Showing posts with label Economy & Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economy & Business. Show all posts

Thursday, April 26, 2018

Reality Check: What Venezuela’s National Crypto Means for Decentralization (VIDEO)

Reality Check: What Venezuela’s National Crypto Means for Decentralization (VIDEO) | blockchain-cryptocurrency-digital-cash | Economy & Business Multimedia Science & Technology Special Interests Trump World News


 


By Ben Swann, Truth in Media


President Trump recently announced a ban on Venezuela’s new national cryptocurrency, the petro.


That’s right—Venezuela created its own national crypto, possibly to circumvent U.S. sanctions.


But could the petro do more than that, and actually catalyze government-controlled cryptos around the world?


This is a Reality Check you won’t get anywhere else.



President Trump signed an executive order March 21 banning all transactions involving digital currency issued by the Venezuelan government, after it began pre-selling its own cryptocurrency, the petro, in February.


The petro differs from other cryptos because, according to the Brookings Institute, “The price of one petro is pegged to the price of one barrel of Venezuelan oil…” and “the petro/bolivar exchange rate … includes a discount factor determined by the Venezuelan government.”


By making that distinction, the Venezuelan government is now responsible for managing multiple currency systems simultaneously, creating what Dash Force News Editor Joël Valenzuela described as “an accounting nightmare.”


But isn’t cryptocurrency supposed to make accounting for transactions easier?


Well, actually it’s not the cryptos but the tech they’re built on. A few episodes back, we discussed how cryptocurrency is backed by radical transparency due to the power of the blockchain.



Rather than being backed by radical transparency and being a “trustless system”, as Valenzuela called it, the petro is essentially “fiat crypto.”


“When you back it with something that doesn’t have transparency, you have to trust the party that is providing the assets that back the coin,” according to Valenzuela. “It ruins its original value proposition.”


So why would Venezuela create the petro in the first place?


Once a crypto is a national currency, it’s subject to many tariff barriers and, in some cases, sanctions. Which is why President Trump made the first major national decision by the U.S. to ban a cryptocurrency. But cryptos like Dash aren’t tied to a government and weren’t created to bypass sanctions.


Once the richest nation in Latin America, Venezuela had suffered wild inflation, plummeting the standard of living and causing uproar from poverty stricken citizens. Many Venezuelans facing economic hardship are putting pressure on the government to stop the bleeding.


Anything to ease their suffering in the short term will be a boon to the tyrants, according to Valenzuela. But because the petro is not truly backed by trustlessness, critics say the government crypto won’t last long. And that presents a challenge to other governments considering creating their own cryptos.


Russian President Vladimir Putin already announced his government will issue its own CryptoRuble, likely sometime in mid-2019, according to CoinTelegraph.


The CryptoRuble is supposed to be directly tied to the ruble, issued by the Russian government and could not be mined.


More governments are likely to investigate the benefits of state controlled blockchain technology.


But remember, the two major selling points of blockchain are radical transparency and decentralization, meaning no one can manipulate the supply or the transactions.


And it’s those two aspects of blockchain that governments aren’t fans of.


Recently Congressman Brad Sherman of California read a statement that called cryptocurrencies “harmful,” and appeared to accidentally admit that cryptocurrency reduces government control of our currency. He said, “It hurts the U.S. government in two ways. Our contr… …our ability to have the US dollar be the chief means of international finance is what has underpinned our ability to impose sanctions…”


So Sherman doesn’t like the lack of “contr…” that the government has over crypto.

But on the other hand, imagine if the U.S. decided to use blockchain to track how our tax dollars are spent. Remember when the Pentagon admitted earlier this year that it couldn’t account for hundreds of millions of dollars?


What could help prevent data loss like this? The blockchain.


Corporations are already testing out the tech to prevent major data breaches like what happened to Target, Home Depot, JP Morgan, Anthem and others.


John Oliver explained the power of the blockchain in a recent episode of his show “Last Week Tonight.” He said, “The blockchain… a database that is nearly impossible to hack or tamper with, and which could possibly improve security, efficiency and trust. That is why big companies like Wal-Mart, IBM and JP Morgan have all been experimenting with blockchain as a way to potentially share and secure data transactions in a reliable, easy to access way.”


So what you need to know is that the blockchain presents an opportunity for governments to create a more transparent financial system. But Venezuela isn’t really doing that with the petro.


The crypto market has and will continue to fluctuate. Some crypto will disappear, some will stick around.


The question is, who is going to control the crypto? If governments do… they will take away the freedom of crypto… but if crypto currencies remain decentralized, then we will be able to keep a radically transparent financial system for the people.


That’s Reality Check. Let’s talk about that, right now, on Twitter and Facebook.


The post Reality Check: What Venezuela’s National Crypto Means for Decentralization (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Friday, April 20, 2018

We Are Entering An Era Of Shattered Illusions

We Are Entering An Era Of Shattered Illusions | shattered-glass-mirror | Collapse Economy & Business Society US News


The structure of history is held together by two essential and distinct kinds of links, two moments in time to which no one is immune: moments of epiphany, and moments of catastrophe. Sometimes, both elements intermingle at the birth of a singular epoch. Men often awaken to understanding in the midst of great crisis; and, invariably, great crises can erupt when men awaken. These are the moments when social gravity vanishes, when the kinetic glue of normalcy melts away, and we begin to see the true foundations of our world, if a foundation exists at all.


Catastrophe occurs when too many people refuse to accept that around us always are two universes at work. There is the cold, hard reality that underlies everything. And on the surface is a veil of deceit and compromise. The more humanity compromises vital truths in order to enjoy the comfort of illusions, the more mind-shattering it will be when those illusions fall away. These two worlds can coexist only for short periods of time, and they will always and eventually collide. There is no other possible outcome.


I think it could be said that the more polarized our realities become, the more explosive and disastrous the reaction will be when the separation is removed. I feel it absolutely necessary to relate this danger because today humanity is living so historically far from the bedrock of reality, political reality, social reality and economic reality that the stage has been set for a kind of full spectrum destabilization that has never been seen before.


Though my analysis tends to lean toward the economic side of things, I am not only speaking of shattered illusions in the financial realm. In my next article, one last time I plan to go over nearly every mainstream economic statistic used today to misdirect the public (from national debt to unemployment to inflation to retail sales and corporate profits) and expose why they are false while giving you the real numbers. Most of my regular readers are familiar with much of this information, but I think it important to consolidate it all in a single article so that we can take stock of where our society sits fiscally. For now, though, I want to discuss the core problem of self-deception, the problem that makes all the rest of our problems possible.


