States.  The congress, if it's members were not owned by lobbyists, could do much
better, even to the point of bringing forth new ideas.  However, a politician ultimate-
ly votes for whatever gets him re-elected.  A politician only votes for the benefit of
those who fund his/her campaign.  So, they will implement and perpetuate the same
old thing, even if it caused severe damage to the nation, because the ones in financi-
al power want the process to remain which made them the principle holders of the
wealth.  There are much better way to remedy the financial jeopardy where Ameri-
ca finds itself.  The congress put America in its state of jeopardy.  The congress, the
congress, the congress IS at fault.  NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall are con-
gressional products which caused a lot of damage to the United States.
___________________________________________________________________

Intro: Selling Short, Put & Call Options, Futures Derivatives

Chicago

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.     
See:

http://oilgeopolitics.net/Financial_Tsunami/Oil_Speculation/oil_speculation.HTM

http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/opachilton-41

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
rise.

The Nature of Politics, in a line itemized summary

They overthrew the monarchs and replaced them with politicians who 
brought us worse wars, chattel slavery, John Calhoun, the Trail of Tears,
Teapot Dome, Tammany Hall, politicians bribed by Al Capone, Watergate, 
Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Jim Crow, Goldman 
Sachs, gasoline price gouging, medical price gouging, Goldman bankruptcy-capacity 
military spending, the Lockheed Bribery Scandal, water supplies drowning in endocrine 
disruptor chemicals, a massive American trade balance deficit, lying propaganda, etc.

The lesson is that you can implement the best form of government in your 
estimation, but if you have unconscionable manipulators running it, then you have 
an evil government.  It's the people in government that count; not the form of government.

1a] Politics is a tug of war where manipulation and
      compromise hold opposite ends of the same rope.

  2] The common man possesses something known as common sense.  This means
       that he should be granted easy access to common law courts, as well as class-
       ical chancellery offices without the exorbitantly high attorney fees of this era.
       In fact, the America Organization of States' 1948 Universal Declaration of Hu-
       man Rights needs to be enforced.

 3a] Where there is the presence of organized crime, there
        are police officers and government officials on the take.

 3b] The system of local police breeds corruption and abuse.  Their arrogance comes
        from believing that they have immunity.  Firstly, it's known as qualified immun-
        ity, and no such immunity exists in the presence of malice.

   4] Deregulation is lawlessness and lawlessness is anarchy.  Republicans are no-
       thing more than self-seeking anarchists, being that they are obsessed with de-
       regulation.  Democrats are far successful at being cold-blooded killers than a
       pack of wolves.   You can land 12 Americans on the moon, but you can't pro-
       duce a descent political party in America.  This would only be because poli-
       tics, per se, is intrinsically evil.  The constant warring between political parties               robs a nation of its peace.  One side in politics does, and then the other side                   immediately seeks to undo.

  5] Campaign mud slinging is White Trash Politics.  Other races have done it, too.

6a]  If the French are such gutless cowards who instantaneously surrender to an
       invading army, then how do you explain: 1] Charles Martel, 2] Charlemagne,
       3] the Norman Conquest, 4] the French victory over the Vikings during the
       Siege of Paris,  5] Saint Joan of Arc,  6] Simon of Montfort,  7] Simon V of
       Montfort,  8] King Louis XIV,  9] Napoleon's army,  10] the French Empire,
      11] the Comte de Rochambeau,  12] the Marquis de Lafayette,  13] the Battle
      of the Somme,  14] the Battle of the Marne,  15] the French Underground,
      16] the French Exocet Missile?   Remember that France was the third high-
      est military spender in the Year 2010.

7b] When referring to the French as cowardly sissies, keep in mind that some of
       the northwestern French are the descendants of Danish Vikings.  As a gener-
       al rule, French towns ending in "x" were once Viking settlements.  It's foolish
       to call Viking descendants a bunch sissies.

7c]  The animosity between the French and British was explained to me by a na-
        tive of England in the following way: "The French look down on everyone,
        and the English don't like being looked down upon."

  8] Donating to a political campaign is no different than bribing a politician,
       when the candidate knows that you made the donation.

  9] The most asinine campaign maneuver is that of a candidate giving voters a card
       which states only the candidate's name, without mention of the candidate's pol-
       itical stance, telling the voter to vote for the candidate.  This leaves a voter en-
       tirely clueless as to the politician's stance on the issues.  When you say, "Vote
       for Joe American Shmoe," you have to give cause why people should vote
       for him.

