When the Overdue Recession Hits Us

Preface
I don't have an Economics Degree, so I rely on a broad spectrum of economists and monetary theorists for these essays.  Plus, as a wise man once told me, "You don't have to be a Master Carpenter to recognize a shack.".  :)

A few facts---
1.  Worldwide debt is somewhere in the neighborhood of $250 trillion, which is close to three times the world's GDP.
2.  The U.S. public National Debt is now a tad over $22.5 trillion...more than our annual GDP.  We pay $896 million per day in Interest on that debt.  Politicians in DC are increasing our Debt exponentially.
3.  U.S. personal debt is now just shy of $20 trillion.
4.  U.S. unfunded liabilities now stand at a bit more than $125.7 trillion.
5.  U.S. nonfinancial Corporate debt is now at about $15 trillion...the highest it has been in decades.
6.  Total U.S. Debt (not counting unfunded liabilities) is now a tad over $74.1 trillion.  [See:  USdebtclock.org ]  That's more than three times our annual GDP.

Conclusions---
1.  The world is awash in Debt.
2.  The U.S.A. has a significant portion of that Debt.
.......................................................
Meanwhile, the UK, continental Europe, and Japan all have been adhering to the Zimbabwe "School of Economics" by PRINTING MONEY.  Plus, the USA is on the verge of starting QE-4, more printing of money.  This is all being done to prop up the Stock Market.  In addition, Corporations have been buying back their own stock, thus falsely inflating that Market.  At the same time, Bond Markets have been crashing, capital expenditures have been decreasing, and manufacturing has been slowing down...in the Western World.  In Asia (except for Japan), they have been sticking to conventional economic, monetary, and fiscal policies; but in the West, we are in an Era of Weirdness.
........................................................
Bottom Line---
When the overdue Recession hits, and there's a succession of bursting Debt Bubbles, the impact on Western World Finance and Economies will be much greater than in 2008-2009.  Businesses, a few investment Banks, perhaps some regular Banks, Insurance companies, and associated firms likely will collapse, then unemployment will jump way up, and price inflation will take hold...thus exacerbating the Recession, possibly driving it into a full-blown Depression.

Central Banks refuse to bite the bullet and raise Interest rates (or better yet, let the Market determine the rate) because that would burst the Stock Market Bubble.  We would have a Recession, but we need to because too much money is chasing too few goods.  Big-time inflation is coming unless we dial back all this monetary craziness.
........................................................
Not only my opinion.  Be Well

BIG News on the Economy

On Wednesday night, 8-14-19, in their News broadcasts, the Corporate Media finally admitted that a Recession "may be" in the near future.  Isn't it amazing how we (according to them) went from "our booming economy" to a Bust "may be" right around the corner.  Ha!

Of course, the Corporate Media have known that for at least a couple of years.  Their News isn't "fake", but it's often incomplete.  The metrics for the next Crash have been in place for, at a minimum, the last three years.  News of a "booming economy" meant a "boom" only for a relatively small percentage of income earners.  The underlying, base economy has been pretty much a disaster.  Half the workers in this country are either in poverty, or bordering on it.  HALF.
We're talking about workers, not people on assistance/welfare.

The greatest transfer of wealth (to the Upper Crust) in the history of humanity is still in full swing.  The so-called "recovery" doesn't apply to the majority of Americans.  I've gone through the stats in many previous posts, and don't have the time or energy to repeat that now.  The reasons for this dire situation also have been detailed in previous posts.

Here's all you need to know for the near-term future:  there's no "may be" or maybe (see the first paragraph above) about the coming Crash.  It's about 99.9% guaranteed.  We're overdue for it.  Again, if you don't believe that, simply look at the time intervals between Booms & Busts from the 1973 Recession to present day.  It won't be only here in the USA; it will be worldwide.  It won't be a minor downturn.  It will be a major Crash.  All you can do is plan and act accordingly.

What does "plan and act accordingly" mean?  Here are my main suggestions.
1.  Pay down as much of your debt as possible.  When the Crash hits, your income & purchasing power may go down, but debt payments likely won't.
2.  Stock up on extra, everyday household goods...not only food, but paper goods, OTC meds, toiletries, anything you use regularly.  Credit will dry up for a time (maybe a week, or two, or ?), and businesses run on credit, not cash.  That means delivery of goods to stores will slow way down or stop...temporarily.
3.  Keep some ready cash handy.  How much depends on your comfort zone.  Banks very well may limit withdrawals for a time.
4.  Hang on to (or obtain with cash) hard assets.  Their value will increase when inflation hits.
5.  Don't take on more major debt, unless it's for an asset that you can sell relatively quickly.  When announcing their "news" about the Recession, the Media suggested that you perhaps (because of current lower interest rates) should now buy a house or a car.  That's wise advice only if you can pay cash and have no extra debt.  Corporate interests want you to take on more debt...don't.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Why the 2nd Amendment ALLOWS GUN CONTROL