When the initial phase of the global collapse was triggered in 2007 and 2008, there was a substantial explosion in interest and education in terms of liberty issues and alternative economic awareness. I remember back in 2006 when I had just begun writing for the movement that the ratio of people on any given Web forum or in any given public discussion was vastly opposed to alternative viewpoints and information — at least 50-1 by my observations. We were at the height of the real estate frenzy; everyone was buying houses with money they didn’t have and borrowing on their mortgages to purchase stuff they didn’t need. Life was good. The shock of the credit crisis came quickly and abruptly for most people, and there has been a considerable shift in the kinds of discussions many are willing to entertain about our future. Yet the idea that such things can happen despite a consensus of social and geopolitical health does not seemed to have soaked into the thick skulls of average people.


Time, unfortunately, has a magical ability to erase vigilance. It’s not that the public has necessarily forgotten that danger can strike anytime anywhere (though some of them have). Many of them know full well that our culture is floating on a paper-thin ship in a turbulent sea. However, the disturbing trend today reveals that people have decided they do not care. “Taking the blue pill” is the rising rally cry from the so-called “new normal.” Yes, the economy is an illusion, the political system is an illusion and the various global conflicts our society participates in are mostly illusions. But we “can’t do anything about it,” so we might as well profit from these illusions while we can, right?


It has been said that during the economic collapse of the 1930s that the Great Depression was a depression only for the 30 percent of people that had lost everything. For the employed and the financially secure, the depression was much like any other time. This is the point at which we stand today in the collective mindset. With nearly a third of the U.S. population kicked off the unemployment rolls and approximately half the country dependent on a government check of some kind for their survival, the current depression is only now beginning to feel like a depression for anyone. The soup lines have received a fresh candy coating of EBT cards and welfare payments, but the illusion is finally fading, and this should be of great concern to us all.


Even more frightening is our culture’s deluded sense of what a collapse actually looks like. For many, collapse is a cinematic and overnight affair, with zombies, nuclear bombs and mass panic. In real life, and throughout history, collapse is a process. Since at least 2008, the U.S. and the rest of the world have been experiencing that process. Everyone is waiting for equities to implode and for social unrest to erupt before they take the threat seriously, but these are not signals of collapse. These are the things that occur when a collapse has run its course. Collapse never occurs overnight. It takes years for the effects of social and fiscal breakdown to be visibly felt. And when they are felt, many people refuse to notice. Eighty years ago, America was halfway through the Great Depression, and mainstream economists were STILL claiming that recovery was right around the corner. Illusion and self-deception can be so powerful that the worst miseries can be normalized, at least for a little while.


And it isn’t only the general public that is stricken with crippling bias. There are those within the liberty movement who have bought into false paradigms for various reasons, and this threatens any progress we have made over the past several years. There are those who still think that the “conflict” between Eastern and Western politicians and banking elites is somehow real. There are those who believe that Russia and China, despite their numerous and undeniable ties to the global banking syndicate (information I have covered in multiple articles over the years), are the “good guys”, while Western nations are the “bad guys”, rather than them all being mere subsidiaries and franchises of the same monstrous globalist machine.


They hold onto this illusion, I think, because it is much more frightening to accept the reality that we are alone, that the liberty movement is the first and last line of defense against centralization, that the responsibility for the future of independence and individual freedom rests on our shoulders. It is much easier to fantasize that there are others out there, nations and governments with armies and capital, that are on our side and will fight our battles for us. This illusion will be a painful one for many in the movement as they begin to realize that the East is actually working in tandem with international financiers instead of working against them.


There are also those in the liberty movement who cling to the notion that the fight against globalism will be won without physical conflict. They believe that if we simply protest long enough, play the political and legal game long enough, nullify long enough, refuse to participate long enough, that the elitist edifice, an edifice which has existed for centuries and has manipulated historical precedence for just as long, will suddenly disappear in a puff of fairy dust.


The first problem with this strategy is that it relies on the assumption of time. Sure, anything is possible given ample opportunity. Perhaps the movement could grind away at the New World Order over the course of several decades until the majority of the masses are awake and aware (which is exactly how long it would take). However, I think it infinitely foolish to presume that we have decades to accomplish such a task. If the past has shown us anything, it is that tyranny does not respect reason and, at a certain point, couldn’t care less about image. Tyranny respects only power. It does not respect the protestations of ants it can crush under foot, but it will make a wide path around a rattlesnake ready to strike. While there is utility in the pursuit of intellectual and philosophical combat, if you are not willing to be the rattlesnake as well, then you are not going to affect change against such an opponent. You will eventually be stepped on.


The refusal to accept responsibility for one’s own defense is yet another product of fear — fear that the enemy is too powerful, that all resistance is futile. But resistance is only assured failure if resistance is never undertaken. Sheeple defeat themselves within their own minds before they ever stand up, and so they never stand. This is the only reason totalitarian elements ever achieve success. Again, many in the liberty movement are going to face a rude awakening when they realize they have relied too much on the notion of the system policing itself, instead of preparing for the worst-case scenario.


And finally, the globalists themselves suffer from a veritable fog of illusions to which I can speak only briefly.


We are stepping over the threshold of an age that will shatter the illusions of everyone, and the internationalists are no exception. The root pillar of elitist globalism itself is that some men are born to rule, while other men are born to serve. Some men are born kings, and other men are born slaves. The psychopathy of this belief system should be evident, but psychopathy also elicits blinding ego and hubris, which smothers any inherent questions of motive. I do not think the elites ever actually consider the validity of their own philosophies. I am relatively certain their manner of viewing the world is much like that of a cult, a religious sect driven by the brutality of zealotry rather than the empowering nature of understanding.


Such men cannot be reasoned with. In fact, zealots often revel in their ability to trample all other world views as they grasp for complete dominance of their ideology. The illusion of rightness is far more important to them than actual truth, and this is their greatest weakness. Hidden under all the posturing and power grabbing, deep in the recesses of their own assumed omnipotence, I sense an ever present terror within the globalist culture. I sense a brand of terror that comes only from the seed of doubt.


The incredible array of propaganda leveled at the public, the constant war gaming and mind gaming against the citizenry, the endless hailstorm of legal maneuvering designed to erase our sense of connection with our natural rights and liberties, the tidal wave of fearmongering, and all the manipulations and scapegoats and elaborate theatrical displays, all reek of fear. For if the globalists were truly as omnipotent as they pretend to be — if they really were all-knowing philosopher kings born to rule — then they would already have their New World Order. They would not need lies. They would not need the threat of force. The undeniable power of their ideology would be enough if their ideology actually had any validity. Lies are designed to hide lack of validity and lack of strength. The globalists are, at bottom, a hollow shell desperately clamoring for substance.


What may appear to be the “thoroughness” of the elitist con is actually a form of micro-management that exhibits a fundamental doubt of success. The globalists wish they could predict the future, but they cannot. So they are just as afraid as most of humanity. I believe we are entering an era in which they will feel the stark pain of shattered illusions and the destruction of their own fantasies, no less felt than the pain of the rest of the world.


