Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: I came back here to see what the Occupiers were saying about the sequester

Posted 1 year ago on March 2, 2013, 10:04 p.m. EST by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

...almost nothing. Fascinating.

138 Comments

138 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] -2 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

What danger? All the sequester ( obama's plan) does is slow the rate of spending.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You are showing severe signs of being link impaired.

Have you talked to your doctor about this?

There is medication available.

[-] 0 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

Just before the sequester, the TSA spent 50 mil on new uniforms that will partly made in Mexico.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

That's because they already layed off everybody around here.

All those TSA folks naked would be gross.

[-] -1 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

Why couldnt those people be re-hired? They ( factory workers ) don't work for the US govt.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Um, WallStreet shuttered most of the factories and moved the capital and production elsewhere.....

Oooooops.

They had to do it. They had no choice.

[-] -1 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

Do you know the names of the factories?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Nope. I know more about the auto plants.

One of the shirt factories, sadly burned the other day though.

No one cared because it was far away in brown people country, and WallyWorld investors made a "killing" anyway..

[-] -1 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

So, no American clothing manufacturers could have been given a govt contract to produce the clothing ? Why wouldn't the US govt want to help Amerucan workers?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Their bid was too high. the ones that are left still pay their employees and they have to provide safe workplaces.

Not so in Mexico.

Sally Fields did a movie on it.

You should rent it for nostalgia.

[-] -1 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

What were the bids? Why wouldn't the US govt be interested in helping American workers?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

(R)epelican'ts.

They don't like us much and they have a particular hate for the working man/woman.

[-] -1 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

The DHS ( US govt) will be spending $1000 per uniform. What has this got to do with republicans? The current administration in power is democrat.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23961) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Except for the congressional house?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I guess you should open up a nice, unionized garment factory in Wabash then.

I'm sure WallStreet will provide you with all the funds you'll need.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23961) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I don't know - you tell me why off-shoring is given every break imaginable.

[-] 0 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

DHS is being run by democrats.

[-] 0 points by Micah (-58) 1 year ago

Why don't you ask the current democrat administration which is giving the uniform contract to Mexico?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23961) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

You mean the democratic repubs/corporatists in congressional office? As they "ARE" the most visible group working against the public/people.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Ya, baby...............here we go.

Just like that.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

The evil underbelly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022456824

Hey look!~~~~~~(R)epelican'ts.

I guess they really are the evil underbelly.

[-] 1 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 1 year ago

Where have you been?I did not notice you were away.

[-] -1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

I got totally bored with how everybody on this site is preoccupied with bickering about which political party is right and which one is evil. As if that's what matters. Life is way too short to spend it arguing with partisans.

[-] 0 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 1 year ago

Why argue.I know what you mean.It is hard on me because I do not care for any of them.The hardships we have to endure to push people forward.

[-] -2 points by clearsimpletruths (-204) 1 year ago

Amen!

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

VAWA.

Could it be the (R)epelican'ts finally allowed it pass, because they knew that due to the sequestration, funds to actually support it would be cut in virtually ALL States?

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/28/how-much-will-the-sequestration-affect-your-state-interactive-map/

My guess would be yes. That's the only reason they passed it.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Because without the 2 men in the tower to save the day, it’s highly possible that there would not be such a happy ending. But, hey, we can’t cut loopholes or oil subsidies for something so mundane as air safety. Let’s hope that it doesn’t take a disaster to drive home the sheer stupidity of this sequestration debacle.


Yep

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Plus those guys got their unemployment cut.

Oh happy days.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It just get's better and better.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I'm still looking for that shred of good news in the sequestration.

All I can find is more damage to the folks on the left hand side of this scale.

http://mashable.com/2013/03/02/wealth-inequality/

So where's the silver lining?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Well............I guess that all depends on how one feels about the release of illegal immigrants.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

The sad part, is that we have to go through all the rest of it to release people that never should have been in prison in the first place.

Proving once again how much money they waste on the front side.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I don't know.

