Exporting Inflation

[I B Hankering]

I’m still hoping Egypt can set up a democracy, and I am wondering what’s going to happen elsewhere in the region: Jordan, Yemen, Algeria, etc.

All of these articles are biased. I think two are to the left and one is to the right, but they are all are saying the same thing: the U.S. is destabilizing the world with an inflationary money policy.


Economist: US exporting inflation to emerging markets

The Peoples Daily
November 04, 2010

The United States is exporting inflation to emerging economies, said Sun Lijian, vice dean of the School of Economics at Fudan University, wrote in a recent article, which urged China to address the problem of excessive liquidity.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90778/90862/7188236.html


Egyptian revolution reverberates throughout Arab world

by Fred Weston
Marxist.com, February 7, 2011

The Egyptian revolution, following on rapidly from the Tunisian uprising, has sent shockwaves across the whole of the Arab world. All the serious strategists of capital are discussing the "domino effect" of the events unfolding in Egypt. None of them, however, had anticipated any of this.
One week before Ben Ali was forced to flee The Economist magazine denied that Ben Ali would be overthrown, or that his regime would even be shaken. Then, once Ben Ali was ousted, they compounded the error by reassuring their readers that the Tunisian revolution would not spread to countries like Egypt, because Egypt was "different", of course. Within a few days Egypt erupted. . . . Thousands of people in Jordan have been out on the streets in protests, demanding the prime minister’s resignation and for prices to be brought down. This is the result of the ongoing economic crisis. Jordan has a record deficit of $2bn this year. Inflation has risen to 6.1 per cent.

http://www.uruknet.info/?new=74725


An Arabian Revolution

by Jack H Barnes
01/14/2011

The League of Arabian states has just experienced its first populist revolution in modern times in Tunisia. The prime minister has announced that he is in control now that the President of the last 23 years or so has fled the nation. The nation has only experienced 2 leaders during its existence.

There is a long list of national leaders who have to be looking around, wondering if they could be next. Autocratic dictators, despots and or Presidents for life have always ruled the region. This changed today when the population of Tunisia over-threw their President.

It appears that the Federal Reserve’s intentional actions of exporting inflation to the world, has claimed its first government. The people have grown angry watching the very staples of life become to expensive to purchase on meager earnings.

This is but the first of what will probably be many events like this around the world. The people in mass can be cowed and systematically robbed, but if you take away their food they will rise up quickly.

Marie Antoinette’s supposed comment about “let them eat cake”, and the response of the French masses, is as likely and dangerous today to leaders who fail to understand its meaning, as it was to her health then. The people will respond violently to rapid food inflation costs. Nations will fall.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/arabian-revolution

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

All of these articles are biased. I think two are to the left and one is to the right, but they are all are saying the same thing: the U.S. is destabilizing the world with an inflationary money policy.

The problem as I see it is nobody in this country gives a fuc, Jimmy Carter laid out what would happen if we did not do something about our dependence on foreign oil. That is the core issue of which everything else stems. If in fact you try and tell Amercians what they do not want to hear, they vote you out of office. Just think of the Tea Party, they want government to spend less but are not willing to cut any of the big three programs SS Medicade and Defense. You touch those they vote you out.

[atlcomedy]

WTF: who do you vote for, generally speaking? You don't seem to support anyone.

[DFW5Traveler]

Originally Posted by WTF

The problem as I see it is nobody in this country gives a fuc, Jimmy Carter laid out what would happen if we did not do something about our dependence on foreign oil. That is the core issue of which everything else stems. If in fact you try and tell Amercians what they do not want to hear, they vote you out of office. Just think of the Tea Party, they want government to spend less but are not willing to cut any of the big three programs SS Medicade and Defense. You touch those they vote you out.

Yup, Carter, laid it all out and now our dependence on foreign oil is much worse since HIS DOE has been in existance.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by WTF

The problem as I see it is nobody in this country gives a fuc, Jimmy Carter laid out what would happen if we did not do something about our dependence on foreign oil. That is the core issue of which everything else stems. If in fact you try and tell Amercians what they do not want to hear, they vote you out of office. Just think of the Tea Party, they want government to spend less but are not willing to cut any of the big three programs SS Medicade and Defense. You touch those they vote you out.

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Yup, Carter, laid it all out and now our dependence on foreign oil is much worse since HIS DOE has been in existance.

Good Ole Jimmy was the first to lay it out. Every President since him has echoed Good Ole Jimmy, especially the Rep. presidents. And it wasn't HIS DOE, it's ours. And the presidents since Jimmy had their opportunity to change the DOE and didn't do it. After all, they were head of the executive branches. But it appears those presidents were on the black gold tit just like the lobbyists and OPEC wanted them to be.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

WTF: who do you vote for, generally speaking? You don't seem to support anyone.

I haven't decided yet in the upcoming Egyptian election

Generally speaking I vote first with my weenie and then with my pocketbook.

That does not leave me a whole lotta good options.

The GOP has been taken over by a bunch of bible thumpers fighting all the freedom my weiner likes and the DNC well they want to waste money almost as bad as the GOP does, killing my pocketbook. But really the GOP is no better at cutting spending, so I lean DEms.

On the local front, I used to support a few Republican city council members who were more slanted in the Ron Paul vein.

It really is a choice of the lesser of two evils.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Yup, Carter, laid it all out and now our dependence on foreign oil is much worse since HIS DOE has been in existance.

WTF kinda statement is that?


What I said was Jimmy Carter told the American public that we would have to sacrifice to change our way of doing business. Ronnie Reagan said, "No, follow me, fuc the future lets party now!".

Ronnie won the 1980 election fair and square and Carter has had no influence on the DOE since. So WTF was your point again?

[DFW5Traveler]

Originally Posted by WTF

WTF kinda statement is that?