Our mission as an opposing force to globalism is to come to terms with our own illusions and to erase them, to stop compromising and to stop waiting for the final shoe to drop and to take positive action now rather than after the endgame develops. This means preparation and organization for the worst-case scenarios. This means making one’s family, neighborhood and community as self-reliant and secure as possible. The excuses have to stop. The distractions and intellectualized silver bullet solutions have to stop. Hard work and risk are all that are left, all that matters. If we do this, and if we do this now, then victory is possible. In any contest of strength and will, he who knows himself best, he who sheds all illusion, will be the winner..


 


The post We Are Entering An Era Of Shattered Illusions appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Broadband Adviser Picked by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Arrested on Fraud Charges

Broadband Adviser Picked by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Arrested on Fraud Charges | ajit-pai-1 | Economy & Business Special Interests US News

[image: Ethan Miller/Getty Images]


By Nick Statt, The Verge


A broadband adviser selected by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai to run a federal advisory committee was arrested last week on claims she tricked investors into pouring money into a multimillion-dollar investment fraud scheme, according to The Wall Street Journal.


The adviser, Elizabeth Pierce, is the former chief executive of Quintillion, an Alaska-based fiber optic cable provider operating out of Anchorage. In her capacity as CEO, Pierce allegedly raised more than $250 million from two New York-based investment companies using forged contracts with other companies guaranteeing hundreds of millions of dollars in future revenue. Pierce resigned from Quintillion in August of last year, and she stepped down from her role in Pai’s Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC) the following month.





“As it turned out, those sales agreements were worthless because the customers had not signed them,” US attorney Geoffrey Berman said in prepared remarks, as reported by the WSJ. “Instead, as alleged, Pierce had forged counter-party signatures on contract after contract. As a result of Pierce’s deception, the investment companies were left with a system that is worth far less than Pierce had led them to believe.” Pierce was trying to raise money to help build out a fiber optic system that would wire Alaska with high-speed internet and better help connect it to networks in other US states. Pierce was charged with wire fraud last Thursday and faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.


Pierce was tapped by Pai in April of last year to be the chair of the BDAC, which he formed “to accelerate the deployment of high-speed internet access, or broadband, by reducing and removing regulatory barriers to infrastructure investment.” According to broadband industry news and advocacy website Stop the Cap, Pierce may have gotten on Pai’s radar by complaining about how cumbersome it was to bring internet access to parts of the country like Alaska.


In a statement issued last week, Quintillion says it began cooperating with the Department of Justice as soon as allegations against Pierce surfaced last year. “Quintillion became aware of the situation regarding the alleged actions of Ms. Pierce last year, took swift action and self-reported to the Department of Justice (DOJ). Quintillion has been cooperating fully with the authorities during this ongoing investigation,” reads the company’s press release on the charges. The company goes on to say that “the ongoing investigation has not impacted Quintillion’s operations nor the quality of its services,” and that it “continues to move aggressively to extend its network and provide world-class telecommunications to Alaska and beyond.”


The post Broadband Adviser Picked by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Arrested on Fraud Charges appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Billions Against Bayer?

Billions Against Bayer? | billions_against_bayer | Agriculture & Farming Economy & Business General Health Science & Technology Special Interests

[image: Organic Consumers Organization]

What happens when you marry a drug company with a pesticide company?

We’re about to find out.


The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) this week approved the $66-billion acquisition of Monsanto by Germany-based Bayer—so much for making America great again.


The big shots at Monsanto and Bayer spewed the usual nonsense about how all they care about is helping farmers and feeding the world. But Mark Connelly, an agriculture analyst at the brokerage and investment group CLSA Americas, told Business Insider:


“Let’s just cut to the chase: These companies want to make more money, they want to raise prices. No company in this industry needs these deals in order to innovate.”


What does the mega-merger mean for consumers? Fortune, which is not exactly anti-big deals, wrote:


. . . consumers could see prices go up not only on agricultural products, but also on the umpteen products that hide corn and soybean inputs such as gas. The Bayer-Monsanto deal is big enough on its own to create cause for concern. It’s even more worrying in the wake of the ChemChina-Syngenta takeover and Dow Chemical’s merger with DuPont.


If things get bad enough for conventional commodity crop growers, with Trump’s trade wars and now this merger, will we see more farmers transition to organic regenerative agriculture?


Read OCA’s press release


Read ‘The $66 billion Bayer-Monsanto merger just got a major green light — but farmers are terrified’


The post Billions Against Bayer? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Billions Against Bayer?

Billions Against Bayer? | billions_against_bayer | Agriculture & Farming Economy & Business General Health Science & Technology Special Interests

[image: Organic Consumers Organization]

What happens when you marry a drug company with a pesticide company?

We’re about to find out.


The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) this week approved the $66-billion acquisition of Monsanto by Germany-based Bayer—so much for making America great again.


The big shots at Monsanto and Bayer spewed the usual nonsense about how all they care about is helping farmers and feeding the world. But Mark Connelly, an agriculture analyst at the brokerage and investment group CLSA Americas, told Business Insider:


“Let’s just cut to the chase: These companies want to make more money, they want to raise prices. No company in this industry needs these deals in order to innovate.”


What does the mega-merger mean for consumers? Fortune, which is not exactly anti-big deals, wrote:


. . . consumers could see prices go up not only on agricultural products, but also on the umpteen products that hide corn and soybean inputs such as gas. The Bayer-Monsanto deal is big enough on its own to create cause for concern. It’s even more worrying in the wake of the ChemChina-Syngenta takeover and Dow Chemical’s merger with DuPont.


If things get bad enough for conventional commodity crop growers, with Trump’s trade wars and now this merger, will we see more farmers transition to organic regenerative agriculture?


Read OCA’s press release


Read ‘The $66 billion Bayer-Monsanto merger just got a major green light — but farmers are terrified’


The post Billions Against Bayer? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Monday, April 16, 2018

Goldman Sachs Analyst: Curing Patients Not a Sustainable Medical Business Model

Goldman Sachs Analyst: Curing Patients Not a Sustainable Medical Business Model | medical-doctor-money | Economy & Business General Health Medical & Health Sleuth Journal Special Interests


By Carey Wedler, The Anti-Media



One of the most reviled companies in the United States recently gave Americans yet another reason to distrust their power: A recent Goldman Sachs report reveals the company questioning whether or not curing chronic illness is compatible with a sustainable business model.


In an internal report viewed by CNBC about the potential of the biotech industry and gene therapy titled “The Genome Revolution,” analysts asked: “Is curing patients a sustainable business model?”


“The potential to deliver ‘one shot cures’ is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing,” wrote analyst Salveen Richter. “However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies,” analyst Richter wrote in the April 10 report.