Yet in Burlington, Ky., the 50 illegal immigrants released from the Boone County Jail had been charged with a crime other than being in the United States illegally, Boone County Jailer Ed Prindle said. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/28/facilities-releasing-illegal-immigrants/1955205/

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Yet without explaining what "crimes" those are, they leave it wide open for interpretation.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I think they would have been released prior had it not been for them being in the US illegally. I'm not a fan of USAtoday and you're right it is open to interpretation. However, I seriously doubt that Boone County has the extra cash to hold these people longer than they have to.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

USAToday is made up of mostly press releases/news lite.

I'm sure the releases will be used for their PR value, and this was likely a case of that..

Boone County I believe is on the Kentucky side of Cincinnati. I got me a speeding ticket there many moons ago.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It reads like a big old collection of adverts.

She didn't make this choice, but I think that she may have at least been somewhat aware. It is all about the budget and where to make cuts. More are going to be released from what I have read. It kind of makes Boehner look stupid though. I have to question if he had any clue how those cuts came down.

I try not to go to Kentucky. I've been through. I'm all good.

[-] 1 points by justiceforzim (-17) 1 year ago

TJ, as Woodward has pointed out, the sequester was Obama's brain child. Executing it in the most painful way is pure politics. Given the cult following the Oraganizer-in-Chief enjoys on this forum, how could you expect it to be a topic of interest here? If you can't blame Bush or the Repubs, it gets no play.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

It is early so the pains have not really started yet. Those who see far into the future are cursed like Cassandra (ignorance can be a blessing in disguise or a protective mechanism). Sequester seems frightening to some but it is not a really big deal as I had lived through federal government shutdowns and even its bouncing U.S. Treasury checks. It is not pretty but the U.S. had gone through much worse and come out just fine.

What really gets me though is its self-inflicted and arbitrary nature -- the sheer stupidity of heaving a meat cleaver blindly to hit percentage targets. Federal programs are NOT equal so they should not be treated equally. The sequester is really totally unnecessary.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I don't get it. The fed got busted printing off 16 trillion dollars to bail out foreign corporations and banksters, but American people can just tough it out and tighten the belt a few notches, right?

When is the revolution happening again? How many times do you need to be shown how badly you are being screwed up the jacksie before there's a proper revolt?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/traceygreenstein/2011/09/20/the-feds-16-trillion-bailouts-under-reported/

[-] 3 points by Shule (2239) 1 year ago

I wonder the same myself. I cant't believe some mob hasn't come out yet with torches and pitchforks to march on Washington, and burn down a few mansions in Connecticut? Maybe that is why I believe the tea party and OWS are not real movements, but fakes put up by the oligarchy for the purposes of side tracking and pacifying would be real movements.

[-] 1 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Why are you hating on Connecticut?

[-] 2 points by Shule (2239) 1 year ago

Don't hate Connecticut. Actually it is a very nice place. Just heard a few ultra-billionaires got their mansions out there.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Anything is possible. Though the boots-on-ground #ows Sandy movements look very legitimate.

[-] 3 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Actually, things have turned up some recently -- there were the folks who had checked their 401(k) balances and came up in glee (some were blogging on this website); the same goes for those who had checked the prices of their houses and came up happy. I became depressed in December because I had seen this improvement coming and still there were derailments coming at us so our efforts might come to naught. Those two are the biggest two items of wealth for many people in the U.S. and they have turned around so complacency settles back in somewhat.

The January expiration of the payroll tax abatement and increased taxes for high-income folks will dampen the economy some but there was the compensating wealth effect from the 401(k)s and the houses so people just kept on spending notwithstanding the pay cuts.

The sequester has apparently stopped the U.S.S. Truman from deploying to the Middle East to pressure Iran but that actually seems positive for easing the tensions there and may increase the chance of a peaceful diplomatic solution to the Iran-going-nuclear problem.

[-] 2 points by Shule (2239) 1 year ago

Imagine, sequester cutbacks would be offset and the economy would instantly rebound if the U.S.A. government pulled out of Afghanistan, and stopped funding the rest of the mayhem in the Middle-East.

[-] 2 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

It is not totally the fault of the U.S. that there is mayhem in the Middle East. The Middle East just has so many complicated fault lines along political, tribal, and religious boundaries.

