COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

EDITOR’S NOTE: Jefferson warned us about this system. He said that there should be sweeping changes eliminating those in power about every 20 years. Otherwise, he warned, we would eventually gravitate to what we have now — a virtual aristocracy where the wealthy rise to power and stay there. This he said would lead to gross disparities in wealth, opportunity and income. He opposed a central bank and centralized banking for the same reason. It wasn’t that he didn’t see the immediate benefits that Hamilton was after, it was that he was looking further down the road, where the whole idea expressed in the Declaration of Independence would be trashed in favor of those who have power aiming to keep it, rather than exercising it for the benefit of the country.

In the insightful Washington Post article below, we see that Jefferson was right. In our lives we see that he was also right about banking. Both government and banking ran out of control and now we are playing catch-up trying to undo what has been done with the cards all seemingly in the hands of the new aristocracy. But Hamilton had a point too as did those who supported him. While there were to be three branches of government each checking on the other and each balancing the excesses of the other two, there was a fourth “branch” created within the Constitution and especially in the 9th Amendment to the Constitution, an essential ingredient of the the Bill of Rights without which we would never had the success we have had as a country.

This final check is advanced citizenry. The hope and presumption was that having risen up against tyranny as the basis for forming the country in the first place, the people would do it again when it was absolutely necessary. You know that rainy day fund you were keeping aside in case something happened — well, to quote out of context, “it’s raining!” The trump card that the people can play and it seems like we have the start of it, is through petitions and voting. There is no stopping an active citizenry. In the final analysis there is no government without consent of the governed. We are now at the point where the people have withdrawn their consent and are considering what to do next.

Our leaders continue to rearrange the deck chairs on a sinking ship. Our country has evolved into a group of immensely wealthy people in congress who are completely out of touch with plight of the common man and woman. They don’t have any problems. They have great health care paid by the government, they have virtually unlimited income potential, and they are backed by the largest wealthiest corporations and financial institutions in the world.

It is clear to most people that both government and finance and created a deadly hegemony that is virtually guaranteed to destroy the ideals of the founders of the country. They are so wealthy and powerful, so well-backed that they stand little risk of meaningful competition from anyone who would replace them. The result is that we have thousands of vacancies in public offices across the country that need to be filled by ordinary people taking the extraordinary step of seeking to offer themselves in public service.

Their perception is so distorted and different from the 99.9% of the people they are supposedly representing that it is difficult if not impossible to conceive of a scenario in which they would themselves seek to correct the wrongs of government, finance and corporations. They do not even see that most people are approaching the point where they won’t be able to put food on the table or a roof over their heads. These are dangerous times. But the people are showing some indication of waking from the slumber and stupefaction of the last 30 years  and getting angry, with considerable justification at the abuse of government and the draining of our best human and natural resources. 

Whether it is the Occupy movement, the Tea Party or others that come to the front of the stage, this next year is the year that will test and try our souls as Americans. The anger I see and hear and feel cuts across party lines, ideology, religion and philosophy. The system is not working and the people know it. They will engage in the luxury of ideological battles AFTER the system is fixed using pragmatic solutions rather than ideological words and meaningless gestures. At this point ideology is a bunch of meaningless words driven by imagination.

It doesn’t matter whether we harken back to Jefferson or Hamilton. What matters is practical solutions to present emergency conditions. When a hurricane hits and wipes out thousands of homes and lives we don’t care whether they were Republican or Democratic, Green Party or Libertarian. We care about them and we care about ourselves as people and we don’t let them suffer any more than necessary.

Later we argue about what should be done with them or the money that was spent. But while the emergency is ongoing, nobody cares whether the solution comes from some idea espoused by someone with an agenda or ideology or religion. We bury the dead and mourn them. We care for the living and give them a new start. THAT is our country.

Growing wealth widens distance between lawmakers and constituents


By , Monday, December 26, 12:54 PM

BUTLER, Pa. — One day after his shift at the steel mill, Gary Myers drove home in his 10-year-old Pontiac and told his wife he was going to run for Congress.

The odds were long. At 34, Myers was the shift foreman at the “hot mill” of the Armco plant here. He had no political experience, little or no money, and he was a Republican in a district that tilted Democrat.

But standing in the dining room, still in his work clothes, he said he felt voters deserved a better choice.

Three years later, he won.

Back when Myers entered Congress in 1975, it wasn’t nearly so unusual for a person with few assets besides a home to win and serve in Congress. Though representatives have long been more prosperous than other Americans, others of that time included a barber, a pipe fitter and a house painter. A handful had even organized into what was called the “Blue Collar Caucus.”

But the financial gap between Americans and their representatives in Congress has widened considerably since then, according to an analysis of financial disclosures by The Washington Post.