“While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.“


Richter cited a Hepatitis C drug manufactured by Gilead Sciences that achieved a 90% cure rate. As CNBC noted:


“The company’s U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.”


In light of the reduced profits as a result of the success of the drug, Richter wrote:


“GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients. In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines … Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise.”


Indeed, cancer is a highly profitable disease. In 2015, the world spent $107 billion on cancer drugs, and according to 2016 projections, that number was expected to grow to $150 by 2020. Further, Gilead Sciences, which Richter singled out as a company losing profits due to cures, was still the second-most profitable pharmaceutical/biotech company in the world in 2017, earning over $12 billion in net income.


Richter, who did not respond to CNBC’s request for comment, offered several ideas to cope with the ‘problem’ of healing patients. He suggested targeting large markets, such as those suffering from hemophilia, because “Hemophilia is a $9-10bn WW market (hemophilia A, B), growing at ~6-7% annually.” in addition, he advised clients to target disorders with high incidences, such as spinal dystrophy, as well as focus on “[c]onstant innovation and portfolio expansion.”


Additionally, Ars Technica reported, the analysis “hints that, as such cures come to fruition, they could open up more investment opportunities in treatments for ‘disease of aging.’”


Goldman Sachs confirmed the authenticity of the report to Ars Technica but declined to comment on its contents.




The post Goldman Sachs Analyst: Curing Patients Not a Sustainable Medical Business Model appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Friday, April 13, 2018

China’s Trade War Against America

China


The Chinese regime is the creation of the globalists. Going back to the Nixon era, Henry Kissinger set into motion a staged and preferential trading system that would inevitably build the Red Communists into the very model for global dominance. Approving China into the World Trade Organization guaranteed a distorted playing field by favoring PRC and allowing their draconian conditions to engage in business by Oriental Marxists. Even The Guardian reports that World trade rules too weak to stop China distorting market, “It is now clear that the WTO rules are not sufficient to constrain China’s market-distorting behavior.” The end result produced a perverse capitalism that merged with totalitarian oligarchists to distort, extort and circumvent any semblance of a legitimate free trading exchange.


Behzad Yaghmaian provides some valuable insights in China: Empire Building in the Age of Globalization.


“The United States helped China’s economic ascendance by promoting globalization and embracing, in recent years, a free market orthodoxy. In the annals of history, it will be noted that it was the United States itself that championed a new economic structure which ultimately undermined its own position in the world.


How did this happen? China’s decision to open its economy to the world coincided with the U.S. drive for globalization. U.S. and Western corporations opened the economic floodgates to China through direct investment and subcontracting agreements. As Western capitalism globalized, China became the factory of the world.


Meanwhile, its free market ideology and obsession with balancing the budget became policy straightjackets that hobbled the United States’ ability to spend strategically on its future. As a result, money that could have been spent on education, research and development, modern infrastructure and other requisites for out-competing its rivals was in short supply.


Unencumbered by a free market orthodoxy, the Chinese opted for the opposite choice. They poured resources into areas pivotal for building a robust and competitive economy. China became the unintended winner of the limits of the United States’ free market ideology.”


Well, this is the short version of why America has allowed such an enormous balance of payments with China. In real terms, this recipe for economic demise was designed by the transnational corporatists. The intentional encouragement and approval of de-industrializing America has been no accident. The systematic dismantling of the merchantry economy followed as plant and equipment manufacturing moved offshore in order to build the Chinese coolie export dynasty.


This trade and industry structure was planned as a global warfare assault to bankrupt the American economy. The way back to a viable merchantry is to defeat the 21th Century robber barons who are most vulnerable to any significant drop in their exports. China has proven they are threats to any rational receptacle trading partnership.


Alan Tonelson in All of the Reasons Why Trump Can Win a Trade War With China, clearly lays out why China is a distrusted actor and major reasons they will lose far more from a curtailing of their overseas sales into the United States.


“Would a country that could take or leave its trade surpluses work so hard to extort or steal its rivals’ intellectual property? Would it pursue industrial policies aimed precisely at creating advantages for so many designated key sectors of its economy over foreign competitors? Would it limit exports of critical commodities like rare earths (essential for electronics and information technology manufacturing) to give its own producers a leg up on rivals press non-Chinese companies to move operations to the PRC? Would it subsidize massive overcapacity in goods like steel and aluminum in order to undercut the competition globally? Would it place so many restrictions on foreign providers of farm products along with banking, insurance, telecommunications, Internet-related, audiovisual, express delivery, legal and other services? Would it sue its trade partners in the World Trade Organization simply because they’re exercising their right to bring actions against China? Would it remain so determined to keep foreign firms in the dark concerning the regulations concerning licensing and operating requirements; product, investment, and business expansion approvals; and business license renewals?


One of these benefits has to do with achieving a goal that’s become imperative to the Chinese authorities—improving the quality of Chinese growth. As with America, too much of China’s economic expansion depends on ever higher levels of debt, rather than on more sustainable sources of demand. And Beijing at least sounds determined to rein in its unregulated shadow banking firms—particularly important lending culprits that have showered credit on provincial governments anxious to meet politically rewarding growth targets.”


In order to forge a worldwide economic alliance, Trump Is Building An Army Of Nations In Trade War Against China. Only President Trump has the guts to put the Chinese State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the ruling State Council (SASAC) business enterprises in the target sights to reign in their predatory practices.


“Earlier on Thursday Larry Kudlow confirmed that Trump is indeed building an army ahead of the big showdown with China. According to Bloomberg, Kudlow wants to rally “pro-market allies to push back against China’s unfair trade practices,” a senior White House adviser said.


“The damage of our economy comes from China’s restrictive practices. Blame China. They’ve been doing this for decades. Don’t blame Trump,” Larry Kudlow, head of the White House’s National Economic Council, told reporters in Washington.


In threatening to punish China for its abuse of intellectual property, Trump is “doing what everyone in the world has said we should do,” said Kudlow, adding that the administration will have more to say about its efforts to recruit other major economies to support the U.S. position.”


America has been pillaged by China for decades. Much of the rest of the world has also been abused by their same theft methods. Fear that China will strike back ignores the fact that China cannot afford missing out selling to the U.S. consumer. Americans gain the opportunity to defeat this aggressor by becoming independent of Chinese export dependency. The United States can win this trade war, it is time to get serious.


The post China’s Trade War Against America appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Big Pharma Price-Gouging in America

Big Pharma Price-Gouging in America | cost-money-medicine-medical-big-pharma | Big Pharma Economy & Business General Health Medical & Health Special Interests


In an earlier article, I explained the following about Big Pharma:


The industry is one of the most profitable in the country, making about 18 cents profit on every dollar of sales.


It’s aided by government using our tax dollars to fund research on new drugs – the industry gets to sell at exorbitant prices.