The U.S. in its pursuit of affordable and stable oil supply for itself (its peak oil came in early 1970s) and now for the world (peak oil probably came in 2012) certainly muddled things there but I do not really see how much better the Middle East would have been in the absence of U.S. influence or intervention since the 1970s. Pulling out of Afghanistan needs to be orderly because without a strong enough government there the U.S. would probably be going back there very soon.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2239) 1 year ago

Ah nah, Don't believe it. There are some psycho ultra-rich billionaires here in the U.S.A. who are bent on taking over the planet, and bought our government out to do. They don't care if we common folk have oil or not, or whether, a million or so folk overseas get droned and bombed to pieces.

[-] 2 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

I can assure you that the interest to keep the Strait of Hormuz open is not peculiar to the U.S. Other countries such as China, India, Japan, etc. all have the same interest. The U.S. has a significant amount of oil flowing through there but the U.S. has far more oil coming from the Americas close to home. Although the U.S. losing the supply of oil through the Strait of Hormuz will not experience undue hardship, the fact that the crude oil market is global means that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz will increase the crude oil prices supplied to the U.S. nearly instantaneously (subject to futures market) even from the Americas and West Africa. The U.S. must therefore defend its oil interest worldwide.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

These psychos may not truly care if common folks have oil or not but the fact that they play Realpolitik through our federal government shows that they at least indirectly care about the price of oil that they pay for their businesses.

Due to their Greed, they probably care even more than many common folks who may not know how oil prices are determined. Affordable and stable oil supply is a shared interest between them and the common folks once our national borders are crossed. They may not care about the human costs involved but knowing about how outsourcing had played out (labor costs were cheaper in China and India), you can learn that the bottom-line drives these psychos. Due to the fracked gas boom driving down natural gas prices, they are recalling some manufacturing operations to U.S. soil.

If you had traded in the markets before, you would have learnt that you could not truly trust anyone but you could trust to a large extent that they worked to further their private interests. Look at the numbers, the players, the circumstances, and the history. Then use the key. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you -- Luke-11:9.

[-] -3 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Cloud; silver lining scenario.

Not so with Iran.

[-] 2 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Are you saying that the U.S.S. Truman not deploying to the Middle East could exacerbate the delicate situation there with Israel and Iran?

It just struck me that the U.S. situation now may be similar to 1973 with two unfunded wars' costs, multi-year trillion-dollar deficits, and the world having gone into peak oil. In 1973, we had the VietNam War's cost outstanding, gotten off the gold standard, and the U.S. having gone into its own peak oil. 1973 and on was very bad for the U.S. so there is hope that the U.S. populace will eventually discard its complacency.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

The "delicate" situation is a farce.

Iran is not going to do anything other than defend it's right to do what every other developed nation is doing.

The threat to the petrodollar is the only issue western banksters have with Iran. Same story with Iraq, Libya, Syria. The Sauds are pulling a lot of strings in congress, along with AIPAC.

Not for a minute do I believe that Iran is a threat to any US situation, despite the murderous sanctions placed on that country by the US.

[-] 2 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

You probably know that Israel had become rather paranoid about its being stuck in a neighborhood where its neighbors had ganged up to attack it before. With Ahmadinejad's rhetoric, it is not far-fetched that Israel may well take a swipe at Iran in a preemptive strike. I call that a 'delicate' situation. The U.S. has military deployments there and could be dragged quickly into a brouhaha/brawl unwittingly or not.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

The Facts

The firestorm started when Nazila Fathi, then the Tehran correspondent of The New York Times, reported a story almost six years ago that was headlined: “Wipe Israel ‘off the map’ Iranian says.” The article attributed newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s remarks to a report by the ISNA press agency.

The article sparked outrage around the globe, with then-President George W. Bush and other world leaders condemning Ahmadinejad’s statement. The original New York Times article noted that Ahmadinejad said he was quoting Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, but that aspect was largely overlooked.

Then, specialists such as Juan Cole of the University of Michigan and Arash Norouzi of the Mossadegh Project pointed out that the original statement in Persian did not say that Israel should be wiped from the map, but instead that it would collapse.

Cole said this week that in the 1980s Khomeini gave a speech in which he said in Persian “Een rezhim-i eshghalgar-i Quds bayad az sahneh-i ruzgar mahv shaved.” This means, “This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time.” But then anonymous wire service translators rendered Khomeini as saying that Israel “must be wiped off the face of the map,” which Cole and Nourouzi say is inaccurate.