10a]  A person who states that monarchy is intrinsically evil is a paranoid in-breeder
        at heart.  He doesn't believe that God has the power to make anyone good.

10b]  This paranoiac inbreeding mentality includes persons who have stated that the
         papacy is intrinsically evil.  Such defamatory people include the preachers who
         see themselves in competition for tax-free collection basket money.  This speak-
         ing ill of the Catholic Church becomes a business venture, in the quest to get as
         many Catholics as possible to leave the Catholic Church and put money into the
         preachers' tax-free collection baskets.  Yee haw there, Reverend Jim Bob.

10c]  Popes come and go.  Some were holy.  Some were heart touching.  Some were
        negligent.  Some caused the Catholic world grief.  No individual pope defines
        the papacy of the past 2,000 years.

11]   If America remained a colony of England, slavery
        would have been made illegal decades prior, in 1834.

12]   Why exchange one tyrant located 3,000 miles away for 3,000 tyrants located
        one mile away?  Republics, as opposed to merely Republicans, have provid-
        ed humanity with unconscionable politicians such as George "WMD" Bush,
        Dick "the Waterboarder" Cheney, Richard "Watergate" Nixon, Mitt "Factory 
        Gate Padlock" Romney, John "Shackle them" Calhoun, NAFTA Newt Gingrich,
        Jefferson "Confederacy" Davis, George Segregation Wallace, those on the pay-
        roll of Al "Buy a Judge"Capone, Ronald "Triple the National Debt" Reagan,
        and Joe "there's a commy under your bed" McCarthy.   Add to this Jim Crow
        laws, the klan, Teapot Dome,
        Gerrymandering, the Wickersham Commission, Tammany Hall, the Lockheed
        Bribery Scandals, The Knapp Commission, MK-Ultra, and much more.

        In fact, George Washington proved his dictatorial prowess in the Whiskey Re-
        bellion that never was, along with him having his own soldiers shot to death at
        various firing squads.  In addition, the American South became a chattel slave
        dictatorship, despite it claiming itself to be the Land of Liberty.  This was ac-
        companied by a slave owner saying, "Give me liberty or give mes, death."  To
        him, liberty was the ability to keep people enslaved.  Patrick Henry, hypocrite
        extraordinaire, was a slave owner.

       The lesson learned from the many American outrages throughout the centuries
        is that it isn't the form of government that matters.  It's the type of people in
        government that does. The kings were overthrown and replaced with multiple
        tyrants.  Thus, effacing monarchy cured nothing.  What is required in govern-
        ment is that it be run by persons with consciences.  Today, an honest politician
        is an oxymoron.

13]  The Duke of Wellington was not named Wellington.  He was Arthur Wellesley.
       In fact, he was the prime minister of England when slavery was made illegal
       and Catholicism was once again made legal for the first time in 1834.

14] Abraham Lincoln's fatal error was that of not prosecuting Jefferson Davis.  If he
      would have hung Davis from the gallows, he would not have been assassinated.
      No one would have had the audacity to have even tried.

15] Mao Tse Tung's writings have ZERO social value.

16] Prince Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli was a borish windbag.

17] An activist Republican is someone who doesn't want to pay his workers and who
      doesn't want to pay his taxes, all the while whining and complaining as a martyr 
      if he doesn't own all the money in the world.

18]  An activist Democrat is someone who wants to have sex, drugs, and rock & roll,
       as well as an abortion after having messed up having sex, drugs, and rock & roll.

19] A non-activist Republican is either someone who thinks that the Republican party
      platform was brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses or someone who would
      like to belong to a country club without partaking in right wing fanaticism.  They
      are two types of people.

20]  A non-activist Democrat is someone who doesn't want to have to live out of trash
       dumpsters.

21]  The Eternal God does not recognize State's Rights; only human rights.  Instead,
       God follows the rule of a leader's accountability.  It's based on the premise that
       the more given to you results in the more being expected from you.  At this point
       in time, Remember Nuremberg, because history repeats itself.  In fact, always re-
       member Nuremberg.  Today's politicians obviously do not do so.  In fact, send
       them a history book about the French Revolution and the European revolutions
       of 1848 as soon as you can.  If they don't learn from history, they will be repeat-
       ing it very soon.  Qaddafi already did.
       ______________________________________________________________

The 'trickle-down' rich didn't create jobs. They created sweatshop slavery.

The Ghosts of Christmas Futures ... and Put & Call Options.