It spends about twice as much on advertising, promotion and administrative costs as on R & D to develop new drugs.


Prices charged for prescription drugs in America are inordinately high compared to virtually all other countries – around double the cost of other developed nations.


They’re rising at around four times the rate of inflation. So are prohibitive costs for insurance and hospital care.


Companies increasingly are forcing employees to share a greater cost burden, along with reducing overall healthcare benefits.


A virtual regulation-free healthcare industry when it comes to pricing facilitates gouging consumers – making proper healthcare, or enough of it, increasingly unaffordable for millions of low and medium-income households.


Perhaps more than any other industry, Big Pharma bandits exploit US consumers for huge profits, rising exponentially for some drugs (new and old), an untenable situation without constraining them legislatively.


When undemocratic Dems controlled Congress under Obama and the Clinton co-presidency, they enacted no laws constraining unacceptably large drug price increases.


With Republicans controlling the administration, House and Senate, they disingenuously support what they rejected when it mattered – doing nothing about it, servile to industry interests.


Obamacare omitted the right to import cheaper drugs from abroad, notably Canada. It failed to mandate lower prices for Medicare-eligible households, a no-brainer it rejected.


NBC News earlier reported that “(p)aying for medicine can be the most expensive out-of-pocket health cost for Americans.”


The sky’s the limit when it comes to pricing, nothing constraining drug industry bandits charging whatever they want, no ceiling imposed on them.


An army of industry lawyers and lobbyists pressures Congress against regulating prices. Large campaign contributions to key House and Senate members buy Big Pharma what it wants.


The 2016 undemocratic Dem platform excluded a mandate for lower drug prices.


It included weasel words about “advancing our party’s progressive ideals…addressing the needs of all Americans” – meaningless rhetorical promises abandoned when controlling the White House and Congress.


Last March, disingenuous Senate Dems introduced the “Improving Access to Affordable Prescription Drugs Act.” The measure went nowhere with Republicans controlling Congress.


Why didn’t they introduce this measure when Dems controlled both houses with Obama in the White House? Why now and not then?


Simple, because they’re beholden to industry bandits like Republicans, gorging at the trough of industry campaign contributions – introducing consumer-friendly legislation only when passage won’t happen, not when it’s assured.


 


 


The post Big Pharma Price-Gouging in America appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Thursday, March 29, 2018

Amazon Now Wants To Photograph Your Home Every Time They Make A Delivery

Amazon Now Wants To Photograph Your Home Every Time They Make A Delivery | amazon-delivery | Economy & Business Science & Technology Surveillance


By Mac Slavo, SHTFplan


Amazon has decided to offer a new service that seems innocent on the surface. The retailer has begun photographing packages left at homes and sending that picture to the customer’s email address to help them locate packages that may have been hidden.


It all seems so innocent. But is it? According to Natural News, Amazon’s new service is meant to help customers find where their package was left while they were at work or out running errands, especially if it was intentionally tucked behind a bush or a flower pot to keep it hidden from potential thieves. Amazon has a good reason for taking pictures of the homes packages are delivered to, but that doesn’t make it any less creepy and privacy concerns are now, once again at the forefront.


Especially considering USA Today reported that this new “feature” is being rolled out almost silently. Amazon has been quietly expanding a program over the past few months in which some of its delivery providers take a picture of where they put your package. The photo is included in the notice of delivery received by shoppers so they know when it arrived and where to look for it.


Amazon Logistics Photo On Delivery is “one of many delivery innovations we’re working on to improve convenience for customers,” Amazon spokesperson Kristen Kish said. The Photo on Delivery program has existed for at least six months, but recently Amazon updated the delivery device and app used by delivery personnel in its Amazon Logistics delivery system called Rabbit by drivers. Now, all Logistics drivers can take a photo. This has made the program more visible to a broader geographic swath of Amazon customers nationwide. It’s currently available at least in the Seattle, San Francisco, and Northern Virginia metro areas and only comprises a small portion of U.S. deliveries.


This feature is rolling out as Amazon increasingly asks its customers to accept its constant presence in their homes, from a voice-activated speaker that records snippets of commands to a high-tech entry system that allows delivery personnel to enter their home. It’s like Amazon is looking for ways to try to make people more comfortable with major violations of their privacy and personal space.


And when it comes to Amazon, concerns over privacy violations are more often than not legitimate, especially considering the fact that the electronic commerce giant has ahistory of spying and surveillance. Just a few months ago, the Daily Mail published an article on “Amazon’s creepy plan to put a camera and microphone in every bedroom” with the launch of the Echo Spot’s “smart alarm.”


But at least for now, you can opt out of having pictures taken of your home. For those who’d prefer not to have photos of their doors or shrubbery sent to them, customers can opt out of the service on the Amazon website under the help and customer service tab.


Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.


The post Amazon Now Wants To Photograph Your Home Every Time They Make A Delivery appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Friday, March 23, 2018

IMF Wants Massive Illegal Immigration to Save Pension Funds

IMF Wants Massive Illegal Immigration to Save Pension Funds | immigration | Economy & Business International Monetary Fund Special Interests US News

[image: AP/Gregory Bull, file]

(The Real Agenda News) In Europe alone, the IMF promotes the arrival of over 5 million illegals to sustain the decaying pension funds.

The governments of Latin America, North America, and Europe have mishandled, not to say stolen, the money saved by workers for decades.


Most of the public and private savings accounts and pension funds were looted by governments to pay for political promises and an insurmountable public debt.


Government handled pension funds are some of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on the working classes in the history of humanity. Consider this: The average person begins working at 18 years of age and contributes to a public fund for over 40 years.


Once it is time to retire, the worker files the paperwork to receive proportionally the average salary he or she earned 40 years earlier. What happened to the earnings that his pension contributions earned over 4 decades?


Did they help pay for other people’s pensions? The answer is a decisive No. The profits made by governments on the monies provided by the working class over decades of hard work was stolen to pay for never-ending entitlement programs, skyrocketing interests from debt accumulated by governments over dozens of years.


Many of these payments are made to international banking institutions like the IMF itself, the World Bank and so-called partner states that lend money at a large profit.


What will happen to the pensioners of the future? In a recent analysis, the International Monetary Fund outlines a way to reform the system.


To do this, it draws up projections with all the variables that condition the Social Security accounts: the number of retirees that is expected, the number of workers, immigration, contributions or generosity with pensioners.


The IMF concludes that it is possible to articulate a financially sustainable system that is socially acceptable at the same time.


But yes: you have to touch many elements, make reforms in depth and, in any case, pensions will be reduced compared to the average salary.


“A public pension is not intended to cover the full income that the retiree would need to retire”, explains the IMF.


If there is such an expectation, it must be made clear that it cannot be fulfilled,“the report stresses. Hence, it asks governments to establish complementary plans.