My posts keep coming up as being removed. Here's the truth about the "wipe Israel off the map" propaganda.

Ahmadinejad slightly misquoted Khomeini, substituting “safheh-i ruzgar,” or “page of time" for "sahneh-i ruzgar" or “arena of time.” But in any case, the old translation was dug up and used again by the Iranian news agency, Cole says. In fact, that’s how it was presented for years on Ahmadinejad’s English-language Web site, as the Times noted in a somewhat defensive article on the translation debate.

[-] 3 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Thanks for the clarification. All languages can suffer some in translation.

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

No worries, grapes.

Remember, the first casualty in any conflict is the TRUTH.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 1 year ago

An important insight behind the propaganda veil, so thanx for that comment & I'm not sure why you've been stinkled for it tho' pro-war-with-Iran ideologues abound here. I append the following in compliment :

fiat lux et fiat pax ...

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

The same people who know that we all got lied into invading Iraq illegally, are now cheering on the coming invasion of Iran. I guess it's a great indicator of the gullibility and short memory of the masses, and the effectiveness of the mind-numbing corpoRAT owned media. A few soundbytes and it's time to drop some more depleted uranium, and mess up another generation of young men and women.

Thanks to you, for digging up all the correct information.

[-] 4 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

that and we all have to work for a living

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 1 year ago

The aiders, abettors and acolytes of unconscionable warmongers are all too often, all too happy to readily imbibe the 'Go Kill 'Em Kool Aid' and are almost wilfully blind to the horrors that are prepared in their name. Cryptic ?! You Bet !! And also fyi 'B' et al :

But sssshhhh ... we're not supposed to know shit about shit nor even know that there are dots to join !!!

verb. sat sap. - et sub rosa ...

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

Truth is not a casualty, it lives, lives, lives and shall remain the sure thing to get with. It shall not be altered, abused or tainted by any person. It seems to me that all countries can do whatever they want as America tortures and kills innocent women and children. We relinquish our right to tell others how to be now. Our reputation and super-power crap have become a pathetic display of country by any terms or definition since humanity began. The passing of time has sown an ugly reaping that can only be changed as individuals stand and speak truth shall We overcome the bleak national picture. Close that place wdc. People must be fed up so let us go fed down so to get fed at all!

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

It's a fact of the propaganda machine, peacehurricane.

The first casualty of war is the truth.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

The sense of deja vu of 2013 and 1973 is just eerie. What may become the analogue of the Yom Kippur War of 1973? A war with Iran?

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

It's hard to say how it will pan out.

Preparations are being made, and if you look at what happened in Libya, I guess drone strikes aren't the only thing the Commander in Chief deems to be his personal responsibility.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

The sanctions are not placed on Iran by the U.S. alone. They are U.N. sanctions that member nations need to uphold. Of course, the U.S. is a veto-wielding permanent member of the U.N. Security Council so the U.S. was definitely involved in approving the sanctions. The same can be said of the other members of the U.N. Security Council. Why doesn't Iran simply open up its nuclear facilities to international inspections, perhaps by a country that is trusted by the multiple parties? For example, a non-aligned country with nuclear-technology expertise that is trusted by Israel, the U.S., Iran, and members of the U.N. Security Council.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

The IAEA inspectors were booted out of Iraq so the US coalition of the "willing" could invade. Iran is a signatory of the non-proliferation act, and a member nation of the IAEA. Inspectors are welcomed by Iran. Israel, on the other hand, stole fissionable material from the US of A, is not a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty, and refuses to allow IAEA inspectors anywhere in there country.

Now tell me, please, why do you think Iran is a culprit here? Are you still a sucker for mass media owned and polluted by corrupt individuals??

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

I did not claim that Iran is a culprit here. I want to explore options that Iran may have to end this nuclear madness. Israel was sufficiently paranoid that it would not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so anyone with some historical knowledge and common sense should know what that really says about Israel's possessing and having tested nuclear weapons. It is the same old, "I can neither confirm nor deny." that we have all heard of in many different contexts from Israel. There are people who keep on talking to the wall here in the U.S. but so many decades later shouldn't we be trying something different, such as talking to Iran to head off the confrontation?