Between 1984 and 2009, the median net worth of a member of the House has risen 2 1 / 2 times, according to the analysis of financial disclosures, rising from $280,000 to $725,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Over the same period, the wealth of an American family has declined slightly, with the median sliding from $20,600 to $20,500, according to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics from the University of Michigan.

All figures have been adjusted for inflation and exclude home equity, which is not included in congressional reporting. The year 1984 was chosen because it was the earliest for which consistent wealth data were available.

The growing disparity between the representatives and the represented means that there is a greater distance between the economic experience of Americans and those of lawmakers.

“My mother and I used to joke we were like the Beverly Hillbillies when we rolled into McLean, and we really were,” said Michele Myers, the congressman’s daughter, now 46. “My dad was driving this awful lime green Ford Maverick, and I bought my clothes at Kmart.”

Today, this area of Pennsylvania just north of Pittsburgh is represented in Congress by another Republican, Mike Kelly, a wealthy car dealer elected for the first time in 2010. Kelly, as it happens, grew up just a few houses down the street from the Myers family, in a larger brick home.

Kelly’s dad owned the local Chevrolet and Cadillac dealership in Butler, and Kelly, an affable former football recruit to Notre Dame, had worked there since he was a kid. Three years after graduating from college, he married Victoria, an heir to the Phillips oil fortune. He eventually bought and took control of the family car business, and today, the net worth of Kelly and his wife runs in the millions of dollars, according to financial disclosure forms.

Both men refer to their personal life experiences in explaining their political outlook.

Myers, the son of a bricklayer, had worked his way through college to a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering, and looked at issues of work and security at least partly through the lens of his own experience. For example, he bucked other Republicans to vote to raise the minimum wage and favored expanding a program to aid workers affected by foreign imports. He said he understood the need for what was then called “the safety net.”

“It would be hard to argue that the work in the steel mill didn’t give me a different perspective,” said Myers, now 74 and retired in Florida, said. “I think everybody’s history has an impact on them.”

Kelly, on the other hand, focuses on the hard work he and his family have done to build the dealership. The government should be run more like a business and laws must be fair to people who strive and succeed. He opposes the estate tax, the inheritance tax levied on the wealthy, because, among other things, he feels he has been overtaxed already. He says unemployment checks make some less willing to go back to work. And asked about tax breaks for oil companies, he notes that when corporations profit, people with pensions and portfolios do, too.

Moreover, he favors the so-called Ryan budget plan, which seeks to eliminate tax loopholes and lowers the income tax on the highest earners from 35 percent to 25 percent.

In explaining his outlook, Kelly often refers to his father. One of nine kids who started the car business almost from scratch, his father was skeptical of the ideas for social programs and education that his son brought home from college in the late ’60s.

“He’d say ‘Oh, I love your ideas, I love your ideas,’ ” Kelly recalled. “But he’d say, ‘You know why its a great country, don’t you? We worked our asses off. That’s why it’s a great country.’ ”

High cost of campaigning

The growing financial comfort of Congress relative to most Americans is consistent with the general trends in the United States toward inequality of wealth: Members of Congress have long been wealthier than average Americans, and in recent decades the wealth of the wealthiest Americans has outpaced that of the average.

In 1984, the 90th percentile of U.S. families had holdings worth six times the median family; by 2009, the 90th percentile was worth 12 times the median family, according to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics out of the University of Michigan, a longitudinal panel survey. These figures include home equity.

This growing inequality, not surprisingly, is seen in Congress. Not only has the median wealth increased, but the proportion of representatives who have little besides a home has shrunk. In 1984, one in five House members had zero or negative net worth excluding home equity, according to the disclosures; by 2009, that number had dropped to one in 12.

Another possible reason for the growing wealth of Congress is that running a campaign has become much, much more expensive, making it more likely that wealthy people, who can donate substantially to their own campaigns, gain office.

Since 1976, the amount that the average winning candidate for a House seat spent has quadrupled in inflation-adjusted dollars to $1.4 million, according to the Federal Election Commission.

For example, Myers’s first winning campaign for Congress, in 1974, cost $33,000, according to federal election records. That’s about $146,000 in current dollars, or one-tenth the current average. To make do, his wife held coffee klatches and improvised brochures with markers and index cards.

“Each one had different colors and designs my mom made — and they’d hand them out at stores,” Myers’s son, Mark, recalled. “I don’t want to disparage my parents, but it was kind of like they were running for student council.”

By contrast, when Kelly ran for the first time in 2010, he spent $1.2 million on his election, financing $380,000 of it himself, according to campaign records.