Just a reminder:  

Holiday shoppers are the
job-creators in November
and December; not the
tax-sheltered rich)

It is acknowledged that Hillary Clinton and her usurpers of the original demo-
cratic party are the most vile and treacherous politicians in the history of the
United States of America.  The woman IS a criminal who must absolutely be
held accountable for her criminal conduct.  However, simply because Clinton
is consummately evil, it doesn't automatically canonize the present Republican
Party platform.  It needs reformed, too.
_______________________________

When an American company fails to pay a livable wage, federal subsidy pro-
grams become the lifeline of the underpaid workers.  Meanwhile, individuals
such as the Walton heirs continue to accumulate obscenely disproportionate
amounts of wealth, in the spirit of 19th Century confederates whose wealth
would come to be torched and/or mangled during Sherman's March to the
Sea (Atlantic Ocean.)  However, the excessive amount of money held by
the Waltons & Romneys of this world is money due to underpaid workers.

In addition, in using low-waged foreign sweatshop labor, a lot of income was
kept away from the American worker, and therefore, a lot of state & federal
income tax dollars was deprived of the governing bodies of the United States.
Plus, empowering sweatshop labor nations causes untold pain to millions of
workers overseas and across the Mexican border.  This is why the Nuremberg
type of trial, along with that which transpired at the Hague ... and even the
Cromwell Regicide trials ... have been a part of civilization for centuries.

None the less, the American minimum wage either has to increase, or the cost
of basic necessities must decrease.  This includes fuel, clothing, shelter, and
food.  Furthermore, the French minimum wage is equivalent to $12.22 US,
and France's unemployment hovers around 5.5%.  In fact, in U.S. dollars,
the Australian minimum wage is $16.88, Belgium's is  $11.69, Ireland's is
$11.09, Luxembourg's is $14.24, New Zealand's is $11.18, and the mini-
mum wage in the Netherlands is $10.99.

The latest conclusion by those who have done their homework on the sub-
ject is to set the United States minimum wage at $12 an hour.  Of course,
this would increase the circular flow of currency, and if the non-stop rise
of the American Trade Balance Deficit ever ceases, the economy would
begin to rebuild the same way it did at the end of World War II.

Furthermore, in adjusted dollars, this would be a return to the late 1960's,
when the minimum wage was equivalent to $10.50.  That was a time when
it was not unheard-of for a young 21 year old union carpenter to own a Cor-
vette.  My present contracting officer, in government contract construction,
was one such carpenter in the 1960s.

The affordable life of the late 1960s was followed by a 1970s that saw the

United States, under Gerald Ford, was the #2 exporting nation on earth.  It
was a time when it was actually common to see a 20 year old Pittsburgh
steelworker own a Trans-Am or Z-28.  When money circulates, everyone
enjoys true liberty.  It's miserliness and greed that locks people into their
social prisons, including the prison of debt.   In the current era, WalMart
has been the richest corporation in America.  In the 1970s and even 1980s,
it was General Motors.

I now direct your attention to those who did an amount of homework on this
subject.  This includes mention that a $12 minimum wage would only require
WalMart to raise its prices by 1.1% one time.  In addition, according to the
same authors, a WalMart shopper's bill would only be raised 46 cents per
average trip to the store.  If I have time to take a surve on consumer prices,
the way I did a survey on corporate effective tax rates and military spend-
ing, I will do so.  Others have a head start on me on this topic, and they
present their writings very well.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/entrepreneur-boost-calif-wages-12-hour-21498327

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/12/04/making-low-wages-liveable/raise-the-minimum-wage-to-12-an-hour

http://www.kansasfreepress.com/2014/01/deep-pocketed-right-wing-republican-advocates-increase-in-minimum-wage.html

Demand & shoppers w/ disposable income create jobs; and not the tax-sheltered holders of wealth which was kept away from sweatshop slaves.

Christmas hiring increases only because shopper demand increases.
The rich don't create jobs.  Shoppers do.

Let us review review and review until the Reaganomics trance is broken:

Spending-money coming out of the pockets of citizens and businesses is the only thing
that creates jobs.  If there is no demand, there are no sales.  If there are no sales, there
are no jobs.  It's that simple.  In order to create jobs, more money must be in the hands
of CUSTOMERS, and not the rich who took tons of money and then put it into over-
seas tax havens and foreign sweatshop operations.