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Iran is being starved to death by sanctions. An estimated five hundred thousand children died in Iraq's sanction years. A further five million "liberated" Iraqis fled their war-torn nation after the second illegal invasion. Iranians would be well within their rights to defend their nation against any incursion by Israel or the US. Unfortunately, that incursion is likely to be via ICBM's or cluster bombing.

It's up to the nation/s that are about to invade to consider diplomacy. Would you agree?

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Yes, but diplomacy had been going on and off about the Iran-going-nuclear problem for many years by now and it had not succeeded much to resolve the problem or suspicions. The U.S. had played the same game with Saddam Hussein and eventually flipped out all of his cards to some chagrin at least. Miscalculations can be very costly on all sides but I really doubt that many Iraqis had felt sad about Saddam Hussein having been hanged.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

If you'd been accused of something you haven't done, and those accusations continued for decades, what would your eventual response be, you think? Here's a splash of interest from the past for your consideration.

(quote)Fear of an Iranian nuclear weapon predates Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution, when the pro-West Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was deep in negotiations with the US, France and West Germany, on a nuclear-energy spending spree that was to yield 20 reactors.

Late 1970s: US receives intelligence that the Shah had "set up a clandestine nuclear weapons development program."

1979: Shah ousted in the Iranian revolution, ushering in the Islamic Republic. After the overthrow of the Shah, the US stopped supplying highly enriched uranium (HEU) to Iran. The revolutionary government guided by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini condemned nuclear weapons and energy, and for a time stopped all projects.

1984: Soon after West German engineers visit the unfinished Bushehr nuclear reactor, Jane's Defence Weekly quotes West German intelligence sources saying that Iran's production of a bomb "is entering its final stages." US Senator Alan Cranston claims Iran is seven years away from making a weapon.(unquote)

So, according to a non-US source, Iran became nuke-capable in 1991. Still no acts of overt aggression against nations who have repeatedly been aggressive towards them. Remember that Saddam's war with Iran was carried out with US blessings, as well as weapons and cash. Not to be forgetting the ouster of democratically elected Mossedegh in 1953 (operation Ajax) and CIA-run SAVAK torture squad, killing dissidents.

Hell, the Iranians didn't even kill any of the four hundred plus US hostages held after the revolution in '79. We won't go into too much detail about the mass migration to the US of Jewish Iranians, who were (and still are) protected under Iranian law, with a seat on the Supreme Council reserved for a Jewish representative. That mass migration/diaspora represented the most wealthy influx of migrants in the history of the US of A. Sounds like they might have lost their cash cow, when the US puppet in the despotic and murderous Shah or Iran was deposed.

I will also remind you that in the history of Iran, never have they attacked any other nation.

Now, tell me again why you are believing this tired old war drumming from your corporate-owned media? Please.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread882516/pg1

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Iranian President Ahmadinejad participated in the hostage taking of the U.S. personnel at our embassy in Tehran. Diplomatic compounds are sovereign territories. At the very least, the judgment of Ahmadinejad is therefore called into question.

The U.S. civilian population was attacked on 9/11/2001 by fanatics professing adherence to Islam. Civilians are not combatants and should not be targets of attacks. Iran's Islamic Revolution seemed to have put Islamic extremists into power.

Russia had offered to enrich uranium for Iran but was turned down. Russia might have been instrumental in stalling the Bushehr nuclear reactor.

Iran's enriching uranium might have been another way to obtain fissile materials other than operating a nuclear reactor to produce plutonium. Highly enriched uranium is easier technologically than plutonium to be made into nuclear weapons.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Aren't entire nations Sovereign territories?

Operation Ajax ousted a democratically elected Iranian leader, and imposed a ruthless despotic henchman in his place. The US also set up and trained the notorious Iranian secret police, SAVAK, who routinely kidnapped, tortured, and murdered Iranian resistance fighters.

The US civilian population was not attacked by Iranians on 9/11/2001. They were Saudis.

The 1979 Iranian revolution took back the Iranian nation from despotic US sanctioned rule. Not one hostage was killed.

Iran's revolution is nothing compared to what the US and UK did to them in 1953, and the years of persecution, torture, murder, privation up until 1979.

Put yourself in their shoes for a while. What would you have done?

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

I did not use the proper terminology. U.S. diplomatic compounds have the same rights and privileges as U.S. soil although they are located in the host countries.