Preface
I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but am a long-time gun owner.  I'm not an attorney, but have studied the Constitution since 1956...mostly informally.  "Studied" doesn't only mean I've read it over and over.  I've researched many constitutional court cases, read dozens and dozens of Supreme Court opinions, and those of lower courts as well.
...................................................
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
2nd Amendment to the Constitution
..............................................
It seems to me that any reading of the above with a view toward common sense leads to the following conclusions.
1.  The 2nd Amendment allows civilians to possess firearms in order to have a "well regulated Militia".  [Our Founders were wary of having a large standing army during peacetime.  They opted for a militia made up of everyday citizens/civilians, non-professional "soldiers".]
2.  Apparently, Americans who oppose gun control have chosen to ignore the phrase, well regulated.  So, too, have some Supreme Court Justices.
3.  Back in the 1700's, "Arms" possessed by militia men for the possible defense & "security of a free State" amounted to pistols and single-shot rifles.  Assault rifles, automatic weapons of any kind, hand-held rocket launchers, etc. did not exist.  It defies common sense that anyone would think any modern day weapons of war should fall under the 2nd Amendment.  Even if they did, those who had them would have to be well regulated to be in compliance with the Constitution.
......................................
Trump is correct when he states that the recent mass murders were undertaken by "mentally ill" people.  Duh.  Too bad he doesn't understand the effect of words such as "invasion", "invaders", etc. on those same people.  Or, maybe he does.  Too bad that Oligarchs like him don't see the connection between horrendous social ills (mass murders, opioid crisis, etc.) and the throwing under the bus of mental health treatment in the USA...which has been going on for decades.  Too bad, indeed.
......................................
Sidebar
Not many, but some gun owners have formed their own "militias".  They seem to believe that they're being patriotic, and are following the Constitution.  Nope.  The phrase well regulated in the 2nd Amendment does NOT mean self regulated.  It means regulated by the Government.  Hello.
..............................................
Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Three More Blatant Lies by Our Oval Office Occupier

Note---  The following quotes may or may not be exactly as spoken.  Any error is quite minimal, and does not change the meaning of the precise quote.

1.  "We now have the greatest economy in our history."  Ha!  Not even close to that, Don Corleone.  It's only great for perhaps the upper 15% or so of income earners.  Everyone else is barely keeping even, or falling behind.  The median income in this country is only $33,188; that means half of us make less.  Asset Bubbles (a type of inflation) and the Debt Bubble are larger than just before the 2008 Crash.  Financial derivatives still are a massive problem.  Casino Capitalism and Crony Capitalism still are setting us up for the next Bust... which, by the way, is overdue.  If you don't believe that, simply look at the time intervals between Booms & Busts from the 1973 Recession to present day.  No one, including you, has eliminated the Boom-Bust Cycle.

2.  "We also now have the greatest employment in our history."  Wrong again.  See this post of mine to understand why Gov't employment/unemployment stats are almost always wrong...including those put out by your Crew---
http://individualsovereignty.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-real-state-of-union-rather-than.html
The piece also explains why Gov't inflation stats are extremely misleading.

In both cases above, today's stats are dwarfed by those of the Golden Age of American Capitalism.  During that time, not only was the economy booming, manufacturing growing, and Business thriving, but mega corporations were being taxed at up to 90%.  With its length of twenty-plus years, that economy makes today's look like an unmitigated disaster.

3.  This last quote is in relation to the Mueller Hearing that took place Wednesday.  "Under Article II [of the Constitution], I have the right to do anything I want to."  What planet are you on, Don?  Good grief.  Even a cursory examination of Article II shows that, except during times of declared war, the Presidency actually is a rather modest Office.  Perhaps you were gaslighting when you made that particular statement.  You have a penchant for trying to confuse people with outrageous claims and obvious lies.  Unfortunately for you, most of us see through your dangerous childishness.  Now we just have to convince your cult following that you're a total fraud.

Not only my opinion.  Everyone Be Well
p.s.  For any new visitors here, I'm not a Democrat or a Republican.

The Every-Four-Years Comedy & Tragedy in the USA Has Begun

Although the next Presidential election is more than a year away, campaigning for it is already off and running.  This year it appears to be more comic & tragic than in any recent past years.  So, let's take a brief, hard look at why I say that.  We'll examine only the two major Parties...the Trump Party (TP), and the Democratic Party (the Dems).  The Republican Party seems to have dried up and blown away.
.................................................
The TP most likely will be nominating a guy who is basically ignorant, a wannabe autocrat, and a psychological gaslighter.  Although grossly ignorant of many significant concepts, he nonetheless is quite clever at manipulating people and lying to them.  His lies are so blatant, numerous, and obvious that his running for office again is a complete comedy.  The tragedy is that he may again get elected.  His current Administration's primary legacy will be:  abuse of child immigrants.  What has happened on his watch in that regard is beyond unconscionable.  In my opinion, it's criminal.

