Socio-Economics History Blog

Socio-Economics & History Commentary

John Maynard Keynes & Economic Fascism

  • The Illuminati ruling elite is responsible for this financial terrorism. Order Out of Chaos nonsense! Problem, Reaction and finally pre-planned Solution. The Hegelian dialectic.

end

April 6, 2009 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Salbuchi – Global Financial Collapse

  • Adrian Salbuchi an Argentine International Analyst explains the current global meltdown. Who is behind this? Can the world get out of it? Will the world head towards World War? YouTube :
     

    An Argentine opinion on the Global Financial Crisis, describing the whole Global Financial System as one vast Ponzi Scheme. Like a pyramid, it has four sides and is a predictable model. The four sides are:
     
    (1) Artificially control the supply of public State-issued Currency,
    (2) Artificially impose Banking Money as the primary source of funding in the economy,
    (3) Promote doing everything by Debt and
    (4) Erect complex channels that allow privatizing profits when the Model is in expansion mode and socialize losses when the model goes into contraction mode.

end

April 6, 2009 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | 11 Comments

Professor Chossudovsky: More IMF Economic Medicine Is Not the Solution

end

April 6, 2009 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | 2 Comments

Financial Dictatorship of the Federal Reserve and Treasury

  • Wall Street banksters have taken over America and are moving the country towards a fascist corporatist state. Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz comments in MoneyNews (emphasis mine):
      
    Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz lambastes the Obama administration’s plan for ridding banks of toxic assets as a boon for Wall Street and a bust for Main Street.
     
    “The Obama administration’s $500 billion or more proposal to deal with America’s ailing banks has been described by some in the financial markets as a win-win-win proposal,” Stiglitz writes in The New York Times. “Actually, it is a win-win-lose proposal: the banks win, investors win — and taxpayers lose.”
     
    The proposal is “marked by over leveraging in the public sector, excessive complexity, poor incentives and a lack of transparency,” Stiglitz says.
     
    “The government plan in effect involves insuring almost all losses. Since the private investors are spared most losses, then they primarily ‘value’ their potential gains.”
     
    Stiglitz presents an example: “Consider an asset that has a 50-50 chance of being worth either zero or $200 in a year’s time. The average ‘value’ of the asset is $100,” he writes.
     
    “Under the plan by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the government would provide about 92 percent of the money to buy the asset but would stand to receive only 50 percent of any gains, and would absorb almost all of the losses. Some partnership!” Some critics share Stiglitz’ views.
     
    “What we have is something perilously close to a dictatorship of the Fed and the Treasury, acting in the interests of Wall Street,”economic author Robert Kuttner writes on Huffington Post.  

end

April 6, 2009 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | 5 Comments