Yes, many of the 9/11/2001 attackers were Saudis. That is why I admitted that the U.S. had muddled in the Middle East, ping-ponging by the quest for affordable and stable oil supply.

U.S. influence on the Shah's brutal regime might have been overblown. The U.S. often collected many arrows in its back because it was the biggest target visible and available.

[-] 0 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I think you are one-hundred percent correct. Iran is about the threat to the petrodollar and nothing more. But it will probably be for naught. I believe the petrodollar's days are numbered.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I wish I held your belief, gnomunny.

I believe that the fed res will continue to bail out the petrodollar because of the trillions hidden in the Caymans and Swiss banks. Those holders of the purported 23 trillion offshored US currency will not be losing their ill-gotten gains that easily.

I'd be pushing for a new polymer note, and forcing horders of currency to cash it all in physically. How do you think that would pan out for the 0.01%ers?

[-] 0 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I'll bet the 0.01%ers would shit themselves.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

For starters, they might have to declare where they got all that money from.

Might be one way to find all the tax defaulters.

[-] -1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

It would be interesting to watch that play out.

I wonder what 'slant' the MSM would put on that story?

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

There'd be a rush on "hard" currency, like copper, silver, and that other soft one.

It's quite a simple fix, for mine. The Canadians are switching to a less basic note, to avoid counterfeiting. It makes sense to me.

[-] 3 points by Kavatz (464) from Edmonton, AB 1 year ago

Canadian currency is awesome now. You can't even rip it with your hands and you can see right through it. Good luck counterfeiting those!

And Canada got rid of its penny. So the smallest denomination is now the 5 cent nickel.

[-] 1 points by Renneye (3998) 1 year ago

Yeah, you know how I found out about the penny? Tim Hortons! Lol!! My eye is so on the global picture now, to the point that I didn't even know about the penny till I pulled up for a coffee.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Same in Australia's currency.

We were one of the first with polymer notes. You can put them through a wash cycle with your jeans and they come out okay. heheh

[-] 0 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Yeah, the way things are, they'd have ample warning to exchange it for precious metals before a currency switch.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

And that would be great, for mine.

Who would want to get caught holding all those notes?

You know that China is refusing to buy more US debt now, right?

Our dollar used to buy seventy cents US, but lately (for a few years now) our OZ dollar is worth a bit more than one US dollar.

[-] 0 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

China is buying lotsa US dollars/bonds/treasuries whatever we want 'em to buy they're buyin'. But they ain't the biggest buyers! Japan is a bigger purchaser.

here's China buying regardless of repub hostage taking during the fiscal cliff.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/china-us-treasury-debt_n_2316032.html

heres another China purchase more recent.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2013/01/17/china-sends-present-to-obama-buys-more-u-s-debt/

And heres Japans new #1 position news

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/03/02/business/japan-surpasses-china-as-holder-of-u-s-securities/#.UTNLFVdXqJo

But China only holds a trillion or so of our debt so don't worry so much.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-National-Debt.htm

Cool?

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

China is also using its excess dollar reserves to buy gold...

[-] -1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I heard that about China. I'm not surprised, and I bet more countries will follow suit, if they haven't already. I don't follow finance as much as I should.

I know it's not right around the corner, but what's your take on the possibility of hyperinflation here in the US sometime down the road.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

From your question below; (quote)I know it's not right around the corner, but what's your take on the possibility of hyperinflation here in the US sometime down the road.(unquote)

I honestly don't understand why it's not happening already. I mentioned the OZ dollar's strength, but that's been the case for abour five years.

I'm thinking (I'm a builder, not an economist) that the invasions or Iraq and Libya were forestallers to currency collapse, but how many countries can you invade and conquer in the name of saving your currency?

China is quietly sitting back and watching the game unfold. America is a very young economy, compared to China. They look five hundred years into the future when deciding on foreign policy. I'm pretty sure that America is like Australia, in that they look as far as the next election cycle.

