Tag Archives: dollar

Where your tax dollars go

Source

7 Reasons Why a Dollar Crisis Is Imminent

This author below forgot to mention the most important reason:  Government Intervention in the markets from which most of these 6 reasons stem from.    The countless restrictions placed on business, manipulation of the money supply, mismanagement, government bailouts, and succombing to special interest groups have all restricted liberty and stifled the economy.

6 Reasons Why a Dollar Crisis Is Imminent
SeekingAlpha.com

The U.S. dollar is sliding dangerously close to a steep cliff — a possible point of no return at which the currency could collapse and America could join the ranks of the world’s banana republics.

click to enlarge

clip_image003

For more than thirty years, the U.S. has resisted the restructuring, austerity and market forces required to restore the health, competitiveness and potential of its economy.

Extending a long-running policy of neglect, denial, short-sightedness, political expediency and corruption, for the past two years, the Federal Reserve has tried to prop up the increasingly uncompetitive and defective U.S. economy with what amounts to unprecedented amounts of money printing — still in effect and slated to expand. The government as a whole has increasingly spent beyond its means, doubled down on debt and pushed the limits of inflation risks as it milks the outdated perception of the dollar as a “safe haven” for all it’s worth.

The bill is coming due and the table is being set for the biggest currency crisis ever. Almost all of the key ingredients are in place for a crisis of confidence that will threaten to overwhelm all efforts to contain it — something beyond the magnitude of currency crises that unraveled Mexico in 1994, Asia in 1997, Russia in 1998, and Argentina in 1999. The similarities are now beyond disturbing.

More…

Schiff Elaborates…

Keynesians, Witch Doctors and Peter Schiff

Austrian Economist Peter Schiff tells it like it is:

Ron Paul Questions Ben Bernanke at the Financial Services Hearings

Disgusting Propaganda from The San Diego Union Tribune

One of our readers received an offer to advertise his business in an upcoming issue of The San Diego Union Tribune (click to download and view .pdf promo).  The text of the promo speaks for itself but you can read his response down below.  First, here is the text of the advertising promo:

Be part of a section that has 75 years in the making!

For 75 years, Social Security has provided an economic safety net that has kept millions of our citizens from indigence in their old age and when they are disabled. Show your support for one of America’s most important programs with an ad in the Social Security 75th Anniversary special section.

The programs Social Security administer are among the most critical and successful in our country’s history, and are vital to our nation’s  economy. For 75 years, Social Security has touched our lives in one way or the other. Here’s your chance to express your thanks and support for the vital national program.

For advertising information, contact your U-T account manager or Linda Willis at (619) 293-1582.

to which he responded:

Hi  [deleted],

Thank you for contacting me about advertising in this special edition of the Union Tribune.  Social Security is the biggest scam/confidence game in American history.  I can’t believe people still buy into this baloney.

By the looks of this promo, I want nothing to do with the promotion of this socialist enterprise where money is stolen from some to benefit others and then stolen again by the government (through inflation and other monkey business) before it even gets to the intended recipients.

I just read the attached promo again “Here’s your chance to express your thanks and support for the vital national program.”  Are you freakin’ kidding me?  Nothing personal, but this is a sick joke!  Did the Communists buy this newspaper????

Sincerely,
[name withheld]

“Atlas Shrugged” Movie Update

BigHollywood.com reports:

Exclusive: ‘Atlas Shrugged’ Producer Sets Record Straight On Upcoming Trilogy

by John Nolte

If there’s a production with a longer and more colorful history behind its troubled march to the silver screen than Ayn Rand’s novel “Atlas Shrugged,” the story of that particular episode of development hell has not yet been told. Published in 1957 and a perennial bestseller ever since (the novel sold a half-million copies just last year), the struggle to realize Rand’s sprawling and epic dramatization of her theory of Objectivism as told through a dystopian tale of the world’s best and brightest, feeling they’ve been exploited by an ungrateful society, putting their talent on strike, eluded even the author herself.

atlas-shrugged-book-cover

Throughout the decades, stars from Barbara Stanwyck to Angelina Jolie have expressed interest in bringing the novel to life, but it’s going to be producers Harmon Kaslow and John Aglialoro who finally break the curse. Directed by Paul Johansson, who also stars as John Galt, and co-starring Taylor Schilling as Dagny Taggart and Matthew Marsden as James Taggart, principal photography wrapped this very day. Which means…

Yes, there will be an “Atlas Shrugged” movie. Well, at least a part one.

Big Hollywood has enjoyed two visits to the film’s set, which our own Charles Winecoff will be writing more about soon, but due to the fact that much of what we’re reading in the media regarding the film’s production doesn’t coincide with what we’ve seen and heard for ourselves, I asked producer Harmon Kaslow to help set the record straight.

Much has been made of the film’s reported budget of $5 million, especially for a project major studios have shied away from out of budgetary concerns. Like most smart producers, Kaslow won’t talk specifics, but there’s more to the story than the $5 million:

“The amount expended on the movie is far north of $5 million. The movie is based on Part 1 of the book (the book has 3 parts) … so the film is based on about 27% of the book.”