On the one hand, the Fund collects the projection of retirements that will be in the coming years.


Given that the contributors of today are the pensioners of the future, the only certainty is that the number of benefits will grow.


On the contrary, the rest of factors can vary much more: the number of people working, immigration, contributions made by contributions or other sources of income and the generosity of the system with pensioners.


Adding all these variables and with the intention of giving an idea of the challenge, the IMF outlines various scenarios by 2050.


One is based on the premise that the current generosity is maintained: now the average pension represents almost 50% of the average salary.


To preserve this status, according to the estimates of the Fund, contributors would go from contributing 21% of the salary to 47.8% in 2050. And spending on pensions would be at 22% of GDP, twice the current rate.


In another scenario, the IMF freezes contributions at the levels they are now. Then the expenditure on GDP remain the same.


But in this case the funding of the system collapses during the next 30 years, and the relationship between pension and the average salary is cut by more than half to 22.6%.


In the Fund’s opinion, neither scenario is acceptable. Neither workers can bear a pressure for contributions as in the first case. Neither can a pensioner live with dignity with only 22% of the average salary as in the second.


So the Fund draws an intermediate horizon. In this third hypothesis, spending on GDP would be at 12.9% and the contribution for contributions would rise to 27.3% of their salary, a very high level.


Income would have to increase by raising the ceiling of maximum contributions while leaving the ceiling of the maximum pension the same.


That is, those who earn more would contribute more but would not receive more, penalizing contributivity, the Fund admits.


In addition, some 5.5 million immigrants would need to arrive in countries like SpainThat represents 12% of the current population and a similar proportion to the number of people that entered the country between 2000 and 2007.


And the rate of people working would have to climb from 59.7% to 79%, a very demanding milestone and more difficult to achieve if prices rise.


“This could be achieved through parametric reforms of pensions that lead to greater participation in the labor force, longer working lives and structural reforms that lower the natural rate of unemployment,” it says.


Even so, the pension would end at 35% of the salary. And that, in the opinion of the IMF, does not seem acceptable either. Therefore, consider that you need to save around 5% of the annual salary.


So the IMF recommends that governments adopt the alternative of “automatically enlisting workers in a second private fund backed by the State”.


It also suggests, as another option, private business plans that fatten the savings by taking a part of the future salary increases, in the style of the British system inspired by the Nobel laureate Richard H. Thaler.


Finally, given that there is a lot of savings in housing, the IMF urges that mechanisms be encouraged to sign reverse mortgages.


In the opinion of the men in black, this scenario would be “plausible, financially viable and possibly socially acceptable”.


As you can see, the size of the figures means that you cannot face the challenge with a solution taken from the hat.


You have to touch many things and none by itself fixes it. And, above all, “there is no room to reverse the reforms”, says the Fund.


The post IMF Wants Massive Illegal Immigration to Save Pension Funds appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

‘Flippy’ a Burger-Flipping Robot just Started its First Shift


(The Daily Sheeple) Flippy, a burger-flipping robot, has just begun work at a restaurant in Pasadena, California. It is the first of dozens of locations for the system, which is destined to replace human fast-food workers.


According to a press release from Miso, the company — which bills Flippy as the world’s first burger-flipping robot — began working with Caliburger two years ago to develop it as a “cost-effective and highly efficient solution” that is “specifically designed to operate in an existing commercial kitchen layout and to serve alongside kitchen staff to safely and efficiently fulfill a variety of cooking tasks.”


“The kitchen of the future will always have people in it, but we see that kitchen as having people and robots,” said David Zito, co-founder and CEO of Miso Robotics tells KTLA in Los Angeles. “This technology is not about replacing jobs — we see Flippy as that third hand.”


But Flippy still needs a human to help it do its job. In its current version, the robot has to have a human coworker nearby to place the patties on the grill, put the cheese on top at the right moment, and add the extras, such as lettuce and sauce before wrapping the sandwiches for customers. So all it does is flip burgers.  But it is just one more nail in the minimum wage’s coffin, that’s for certain.


“The Flippy robot takes the form of a relatively small, wheeled cart equipped with a 6-axis robotic arm and what Miso Robotics calls a ‘sensor bar,’ TechCrunch writes. “It takes in data from thermal sensors, 3-D sensors and different cameras onboard to perceive its environment. Digital systems that send tickets from the counter back to the kitchen give Flippy its orders.”


TechCrunch also reported that unlike rival burger bots under development, such as one made by Momentum Machines, Flippy uses artificial intelligence to improve its technique – so the more it works, the better it gets at the job, in much the same way that might be expected from a human worker.


The post ‘Flippy’ a Burger-Flipping Robot just Started its First Shift appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

These Companies Still Support the NRA

These Companies Still Support the NRA | nra | Economy & Business Gun Control US News


This morning when I was reading the headlines, I came across one that talked about the companies which still supported the NRA after all the ridiculous boycotts that caused other businesses to withdraw their support. I eagerly clicked the link and saw this sub-headline:



Come for the discounts, stay for the opposition to common sense gun laws.



What???


Of course, then I saw that it was ThinkProgress and wasn’t surprised anymore, but I figured I should make my own list that was a bit more positive than their dismal droning, blaming the guiltless NRA instead of the FBI or the other law enforcement agencies that actually WERE at fault for not stopping the school shooting in Florida that took the lives of 17 people on Valentine’s Day.


For more information, read Part 1 and Part 2 of my investigation into the shooting.


*Climbs off soapbox.*


In the article, Josh Israel (any relation to Sheriff Scott Israel?) and Kira Lerner ranted:


After the shooting in Parkland, Florida, the NRA has been the focus of renewed national attention, as the group continues to successfully block any legislation to curb gun violence on the national level. Dallas’ mayor pro tem told the NRA Monday that the group will be “met with opposition” if it holds its scheduled May conference in his city. And over the weekend, hundreds of people gathered outside the group’s Virginia headquarters to hold a vigil and protest.


ThinkProgress asked more than two dozen corporations that offer incentives to NRA members whether they plan to continue their relationships with the gun lobby. A growing number of those companies have ended their relationship with the NRA since this list was initially published. (source)


Anyway, the following companies haven’t caved to pressure and continue to support the NRA. If you get a chance, you can support them in return.



Shots fired.


Many other businesses have severed ties with the NRA or have announced plans to do so.


The NRA denounced those companies in a statement, saying:


“Some corporations have decided to punish NRA membership in a shameful display of political and civic cowardice.