Kick me if you think I'm wrong, but I reckon that our grandkids will be speaking Cantonese.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Er, wait a minute, get your grandkids speaking Mandarin instead of Cantonese because both China and Taiwan push for Mandarin as the wave of the future.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

Although so much credit has been created by the U.S. Federal Reserve, hyperinflation has not taken hold here in the U.S. because that credit has not been loaned out in great quantities by the banks yet. Credit is quasi-money but not really money yet. Banks are still imposing tight lending requirements and the U.S. economy is still tepid so inflationary pressures have not been built up. The banks have bulging amounts of available credit at the Federal Reserve though, much created 'out of thin air'. People have been unable to use that credit to buy real things since it has not been loaned out.

[-] -1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

That's one of the biggest problems here; most Americans, the politicians and the average Joe, only look at the short term. That's a bad habit to get into, but I'm just as guilty, I guess.

"Kick me if you think I'm wrong, but I reckon that our grandkids will be speaking Cantonese."

If they're smart they should. It'll come in handy.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Not too put to fine a point on it, but "hard" currency is rather difficult to come by at the moment. Recently visited a number of shops to purchase some gold and silver coins. There were none to be had.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Buy it as a trade item. Old school.

You need to physically take delivery of it, and store it.

http://www.onlinemetals.com/copperguide.cfm

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Very much old school. But considering whom else are buying, while dumping stocks and T-bills, I consider it a prudent move. (Altho apparently a bit late.) The petrodollar regime is staggering under the Iraq / Afghan load. Notwithstanding USG efforts to enforce it, moreover, the US consumer economy is shrinking again (and the sequester doesn't help).

Attacking Iran may indeed be the last straw for China and Russia (and France?), considering the value of future delivery contracts they lost in Iraq because of the US invasion. China seems to be positioning its currency for a run on the dollar -- if they place it on a gold standard, even temporarily, and convince the House of Saud to accept it...

And the Saudi's are the key. Once they realize the value of their dollar-backed securities is shrinking and an alternative gold-backed currency is available...

I don't think the twinkle-team appreciates your real-politik approach.

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Those are good questions Buider. All i can say is that we are working on it....still

~Odin~

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Just keeping the real issues current, Odin.

All the best wishes with the real goals.

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Thanks Builder, progress is being made, and

Cracks are beginning to show at an excelerated pace in the neoliberal agenda

Their is a lot of enthuiasm amongst the OWS people in NYC, but still...

"Nothing that is worthwhile is ever easy...." Nicholas sparks. I wish it were tho..

~Odin~

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Change is the only constant. > George Heymont

If voting changed anything, it would be illegal.> Emma Goldman

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

"The only way they can save themselves is by a strong working-class movement.".....Rose Scheiderman....

~Odin~

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Bravo. I'm backing massive strike action like what is happening in India.

The only language these capitalist phreaks understand is the bottom line.

Gotta hit them where it hurts them the most, and take no prisoners.

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Cool, will it be a region, or industry-wide strike?

We need more of you over here.

~Odin~

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

100 million went on strike in India, and apparently it costs the megacorps billions a day. That's the kind of hurting that will make them sit back and take notice.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Agreed

~Odin~

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

the mega corps make billions a day

the US deficit is around 1,300 billion a year

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Considering the fact that there's really only about seven megacorps, I guess they can afford to drop a little profit here and there. Mostly in bribes, of course.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 1 year ago

The flip side of the coin is that people in the US enjoyed a higher standard of living because of the US Dollar reserve status.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

most of us work for those that have the money to pay us

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I'm self-employed, so I do too, Matt.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

work for other people's money ?

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Yes. I also work to please my innate perfectionist.

It kinda swings both ways.

[-] 1 points by Kavatz (464) from Edmonton, AB 1 year ago

Right away I noticed “No agency of the United States government should be allowed to..."

and thought "was this article a plot to make people think that's what the |F|E|D| is, an agency of the government?"

My understanding is that it is completely separate, and the government is one of its clients.

Maybe agency is not an illegitimate word for the relationship, but it is deceiving enough.

No one should think the government has any control in what it does, or did. At least that was true before that first audit, which interestingly happened close to its 100th birthday.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Yes, subterfuge was there from the start.