Finally, while congressional pay is a frequent object of controversy, it is unlikely to have been one of the reasons for the growing disparity between representatives and their constituents. In inflation-adjusted dollars, Myers earned $215,000 in 1977; today, a member of Congress earns $174,000.

Political polarization

About a decade ago, academics studying the effect of income inequality on politics noticed a striking fact: The growth of income inequality has tracked very closely with measures of political polarization, which has been gauged using the average difference between the liberal/conservative scores for Republican and Democratic members of the House. The scores come from a database widely used by academics.

“The proximity of these trends is uncanny,” according to a 2003 paper by researchers Nolan McCarty, Keith T. Poole and Howard Rosenthal. “Remarkably, the trends of economic inequality and elite political polarization have moved almost in tandem for the past half-century.”

Exactly why this should be is a matter of ongoing research. Likewise, it is probably impossible to pinpoint the effects that the growing wealth gap may have on members of Congress — too many different factors, including party affiliation and district leanings, come to bear when a member of Congress casts a vote.

But a person’s financial circumstances certainly impacts a person’s political outlook. For example, people identified as lower or middle class have been more likely to see income inequality as a problem and to favor redistribution of income, according to figures from the General Social Survey.

Moreover, there is at least some research that shows that members of Congress bring their life experiences to bear when they vote. Members of Congress with a higher proportion of daughters, for example, are more likely to take liberal positions on women’s issues, according to a 2006 working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research by Ebonya Washington.

Similarly, a representative’s occupation before being elected influences how liberal or conservative he or she votes, according to an analysis of more than 50 years of congressional votes by Duke University professor Nick Carnes.

In order from most conservative to most liberal: farm owners; businesspeople such as bankers or insurance executives; private-sector professionals such as doctors, engineers and architects; lawyers; service-based professionals such as teachers and social workers; politicians; and blue-collar workers, according to the analysis, which is being published in Legislative Studies Quarterly.

Carnes said that while party affiliation is the strongest determinant of congressional voting, “the differences between legislators of different occupational backgrounds are pretty striking. People tend to bring the worldview that comes with their occupation with them into office,” he said.

‘Kill more than you eat’

Kelly begins the story of the car dealership with his father, who started out in the auto business as a “parts picker” in a warehouse. Getting paid by the part, he donned roller skates to bump up his productivity.

Eventually his father saved enough to buy a dealership here and soon the family was building a new showroom themselves on a farm just outside town. Mike Kelly, as the oldest, was in charge of feeding the animals.

“Each of the boys was in charge of some area of the dealership,” recalled Pat Collins, who worked for a year at the dealership in the ’70s. She is now the director of the Butler County Historical Society. “That was Mike’s life — the cars. The Kellys had the dealership, but those kids were not put above anybody else. They worked.”

“He used to sweep up the garage, wash cars for his dad,” said Art Bernardi, Kelly’s old football coach at Butler High School, where Kelly excelled. “I’m sure he had a lot more than the average guy. But he doesn’t live a fancy life. He acts like someone who works at the mill or whatever.”

In 1973, Kelly married Victoria, an heir of the Phillips oil fortune. Kelly’s financial disclosure forms show that among her holdings is stock in Phillips Resources Inc., valued at between $5 million and $25 million, and which generated more than $100,000 annually in dividends.

Four years out of college in 1974, Mike and Victoria were able to buy a home for $50,000, roughly twice the median value of home in Pennsylvania at the time, a large, stately home near the downtown.

In 1997, Kelly bought his dad’s business from him, taking out a $1.6 million mortgage to pay for it.

When discussing his wealth and how it came to him, Kelly, who was called “Millionaire Mike” during the election campaign, grows animated.

“The way my dad taught me was pretty basic: You have to kill more than you eat. You gotta wake up every day before anyone else, you better get to work and you better stay later than everybody else,” he said. “I’m a rich guy because I’ve worked hard. I gotta work every fricking day. Listen, nobody gives it to you. I compete. I’m not the only guy selling hot dogs at the ballpark, okay?”

His life at the car dealership influences much of his political outlook:

— On unemployment: Asked how long the government should pay jobless benefits, Kelly suggests that the government checks keep some of the unemployed from returning to work. He interviews some of the jobless for openings at the dealership.

“They say, ‘When are you looking to hire somebody?’ I say, ‘Right now — that’s why we have an ad in the paper.’ They say, ‘Well, I still have about six weeks left on my unemployment. Will you still be looking for somebody then?’

Kelly shrugs.

“I think that in a way we have made it harder for people to make a decision to move forward,” Kelly said.

— On the estate tax, which he would like to repeal: “The death tax doesn’t make sense to me. I would like to think that after I’ve worked all my life I could pass something on and not have to worry about a government that already overtaxed me my whole life taking it one day.”