This is the first I’ve heard that this production is only the first of three films, and while I haven’t read ”Atlas Shrugged,” those who have tell me a trilogy is the perfect way to tell the story on screen. Like “Lord of the Rings,” the natural breaks in Rand’s novel practically demand it be told in three parts, and a single feature film, even a long one with a hefty studio budget behind it, would almost certainly short-change the novel’s legion of faithful fans who, regardless of budget, are most concerned about seeing an adaptation that doesn’t compromise Rand’s philosophy. To that end, Kaslow assures the Randians:

“The movie is a direct ‘adaptation’ of the book included using much of the dialogue written by Ayn Rand.”

Assuming we’re talking in the area of  $15 to $20 million to film the entire novel, with no big star salaries that’s still a low budget but not a ridiculously low budget. As far as the casting of unknowns, as is the case with any film, budget constraints are a reality and when you’re working in the arena of millions as opposed to hundreds of millions, you’re not going to get a Charlize Theron or Angelina Jolie.

taylor schilling
Dagny Taggart (Taylor Schilling)

Kaslow told me, “The talent cast in the movie was selected on the basis of the director’s and producers’ belief in their acting skills without taking on the ‘distractions’ often associated with ‘A-List” talent.’”

I’m sure that doesn’t mean they would’ve turned down the distraction of an Angelina Jolie, Charlize Theron or another A-lister, but as we’ve seen many times before, acting ability, screen presence and the chops necessary to deliver a memorable performance can come from unknowns. After all, like all great actors, at one time Jolie and Theron were unknowns.

In any case, like “Harry Potter” and the “Narnia” films, the real star here is the project itself, Ayn Rand, and Objectivism. If the performances rise to the occasion no one’s going to care that there’s no familiar name above the title.

Warner Bros. Studio
John Galt (Paul Johansson)

In a Sunday piece for Daily Finance, Bruce Watson took some pretty hard shots at the production claiming it’s nothing more than a desperate and cynical rush job using an inexperienced director in order to allow Aglialoro to hold onto the film rights, which were set to expire last month had filming not begun. I asked Kaslow about this directly:

“John Aglialoro finally decided to marshal the production because it was apparent that a studio would not …

“While the rights would revert back to the estate if production did not commence by June 14, 2010, the goal of the producers is to produce a film worthy of epic nature of the novel that will satisfy the millions of persons who have read the book, but also appeal to a wide audience (so as to introduce them to the Ayn Rand’s work).

“During the course of Aglialoro’s efforts to get the film into production, the project had definitely attracted a number of very reputable directors … however, given Johansson’s passion for the material and desire to execute a faithful cinematic vision of the book, the producers believe they found a director that most will believe is a diamond in the rough.”

Kalsow also took exception to Watson’s description of Johansson’s directing experience as mostly confined ”to the set of the teen-oriented soap opera.”

Director Paul Johansson’s inaugural feature film (The Incredible Mrs. Richie – 2004) won a [Daytime] Emmy as Outstanding Family Special, plus he has experience directing a substantial amount of television.

Johannson did win a Daytime Emmy for writing the “Mrs. Ritchie” screenplay and was nominated for his direction that won Gena Rowlands an Emmy and James Caan a nomination.

Avco Cinema
James Taggart (Matthew Marsden)

No one, including the ”Atlas” producers, can predict how a project will ultimately turn out, and that’s true whether your budget is $5 million or $200 million. And no one would argue that the challenges involved in bringing such an ambitious and epic story to the screen aren’t made that much more difficult with with limited resources, including taking a chance on a director making his theatrical feature debut. However, from all we’ve seen and from our discussions with the producers, director, and cast, there’s no doubt that everyone involved is passionate about telling this story and most importantly, dedicated to remaining true to Ayn Rand’s philosophical vision — which would’ve likely have been compromised bigtime by a major studio.

As of now the plan is to release part one of “Atlas Shrugged” in theatres sometime during the second quarter of 2011 and start production on the second part the following fall.

Killing Jobs – John Stossel

John Stossel writes:

Yesterday, Congress voted 60 to 40 to extend unemployment benefits through November.

Unemployment benefits are popular with the public, so I understand why even Republicans say they support this handout “if it’s paid for.”  But this is not good policy.

Unemployment checks lead people to delay seeking work.  I’m told that  it’s cruel to say that, but it’s just true. When you subsidize something, you get more of it. As CATO’s Michael Tanner points out:

The extension of unemployment benefits lengthen the average stretch of unemployment by three weeks or more…

roughly a third of those unemployed in the United States find work [within a week of] when their benefits expire, according to a study… in Industrial and Labor Relations Review.

Also, government benefits crowd out private charity. America used to have hundreds of “mutual aid societies.”  Neighbors helped neighbors. That worked much better than government checks.  The neighbors knew who needed a helping hand vs. who needed a kick in the butt.  Government handouts undermined such private charity.  Mutual Aid societies disappeared.