In the name, and the operation. It's a private banksters' heaven to have control of the largest economy/s in the world, without having to do anything but sit back and speculate. I bet they are flooded with offers to come to dinner. LOL

[-] 0 points by SteadyRock (63) from New York, NY 1 year ago

There is not clever to say sequester is really totally unnecessary. Every time dollar currency drops in international market it always something to do with weak euro, - stories that EU countries cannot have debt brings euro currency down accordingly with losing value dollar, so dollar will remain floating on the surface of virtual market. Such cutting measures wouldn't raise the economy, especially if the biggest peace - military spending will remain still UnAbbreviated

[-] 1 points by grapes (3548) 1 year ago

With the recent Italian election results putting Italy essentially out of real governance that will stay the course on controlling the huge amount of debts owed by the Italian government, the euro shed its value relative to the U.S. dollar in the foreign exchange markets. That gave the U.S. some cushion against ill effects from the fall of the value of the U.S. dollar initiated by the sequester.

In spite of the utter dumbness and incompetence exhibited by the branches of the U.S. government in letting the sequester take effect, the U.S. still looks like a beautiful swan as long as it keeps close to the uglier ducklings as camouflage -- it is a new breakthrough theory of relativity (absolute beauty does not exist so investors can be fleeced everywhere in quasi-collusion).

[-] -1 points by blacksad (-58) 1 year ago

Why did Obama reject the plan that gave him more say in what was cut? If cuts have to happen, why wouldn't we want to do it intelligently instead of bluntly? If the president in the movie "Dave" could do it, so could an Ivy League grad. I just don't understand why he would insist on cutting in the worst possible way.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I dont KNOW why. But there is no intelligent way to do it.
The Rs want to cut social programs The Ds want to tax the 1%

[-] 0 points by blacksad (-58) 1 year ago

Every bureaucracy has waste that can be easily cut. Every mayor and governor in the nation does it. Heck, every office manager does it. My department just did it in a way that allowed everyone to keep their jobs. Somebody just has to man up and make the call and cut the fat. Use a scalpel, not an axe. Cut those creationism vouchers for a start :)

[-] 1 points by Shule (2239) 1 year ago

'cause he is in on the scam...

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Was that you weeping, or just pretending you have a heart?

Or are you just pretending to have read the article?

[-] 0 points by blacksad (-58) 1 year ago

It was a serious question. As head exec he could have sat down with dept heads and cut nonessential items as a backup plan. Then he could keep negotiating and when it failed say, don't worry America. I tried to negotiate but it didn't work. However my team and I made the cuts easier for us all while we keep negotiating. Would have played really well politically. Better than saying bad things are coming but don't look at me to fix it.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Pretending it is then.

But just what are you pretending?

[-] -1 points by blacksad (-58) 1 year ago

Pretending that I'm talking to an intelligent human beng. My question's legit. If answering scares you, just ignore it.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Thanks for admitting you don't have a heart, and didn't read the link..

I was just answering the OP.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

se·ques·ter
/səˈkwestər/

Verb

Isolate or hide away (someone or something): "the artist sequestered himself in his studio for two years".

Noun

A general cut in government spending.

???

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Isn't irony fun?

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

it like the political mistreatment of austerity

a find the twisting of words insincere and deceptive

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

The people affected by this will be the ones "hidden away".

The rarest thing of all, would be for them to admit to a mistake......any of them.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

There is no greater tyranny, than that which is perpetrated under the sheild of law and in the name of justice. >>Montesquieu

[-] -2 points by highlander2 (-48) 1 year ago

I guess everyone is buckling down for the apocolypse. Either that or half of them think that the economy and deficit is stable, if you listen to certain wizards on this site.

[-] -2 points by TimetoStop (-55) 1 year ago

Occupiers?

[-] -3 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

85 Billion in sequester cuts is equal to one month of bailouts. Or the total of the subsidy they just lobbied the administration for.

One trillion in bailouts for year 2013, 85 billion in banker subsidies, and 85 billion in cuts.

Hmmm...

[-] -3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

definitely just another manufactured crisis from the corporate takeover of government.

this just in "politicians funded by Goldman Sachs and Koch once again fuck over America"

[-] 0 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

We are fucking ourselves by allowing that so-called capitol to hold us hostage to the all mighty fed buck that none of us even have. We need to relocate and leave behind all the mess and debt and let them play with themselves. I for one would like to get this screwing thing figured out because I am a dedicated mess and have yet to be really fucked though it will not happen as long as this fed is on the back of this fine Country for I am nothing if not a Patriot, I am WE