What I said was Jimmy Carter told the American public that we would have to sacrifice to change our way of doing business. Ronnie Reagan said, "No, follow me, fuc the future lets party now!".

Ronnie won the 1980 election fair and square and Carter has had no influence on the DOE since. So WTF was your point again?

You really can't be that naive, can you? If you can't see that gvmt created another big program to fix a crisis that could have easily been fixed by NOT meddling in middle east policy and opec. It was his [carters'] globalist policies in the middle east that lead to the crisis. Yes, the public demanded a fix and the gvmt, both dem and repubic, created another debacle that could have been fixed by staying out of middle east policy and allowing our own country to create more energy sources. By the way whatever deal Carter struck with OPEC in 1979 is still benefiting Carter, OPEC is still donating to the Carter Foundation. With just one search.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

By the way whatever deal Carter struck with OPEC in 1979 is still benefiting Carter, OPEC is still donating to the Carter Foundation. With just one search.

Damn, DFW. You see nefarious conduct on the part of JC just because OPEC still donates to the Carter Foundation? Some 31 years later? So, I guess no matter where OPEC spreads it money, whoever takes it is scurrilous? Does that include US congressmen (no matter what stripe), or presidential candidates, Republican/Democrat parties?

Seems like somewhat of a simplistic conclusion to me.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

You really can't be that naive, can you? I.

No really I'm not. Speaking of, here is a brief history from which the DOE sprang. As you can see it really started in WWII, not sure how you will blame Carter for that but I have full confidence you will somehow do it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_En ergy

History The Department of Energy was formed after the oil crisis on August 8, 1977 by President Jimmy Carter's signing of legislation, The Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-91, 91 Stat. 565).
The United States, eager to make a nuclear bomb before any other nation, started the Manhattan Project under the eye of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. After the war, the Atomic Energy Commission was created to control the future of the project.
In 1974, the AEC was reinstated and gave way to Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which was tasked with regulating the nuclear power industry, and the Energy Research and Development Administration, which was tasked to manage the nuclear weapon, naval reactor, and energy development programs. Only a few years after that, the Energy Crisis called attention to unifying these two groups. The Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977, which Carter signed on August 4, 1977, created the Department of Energy, which assumed the responsibilities of the Federal Energy Administration, the Energy Research and Development Administration, the Federal Power Commission, and programs of various other agencies.
The department began operations on October 1, 1977.

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Yes, the public demanded a fix and the gvmt, both dem and repubic, created another debacle that could have been fixed by staying out of middle east policy and allowing our own country to create more energy sources.

Yes Carter was for alt energy sources, Reagan dismantled those programs asap.

Carter told the American public to buckle up, Reagan told them no worries. Politicians have had to play that stupid game ever since, well Bush one slipped up but we kicked his ass outta office for daring to suggest we might have to raise taxes to pay for Ronnie's shit!

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by WTF

Yes Carter was for alt energy sources, Reagan dismantled those programs asap.

Carter is a naif. Alt energy was dumb then, and its equally dumb today. Crony capitalism at its finest, wrapped in an American flag of "ecology". The fucking greens screwed the pooch way back in the 70s/80s when they all but killed nuclear -- the ONLY alternative energy that scales. They are no smarter today.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Carter is a naif. Alt energy was dumb then, and its equally dumb today. Crony capitalism at its finest, wrapped in an American flag of "ecology". The fucking greens screwed the pooch way back in the 70s/80s when they all but killed nuclear -- the ONLY alternative energy that scales. They are no smarter today.

Carter wasn't anti nuke!

Three Mile Island could not have come at a worse time.

You can't blame Carter for that

We are stupid as a society, sorry but thats just the way it is. We should have built nuke and still should be of course Iowa being the first primary sure makes it hard for politicians to tell the truth in this regard. Both parties guilty there.

[DFW5Traveler]

Originally Posted by WTF

Yes Carter was for alt energy sources, Reagan dismantled those programs asap.

Carter told the American public to buckle up, Reagan told them no worries. Politicians have had to play that stupid game ever since, well Bush one slipped up but we kicked his ass outta office for daring to suggest we might have to raise taxes to pay for Ronnie's shit!

Ding ding ding!!!! and what does the DOE do now, thanks to Carter's DOE, they provide subsidies to alt energy companies. Redistributing tax payer moneys to a select few, called cronyism. Take biofuels, who are the largest farmers partaking in this cronyism, ADM/Monsanto, hmmm, how is that helping the country when corn ethonal takes more energy to create than it's energy output. It's also 20 to 30% less effecient than gasoline. What happens when farm lands switch food crop to a bio-fuel crop? Oh yeah, the cost of the food from those remaining food farms increases.

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Carter is a naif. Alt energy was dumb then, and its equally dumb today. Crony capitalism at its finest, wrapped in an American flag of "ecology". The fucking greens screwed the pooch way back in the 70s/80s when they all but killed nuclear -- the ONLY alternative energy that scales. They are no smarter today.

+1

[WTF]

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Ding ding ding!!!! and what does the DOE do now, thanks to Carter's DOE, they provide subsidies to alt energy companies.

Carter has nothing to do with that! He combined a bunch of agency already there. It wasn't a start up operation.

Damn, thats like blaming 9/11 on the Wright brothers

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by WTF

Carter wasn't anti nuke!

Three Mile Island could not have come at a worse time.

You can't blame Carter for that

We are stupid as a society, sorry but thats just the way it is. We should have built nuke and still should be of course Iowa being the first primary sure makes it hard for politicians to tell the truth in this regard. Both parties guilty there.

Location of the early primaries is an outdated argument. Candidates are running (& fundraising) nationally from the start. Polling data is better. Candidates pandering to Iowa or NH voters is not the reason any policy exists or doesn't exist.