A 2005 study in the Journal of Public Economics found that:  “Church spending fell by 30% in response to the New Deal, and that government relief spending can explain virtually all of the decline in charitable church activity observed between 1933 and 1939.”

The most free and prosperous places in the world, like Singapore and Hong Kong, offer no unemployment insurance. Yet they are great places to find work.  Singapore’s unemployment rate is just 2.2%.

A “safety net” is supposed to catch someone when he is falling, not two years after he falls.  By 99 weeks — the current length of unemployment benefits — it is time for him to him to stand up.

The Dr. Zhivago Option

The Dr. Zhivago Option

By Robert Ringer

The other day, one of my son’s friends, who had just come home from college for the summer, stopped over to say hello. We chatted briefly, and I asked him if he was still planning on becoming an entrepreneur/businessman after he graduated from school next spring.

To my surprise, he said that because of the economy, he had changed his mind about pursuing a business career. He told me that he now planned to apply for a job with the CIA. Surprised, I asked, “What in the world made you decide to go to work for the CIA?”

Without pause, he responded, “It’s so tough to get a job nowadays that I figured I’d just go to work for the government, because there’s much more security in a government job.” I immediately thought to myself that standing right in front of me was a new Barack Obama voter!

It’s simple: Get as many people as possible working for the government – which can always meet its payroll by taking money from entrepreneurs and small businesspeople who create private-sector jobs – and thereby assure winning a majority of votes in every election.

It reminded me of a conversation I had many years ago with a brilliant, ultra-pragmatic, narcissistic acquaintance who had a hugely successful economic consulting business. One day we were having a discussion about the United States’ relentless move toward collectivism, and I asked him, “Given how you’re addicted to the material things in life, what would you do if the United States ever became a full-fledged communist country?”

Without so much as a pause, he answered, in a matter-of-fact tone, “That wouldn’t be a problem. I’d just become a member of the Communist Party and work my way into the inner circle.” His response evoked a nervous chuckle from me, but the chuckle quickly faded as I realized he was deadly serious. His answer bothered me then, and it bothers me even more today.

The first thing that went through my mind after that conversation was the movie Dr. Zhivago and Rod Steiger’s character Viktor Komarovsky. Komarovsky was a member of Russia’s elite class that dined on caviar and expensive vodka while the masses lived on the edge of starvation in abject poverty.

But when it became clear that the Bolshevik Revolution would succeed, Viktor Komarovsky simply cozied up to the revolutionary hierarchy and proclaimed himself to be a communist. He was well aware that revolutionary rhetoric was a fantasy, and that in every revolution, it’s the toughest and wiliest thugs who emerge as the new royalty.

For the masses, of course, things stay pretty much the same, though under communism they usually end up even worse off than they were before the revolution (as was certainly the case in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution).

Today, the Komarovsky mind-set is a serious problem in the United States. I keep saying that Obama and Co. know they are going down to massive defeats if there are elections in 2010, but maybe I’m wrong. Perhaps I’ve underestimated their determination to get enough people on the government dole and government payroll to mathematically assure victory.

I continue to say that most of the big stories in the news are nothing more than distractions – distractions that take people’s focus off the biggest problem Americans are facing: an irreversible loss of their liberty. That includes the BP oil spill, illegal immigration, and even Obama’s attempt to buy off Joe Sestak to get him out of the race so he could pay back Arlen Specter for his open conversion to the progressive cause.

It’s not that some of these issues aren’t important; they are. But they are not as important as Americans unthinkingly submitting to servitude. And that is what the Obamaviks don’t want the masses to think about.

When it comes to the mid-term elections in 2010, Republicans are running a race against the clock, because it’s only a matter of time until the government has a large enough percentage of voters on its payroll and on the dole to assure a permanent majority in the House and Senate, not to mention permanent control of the White House.

Worst of all, the Republican Party itself has a whole army of Viktor Komarovskys in its ranks, ready to support the Obamaviks at the drop of a vote. Names like Mitt Romney (the de facto architect of Obamacare), John McCain (“I was in favor of illegal immigration before I was against it.”), Lindsey Graham (an unabashed hard-core progressive), Mike Huckabee (the slickest – and possibly most dangerous – man in America), Orrin Hatch (a deeply entrenched member of the go-along-to-get-along club), and Mitch McConnell (another deeply entrenched member of the same club) come quickly to mind.

These men have conclusively demonstrated that they are more than willing to support the progressive’s notion of “social justice” if that’s what it takes to get elected and reelected. Their greatest threat comes from names like Bachmann, Ryan, DeMint, Rubio, and Paul & Paul.

Over the next five months, you can be sure that much Republican blood will be spilled in the war between the Viktor Komarovskys of the Republican Party and those who refuse to go along with the business-as-usual Dr. Zhivago Option. And you can guess which side the socialists in the Democratic People’s Party will be cheering for.

Best headline of the day…

The Commission to Study Deficits is Broke
Randall Hoven

June 07, 2010

As reported by The Fiscal Times, President Obama’s commission to study the problem of what to do about the government running short of money is running short of money.

Full Story