Let it be absolutely clear. The loss of a discount will neither scare nor distract one single NRA member from our mission to stand and defend the individual freedoms that have always made America the greatest nation in the world.” (source)


The companies which have caved to the public pressure of websites like ThinkProgress are:



  • Alamo Rental Cars

  • Allied Van Lines

  • Avis Rental Cars

  • Budget Rental Cars

  • Chubb (they underwrote carry insurance for gun owners)

  • Delta Airlines

  • Enterprise Rental Cars

  • First National Bank of Omaha

  • Hertz Rental Cars

  • LifeLock

  • Lockton (they underwrote carry insurance for gun owners)

  • MetLife

  • National Rental Cars

  • North American Van Lines

  • Republic Bank

  • Securian Financial Group

  • SimpliSafe

  • Starkey Hearing Technologies

  • Symantec (the company that produces Norton Antivirus software)

  • Teledoc

  • TrueCar

  • United Airlines

  • Wild Apricot


ThinkProgress smugly concluded:


In early 2013, weeks after the Sandy Hook shooting, ThinkProgress published a similar list. Since that time, several companies have discontinued their relationships with the pro-gun group.  Following a grassroots pressure campaign led by the global advocacy group Avaaz.org, both Best Western and Wyndham hotels stopped offering an NRA discount…


…A similar pressure campaign by a coalition of LGBTQ rights groups and gun violence prevention organizations began pressuring FedEx to do the same in 2016, but has not yet had success. (source)


It’s astonishing to me that the NRA is being publicly crucified, yet none of these people are talking about the failures of the FBI, the Broward County Sheriff’s office, or the local police to follow the laws that are already on the books.


Then again, I guess it isn’t really that astonishing at all. But it certainly demonstrates where their priorities are.


The post These Companies Still Support the NRA appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Thursday, February 15, 2018

The Military Industrial Complex Strikes Again: War Spending Will Bankrupt America

The Military Industrial Complex Strikes Again: War Spending Will Bankrupt America | military-spending | Economy & Business Military Special Interests US News


By John W. Whitehead, Rutherford Institute


Why throw money at defense when everything is falling down around us? Do we need to spend more money on our military (about $600 billion this year) than the next seven countries combined? Do we need 1.4 million active military personnel and 850,000 reserves when the enemy at the moment — ISIS — numbers in the low tens of thousands? If so, it seems there’s something radically wrong with our strategy. Should 55% of the federal government’s discretionary spending go to the military and only 3% to transportation when the toll in American lives is far greater from failing infrastructure than from terrorism? Does California need nearly as many active military bases (31, according to militarybases.com) as it has UC and state university campuses (33)? And does the state need more active duty military personnel (168,000, according to Governing magazine) than public elementary school teachers (139,000)?”— Steve Lopez, Los Angeles Times


Mark my words, America’s war spending will bankrupt the nation.


For that matter, America’s war spending has already bankrupted the nation to the tune of more than $20 trillion dollars.


Now the Trump Administration is pushing for a $4.4 trillion budget for fiscal year 2019 that would add $7 trillion to the already unsustainable federal deficit in order to sustain America’s military empire abroad and dramatically expand the police state here at home. Trump also wants American taxpayers to cover the cost of building that infamous border wall.


Truly, Trump may turn out to be, as policy analyst Stan Collender warned, “the biggest deficit- and debt-increasing president of all time.”


For those in need of a quick reminder: “A budget deficit is the difference between what the federal government spends and what it takes in. The national debt, also known as the public debt, is the result of the federal government borrowing money to cover years and years of budget deficits.”


Right now, the U.S. government is operating in the negative on every front: it’s spending far more than what it makes (and takes from the American taxpayers) and it is borrowing heavily (from foreign governments and Social Security) to keep the government operating and keep funding its endless wars abroad.


This is how military empires fall and fail: by spreading themselves too thin and spending themselves to death.


It happened in Rome. It’s happening again.


Not content to merely police the globe, in recent decades, America has gradually transformed its homeland into a battlefield with militarized police and weapons better suited to a war zone.


Since taking office, President Trump—much like his predecessors—has marched in lockstep with the military. Now Trump wants $716 billion to expand America’s military empire abroad and billions more to hire cops, build more prisons and wage more profit-driven war-on-drugs/war-on-terrorism/war-on-crime programs that eat away at the Fourth Amendment while failing to make the country any safer.


Even the funds requested for infrastructure will do little to shore up the nation’s crumbling roads, bridges, railways, highways, power grids and dams.


No matter how your break it down, this is not a budget aimed at perfecting the Union, establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting general welfare, or securing the blessings of liberty for the American people.


No, this is a budget aimed at pandering to the powerful money interests (military, corporate and security) that run the Deep State and hold the government in its clutches.


So much for Trump’s campaign promises to balance the budget and drain the swamps of corruption.


The glaring economic truth is that at the end of the day, it’s the military industrial complex—and not the sick, the elderly or the poor—that is pushing America towards bankruptcy.


As investigative journalist Uri Friedman puts it, for more than 15 years now, the United States has been fighting terrorism with a credit card, “essentially bankrolling the wars with debt, in the form of purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds by U.S.-based entities like pension funds and state and local governments, and by countries like China and Japan.”


The illicit merger of the armaments industry and the Pentagon that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us against more than 50 years ago has come to represent perhaps the greatest threat to the nation’s fragile infrastructure today.


Having been co-opted by greedy defense contractors, corrupt politicians and incompetent government officials, America’s expanding military empire is bleeding the country dry at a rate of more than $15 billion a month (or $20 million an hour)—and that’s just what the government spends on foreign wars.


That does not include the cost of maintaining and staffing the 1000-plus U.S. military bases spread around the globe.


Incredibly, although the U.S. constitutes only 5% of the world’s population, America boasts almost 50% of the world’s total military expenditure,  spending more on the military than the next 19 biggest spending nations combined.


In fact, the Pentagon spends more on war than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety.


War is not cheap.


Although the federal government obscures so much about its defense spending that accurate figures are difficult to procure, we do know that since 2001, the U.S. government has spent more than $1.8 trillion in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (that’s $8.3 million per hour).


That doesn’t include wars and military exercises waged around the globe, which are expected to push the total bill upwards of $12 trillion by 2053.


Mind you, these ongoing wars—riddled by corruption, graft and bumbling incompetence—have done little to keep the country safe while enriching the military industrial complex—and private defense contractors—at taxpayer expense.


Just recently, for example, a leading accounting firm concluded that one of the Pentagon’s largest agencies “can’t account for hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of spending.”


Just consider the fact that it costs American taxpayers $2.1 million per year for each soldier deployed in Afghanistan.


Imagine what you could do with that money if it were spent on domestic needs here at home.


Unfortunately, that’s not going to happen anytime soon, not as long as the money interests in Washington keep calling the shots and profiting from the spoils of war.


War has become a huge money-making venture, and America, with its vast military empire, is one of its best buyers and sellers. Not only does the U.S. have the largest defense budget, it also ranks highest as the world’s largest arms exporter.