There will be lots of talk by the TP about "illegal immigration", but little to none about asylum seekers and the primary reason for them fleeing their Central American countries:  past USA support for dictators and thugs in those homelands, plus their neoliberal, privatization policies.
..................................................
The Dems have about twenty people running for the nomination.  I've never heard of half of them, so I assume any appeal to voters they possess is regional in nature.  Maybe it will become national, maybe not.  Of the total twenty or so, some seem to be running mostly on a single issue, which varies from person to person.  One or two seem to be running only to defeat Trump, with not much else in their platform.  The Upper Crust of the Dems (which comprises many of the vote-stealing "super-delegates") appears to be leaning toward Hillary-Lite (Joe Biden), because he's the neoliberal, "establishment" candidate with close ties to the Financial Sector.  That's important to the DNC.  If he gets nominated, most likely the Dems will again (as a friend put it) snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  Now, that's funny!  It's also tragic.

There will be lots of talk by the Dems about immigration, but probably none about Hillary (& the rest of our Gov't) supporting the 2009 coup in Honduras.  The result was corruption, neoliberal privatization, thugs, gangs, murders, and unemployment.  No wonder many common people there are fleeing their homeland.  In 2016, we were still giving millions to that thug gov't.
...............................................
If the last several weeks are any indication, the election in 2020 again will be primarily about personalities, not issues.  Get ready for another sham election.  It's plain to me why 50% of eligible voters don't vote.  The whole thing is a farce.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

FINALLY---Someone in Congress Asks the Right Question

U.S. Congressional Representative, Ted Lieu of California, asked a Trump Admin official (in a Hearing) the following:  "Under the Constitution, does the President have the authority to declare war?".  The Trump guy hemmed, hawed, beat around the bush, and never answered the query.  Then Rep. Lieu said he would make it easy:  "The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, right?".  More hemming & hawing from the U.S. Envoy to Iran.  Kudos to Representative Lieu.

Those who rely on the War Powers Resolution (often called the War Powers Act), or any other "resolution", to declare war are violating the Constitution and their Oath of Office.  In our system of government, it isn't up to the President to decide when to go to war.  The Founders believed that could be subject to abuse, and so they made certain that only Congress had that power.  At least then, We the People supposedly would be represented in the decision.  Plus, Congress was not given the authority to transfer that power to the Executive.  The President only has power to manage a war...once Congress has declared war.  Finally, no Law supercedes the U.S. Constitution.

According to recent News reports, Trump & Crew are considering using the 2001 Resolution as authority to go to war with Iran.  That's ludicrous.  Not only is it ludicrous (and illegal) because of the paragraph immediately above, but also because that Resolution had absolutely nothing to do with Iran.  Nothing at all.

The last time Congress declared war was in December, 1941.  Over the decades since then, members of our Gov't have ignored the war clause of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States.  That means each of them has violated his/her Oath of Office.  Very few people seem to care.

The case for war with Iran is so flimsy that it really doesn't exist.  The Warmongers' efforts to make the case have a strong stink about them. More importantly, the President does not have the Constitutional authority to declare war on any nation.  Once any part of our bedrock Supreme Law of the Land is by-passed, then the same can happen to any other part.  Hello.  This whole scenario reeks of "The Grand Chessboard:  American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives".  Empire on steroids.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The Biggest Flaw in the Constitution -OR- Here's How They Do It

In the last four years, I've posted this piece twice before the posting below.  It has been edited just a tiny bit .  I believe this essay is crucial in understanding how the Constitutional Republic of the USA essentially has been overthrown.  It all started as far back as Alexander Hamilton...and it's not any kind of "conspiracy".  It was (and still is) an in-plain-sight battle between those who believe in genuine democracy and those who believe in Rule by Oligarchs and Plutocrats.  The latter (who are not constrained by political Parties or labels) always have referred to the rest of us as "the little people".

"They" (in the title above) are the Neoliberals, NeoConservatives, and other Oligarchs who over decades and by sheer, disorganized, dumb luck have brought about a coup in our Government.  For years I wondered how so many unconstitutional laws could come into being in this Land with barely a peep of protest from anyone.  I think perhaps finally I've figured it out.  Over the years, now and again, I heard this-or-that politician mention the "necessary and proper" clause of the Constitution; but I never paid much attention to it until recently.