The ultimate example is Christmas time.  During Christmas, extra hiring occurs only
because there is a much higher demand for various products and services.   Thus, the
extra hiring that occurs during the Christmas Season is NOT due to the rich making
investments.  It's due to the customers making purchases.  If the money supply is tak-
en out of the hands of the consumers and then put into the hands of the rich, you end
up getting the Reagan 10.8% unemployment rate, as well as the Great Recession of
the Bush II administration.  It's that simple.  The rich have only been investing in
slave labor nations, all the while hiding personal money in overseas tax havens.

An example of how it is false to say that, "If you build it, they will come." 

There is only a limited need for funeral homes.  People are not going to start having
themselves killed and buried, just because the rich suddenly create a surplus of funer-
al homes.  Only so many people have cancer.  The cancer industry will not get more
clients, if the rich open more clinics.  Only so much of any type of product or service
can be consumed.  In as much, demand is the major determinant of added business
operations.  Should the demand be lacking, then new business will quickly go into
the history books and Voila.  No more new jobs. 

The rich have more than enough money for investment.  This is why they are called
rich.  These are the yuppies of the Reagan years.  They have already proven that they
don't care about you or the Chinese sweatshop workers who have threatened suicide
and even committed suicide.  The Reagan era yuppies are not your friend.  You are
their dupe, if you subscribe to the give-to-the-rich concept.  During Christmas, the
phrase used to be, "Give to the poor."  Not any more.

Money talks ... to politicians.   Witholding money also talks ... to big business.

Now, jobs are out there, in response to the demand that exists at this hour.  In fact,
the jobs are way out there ... in China's low-paying labor camps.  Being that foreign
sweatshop laborers make too little money, and being that there was typical protec-
tionism of the part of the Chinese Communist regime, there is the lack of demand
for American products from the Chinese workers who cannot afford them, in the
first place.

There aren't going to be any new businesses of appreciable numbers in America's
near future, if it keeps operating according to sweatshop economics, and if hiked-
up prices remain hiked, thereby draining the level of disposable income in America.
At this rate, the Republican Party will fulfill the Apocalyptic prophecy, "A Day's 
wages for a loaf of bread."  Republican economics is ushering-in Armageddon.

Disposable Income equals Potential Demand.  In as much, if you want positive
change, you have to establish the 21st Century version of Caesar Chavez's Grapes
& Lettuce Boycott.  It benefited the workers at the time.  It resulted in amended
ways of doing business.  It did not leave the workers out in the cold.

As a review, the sweatshop workers need disposable income in a two-way highway
trade system which will create the demand that will bring back the American jobs
that left for China and other sweatshop nations as far back as the mid 1990s.  Only
in two-way reciprocal trade is there free trade.  By now, you should realize that
NAFTA has nothing to do with freedom.  Only the opposite.

Putting added dollars in the hands of the rich isn't going to create demand, and there-
fore, it isn't going to create jobs that will last.  For example, the added dollars in the
hands of the rich won't increase the human body's capacity for food and drink.  So,
it won't create a greater demand for food and drink.  In as much, demand is the #1
determining factor for an economy's investment sector, in combination with the rate
of circulation of the money supply, in as far as concerns the Multiplier Effect.

It was recently proposed by a Reaganite that America is falling into the inflation trap.
In as much, take note:  As of October 2011, the U.S. dollar inflation rate was 3.53%.
At the beginning of the same year, it is 1.63%.  However, toward the end of the Bush
years the rate ranged from 5.6% to .09%, and this was in a six month period.  During
the Barack Obama years, the inflation rate has thus far been as low as MINUS 1.48%
(in Aug 2009).  In years past, the rate was an average of 13.58% in 1980, 11.03% in
1974, and even 14.65% in 1947.  In 1931, a Great Depression year, the inflation rate
was MINUS -10.3%.  Shortly after WWI, in 1919, it was 15.31%.  Plus, even though
1974 was a high inflation rate year, the United States was the second highest exporting
nation on Planet Earth in 1975.  Therefore, the present inflation rate is not alarming.

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx

The middle class would be able to huddle together and start new businesses, if there
weren't a such a wide disparity in income between the top 10% and the bottom 90%.
Technically, it's the top 20% versus the bottom 80%, in term of stocks and securities.

As you can see, the Republicans disseminated yet another lie in claiming that you
absolutely must throw all the money in the world into the hands of rich, or else no
more jobs will be created.  The fact is that throwing more money into the hands of
the rich decreases demand by decreasing disposable income among potential con-
sumers.  The very thing that the Republicans claim to be the only cure to the econ-
omy has been the cause of its demise, all along.