The American military-industrial complex has erected an empire unsurpassed in history in its breadth and scope, one dedicated to conducting perpetual warfare throughout the earth.


For example, while erecting a security surveillance state in the U.S., the military-industrial complex has perpetuated a worldwide military empire with American troops stationed in 177 countries (over 70% of the countries worldwide).


In the process, billions have been spent erecting luxury military installations throughout the world.


For example, the U.S. Embassy built in Iraq, dubbed “Fortress Baghdad,” covers 104 acres and boasts a “city within a city” that includes six apartment buildings, a Marine barracks, swimming pool, shops and 15-foot-thick walls. Camp Anaconda in Iraq, like many U.S. military bases scattered across the globe, was structured to resemble a mini-city with pools, fast food restaurants, miniature golf courses and movie theaters.


While most Americans can scarcely afford the cost of heating and cooling their own homes, the American government spends $20 billion annually just to provide air conditioning for military installations in Iraq and Afghanistan.


In essence, what we’re doing is “we’re air conditioning the desert over there in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places,” noted retired brigadier general Steven Anderson, a former chief logistician for Gen. David Petraeus in Iraq.


Think about that for a minute.


There’s a good reason why “bloated,” “corrupt” and “inefficient” are among the words most commonly applied to the government, especially the Department of Defense and its contractors.


For instance, a study by the Government Accountability Office found that $70 billion worth of cost overruns by the Pentagon were caused by management failures. To put that in perspective, that equates to one and a half times the State Department’s entire $47 billion annual budget.


Fraud is rampant.


A government audit, for example, found that defense contractor Boeing has been massively overcharging taxpayers for mundane parts, resulting in tens of millions of dollars in overspending. As the report noted, the American taxpayer paid:


$71 for a metal pin that should cost just 4 cents; $644.75 for a small gear smaller than a dime that sells for $12.51: more than a 5,100 percent increase in price. $1,678.61 for another tiny part, also smaller than a dime, that could have been bought within DoD for $7.71: a 21,000 percent increase. $71.01 for a straight, thin metal pin that DoD had on hand, unused by the tens of thousands, for 4 cents: an increase of over 177,000 percent.


Price gouging has become an accepted form of corruption within the American military empire.


And if you think gas prices at home can get high, just consider what the American taxpayer is being forced to shell out overseas: once all the expenses of delivering gas to troops in the field are factored in, we’re paying between $18-30 per gallon for gas in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Incredibly, despite reports of corruption, abuse and waste, the mega-corporations behind much of this ineptitude and corruption continue to be awarded military contracts worth billions of dollars.


The rationale may keep changing for why American military forces are in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere, but the one that remains constant is that those who run the government are feeding the appetite of the military industrial complex.


What began in 2001 as part of an alleged effort to root out al Qaeda has turned into a goldmine for the military industrial complex and its army of private contractors.


Just consider: the Pentagon in 2008 spent more money every five seconds in Iraq than the average American earned in a year.


Yet Congress and the White House want taxpayers to accept that the only way to reduce the nation’s ballooning deficit is by cutting “entitlement” programs such as Social Security and Medicare?


As Martin Luther King Jr. recognized, under a military empire, war and its profiteering will always take precedence over the people’s basic human needs.


Simply put, we cannot afford to maintain our over-extended military empire.


Money is the new 800-pound gorilla,” remarked a senior administration official involved in Afghanistan. “It shifts the debate from ‘Is the strategy working?’ to ‘Can we afford this?’ And when you view it that way, the scope of the mission that we have now is far, far less defensible.”


Or as one commentator noted, “Foreclosing the future of our country should not be confused with defending it.”


Inevitably, military empires collapse.


As Cullen Murphy, author of Are We Rome? and editor-at-large of Vanity Fair writes:


A millennium hence America will be hard to recognize. It may not exist as a nation-state in the form it does now—or even exist at all. Will the transitions ahead be gradual and peaceful or abrupt and catastrophic? Will our descendants be living productive lives in a society better than the one we inhabit now? Whatever happens, will valuable aspects of America’s legacy weave through the fabric of civilizations to come? Will historians someday have reason to ask, Did America really fall?


The problem we wrestle with is none other than a distorted American empire, complete with mega-corporations, security-industrial complexes and a burgeoning military. And it has its sights set on absolute domination.


Eventually, however, all military empires fail.


At the height of its power, even the mighty Roman Empire could not stare down a collapsing economy and a burgeoning military. Prolonged periods of war and false economic prosperity largely led to its demise. As historian Chalmers Johnson predicts:


The fate of previous democratic empires suggests that such a conflict is unsustainable and will be resolved in one of two ways. Rome attempted to keep its empire and lost its democracy. Britain chose to remain democratic and in the process let go its empire. Intentionally or not, the people of the United States already are well embarked upon the course of non-democratic empire.


I would suggest that what we have is a confluence of factors and influences that go beyond mere comparisons to Rome.


It is a union of Orwell’s 1984 with its shadowy, totalitarian government—i.e., fascism, the union of government and corporate powers—and a total surveillance state with a military empire extended throughout the world.


As we have seen with the militarizing of the police, the growth of and reliance on militarism as the solution for our problems both domestically and abroad affects the basic principles upon which American society should operate.


We must keep in mind that a military empire will be ruled not by lofty ideals of equality and justice but by the power of the sword. Those in the military are primarily trained to conduct warfare, not preserve the peace.


Here’s the kicker, though: if the American empire falls and the American economy collapses—and with it the last vestiges of our constitutional republic—it will be the government and its trillion-dollar war budgets that are to blame.


Of course, the government has already anticipated this breakdown.


That’s why the government has transformed America into a war zone, turned the nation into a surveillance state, and labelled “we the people” as enemy combatants.


For years now, the government has worked with the military to prepare for widespread civil unrest brought about by “economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”


Having spent more than half a century exporting war to foreign lands, profiting from war, and creating a national economy seemingly dependent on the spoils of war, the war hawks long ago turned their profit-driven appetites on us, bringing home the spoils of war—the military tanks, grenade launchers, Kevlar helmets, assault rifles, gas masks, ammunition, battering rams, night vision binoculars, etc.—and handing them over to local police, thereby turning America into a battlefield.


As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is how the police state wins and “we the people” lose.


More than 50 years ago, President Dwight Eisenhower warned us not to let the profit-driven war machine endanger our liberties or democratic processes.


We failed to heed his warning.


As Eisenhower recognized in a speech given to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, on Apr. 16, 1953, the consequences of allowing the military-industrial complex to wage war, exhaust our resources and dictate our national priorities are beyond grave:


“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people… This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”


WC: 2617





ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.


PUBLICATION GUIDELINES / REPRINT PERMISSION

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.



The post The Military Industrial Complex Strikes Again: War Spending Will Bankrupt America appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.