"The Congress shall have Power ... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."  [All emphasis added.]
~ Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, United States Constitution

The Powers mentioned in that clause, "...the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers...", are those delegated by We the People to our Federal Government.  They are the Enumerated Powers that we have given to the Congress, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch.  The Government has only those Powers.  Unfortunately, going all the way back to our Founding Fathers, some have claimed that Article I Section 8 Clause 18 gives other, implied Powers to the Government.  Hamilton and Jefferson debated that very point.

Alexander Hamilton was the Founder who proposed that our Gov't should be that of a Monarchy; he wanted a King as our leader.  Luckily, that idea quickly was scrapped.  Nonetheless, Hamilton kept fighting for a central government bordering on dictatorial.  He wanted a central bank, and he claimed that Article I Section 8 Clause 18 gave the Gov't implied Powers.  Hamilton argued that the "sovereign" duties of a government implied the right to use means adequate to its ends, regardless of specific Enumerated Powers.  Jefferson opposed him at every turn until Hamilton was killed by Aaron Burr in a duel, July, 1804.  Nevertheless, the seed had been planted.  Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall and others promoted the idea that the Government had implied powers.  At times, the "necessary and proper" clause was referred to as the "elastic clause".

The idea eventually lost favor in the late 1800's up until the 1930's.  With the Roosevelt Administration, the "elastic clause" was back in favor... and as the Fed Gov't expanded, the idea became more and more the flavor of the day.  As that happened, "Legislative Absolutism" took hold more and more.  In 1901, Supreme Court Justice Harlan coined that term, warning of a time when unconstitutional laws would be passed as a matter of course.  He was right.

Any examination of the "necessary and proper" clause with a view toward common sense tells us that no additional Powers are implied by it.  Furthermore, it makes ZERO sense that so-called "implied" powers would be able to result in a law which would essentially nullify any specific written clause in the Supreme Law of the Land.  Finally, the use of "implied" powers apparently is virtually without limits.  It's whatever an indoctrinated, propagandized public will tolerate.

EXAMPLE---  The so-called PATRIOT Act essentially nullifies the Fourth Amendment.  Gathering of bulk data is permitted... without the people being intruded upon having to be suspects of any kind.  In addition, FBI Agents can write their own Search Warrants (called "National Security Letters")... the Fourth Amendment makes it clear that judges must issue those.  Finally, other portions of the Act violate the Due Process Clause of the Constitution.  [So do portions of the National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA.]

All the "necessary and proper" clause is saying is this:  Congress can pass Laws in order to implement the specific Enumerated Powers that were delegated to them by We the People.  Nowhere does it say or imply that Laws contravening the Constitution also may be passed.  Only an attorney with no common sense would infer such a thing from that clause.  Both Hamilton and Marshall were attorneys.  [My admittedly limited experience with attorneys tells me that very few of them have any common sense whatsoever.  They appear to live in a very esoteric world; as with everything, I'm sure there are exceptions.]

In the "necessary and proper" clause, the "foregoing Powers" refers to the Enumerated Powers in clauses 1-17 of Article I Section 8.  "All other Powers" refers to Enumerated Powers in other parts of the Constitution...or, as the 18th clause puts it, "...vested by this Constitution...".  Nothing in this clause implies Powers that are not Enumerated.  That was Jefferson's position, and he was right on the mark.  The Monarchy-loving Hamilton thought otherwise.

So, here's the biggest flaw in our Constitution---
The following, or something similar, should have been added at the tail end of the "necessary and proper" clause and both the "commerce" and "general welfare" clauses:  "Nothing in this section should be construed to mean that the federal government has any powers other than those enumerated in the Constitution.".

My conclusion is that certain people in our political history wanted a way around the constraints of the Constitution.  It appears they desired a central government so strong that it bordered on dictatorial.  To achieve that objective, they inferred from primarily the "necessary and proper" clause, but also from the "commerce" and "general welfare" clauses, so-called implied powers.  I see that as pure BS.  I sincerely doubt that it was the intention of almost all our Founders to give the Government unknown, virtually unlimited Powers that could, in fact, contravene any of the listed or Enumerated Powers delegated by We the People.  That makes no sense... and more importantly, it makes the Constitution worthless.  The primary purpose of the Constitution is to restrain/constrain government; that's not possible if we accept the concept of "implied powers"... which can be almost anything.  

Unfortunately, "implied powers" has been the flavor of the day for decades & decades.  As well as some other people, Trump loves that flavor.  Most Presidents do.  Most people in both Houses of Congress do, too.  That's why we have so many unconstitutional Laws.  The Powers-That-Be have convinced themselves (and most Americans, it seems) that the bedrock of our Gov't, the Constitution of the United States of America, contains unknown, virtually unlimited, implied Powers.  There's no common sense in that view.

None of this bodes well for what is supposed to be a Free Society.  We are marching voluntarily straight into George Orwell's dystopian world.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well