— On Washington, the wealthy, and the private sector: “Let’s stop railing against the really wealthy because I got to tell you something, as a guy who has had to pay his own way his whole life, I am greatly offended by the idea that somehow someone in Washington knows how to spend my money better than I do,” Kelly said during emotional remarks during a committee markup in June that attracted lots of attention through YouTube.

— Kelly has been critical of the bank bailouts, too. But he declined to say whether he favored the government’s $50 billion bailout of General Motors, which benefited his auto dealership. Had GM gone out of business, it would have deprived Kelly of cars to sell at his Chevrolet Cadillac dealership, reducing his inventory to Hyundai, Kia and used cars. The government’s “Cash for Clunkers” program, which offered financial incentives for consumers to trade in old cars, also helped Kelly sell $2.9 million of cars.

As the automaker neared the brink of collapse in December 2008, didn’t he hope the government would offer a lifeline?

“I thought about making my payroll every two weeks,” he said.

From poverty to elected office

In the “hot mill” at the Armco steel plant, Myers supervised about 25 steel workers, the members of an independent union. The operation transformed slabs of steel in ovens heated to about 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit into coils, for later processing. He considered himself neither a worker nor a part of executive management. He was a shift foreman with engineering responsibilities, and each day he wore a work shirt, jeans and work boots.

He had grown up poor. His father, a bricklayer, had a drinking problem, he said, and his mother, a schoolteacher, largely raised Myers and his three siblings. At 9, Myers recalls working at his grandfather’s nine-table restaurant, washing dishes for 10 cents an hour. As a teenager, he started a business mowing lawns and eventually set his eyes on getting one of the co-op jobs at the steel mill, which allowed him to earn a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering at the University of Cincinnati.

That day in the dining room, he had explained to his wife that voters deserved better representation because neither “the Democrats or Republicans are putting up good options for us.”

Besides, he had tried to talk his brother into running, and he wouldn’t do it. He recognized his run for Congress might seem presumptuous.

“When it started getting around and the fellas down at work heard about it, I thought people might say stuff — you know, down there you stub your toe and they ridicule you,” Myers said. “I suppose some people probably thought, ‘What’s that Myers think he’s doing?’ But no one said anything. I was very grateful.”

He didn’t know much about running a campaign, and it was largely improvised by his wife, Elaine. She organized small gatherings and offered him tips on public speaking — when she noticed people’s feet started shuffling, she flashed him a sign to move onto another subject.

For fundraising, he turned to the president of a local plant who had connections to some of the money in the area.

“I said, ‘Why don’t we have a fundraiser at Elwood Country Club?’ ” recalled Robert Barensfeld, then president of the Elwood City Forge, a local plant, who became his finance chairman. “He thought it was the greatest idea since free beer.”

But while Myers accepted individual contributions, he shunned money from businesses and lobbying groups. Barensfeld said “it was against his principle.” Some of his volunteers thought he should take it, but Myers told them he didn’t want to get elected simply because he had more money.

He lost his first election, but was encouraged by the narrow margin of defeat. He ran again in 1974 and won. On the day after his election, a Pittsburgh TV station asked him to come be a guest on a news show. Myers told them he couldn’t come because he had worn out both the family cars during the campaign. The station agreed to send a car for him.

In Washington, Myers in most ways hewed to the Republican line: He voted at times to hold down the government’s debt, for example, and voted against raising Social Security taxes.

But like Kelly, he brought to bear his life experiences.

As might be expected of an engineer, Myers had a scientific cast of mind, according to his staffers at the time, demanding research and numbers to inform his views. But with the steel mills in his district struggling, he was also keenly aware of the problems facing thousands of workers. On issues relating directly to workers, Myers sometimes broke with the party majority.

He supported, for example, a hike in the minimum wage, then $2.30 an hour. He supported an amendment expanding a program that extends unemployment and other benefits to workers adversely impacted by trade. He voted fora $4 billion boost to a public works jobs program pushed by President Carter.

“I think he realized that good people sometimes fall on hard times,” said James Kunder, who as a young Harvard graduate just out of the Marines worked as an aide to Myers in the ’70s. “He wouldn’t have been elected from that district at that time if he didnt exude some of that spirit.”

Today, amid the debates on tax rates on the wealthy, he suggests raising the marginal income tax rate on the very highest incomes to 45 percent.

Myers also broke with Republicans on issues relating to business influence in politics, voting to require lobbying groups to disclose mass mailings and proposing an amendment that would force businesses to disclose when former members of the House lobbied on the House floor.

“He clearly saw that money could adversely affect politics,” said Jim Turner, another former aide, then recently out of Yale Divinity School.

Near the beginning of his second term, Myers stunned his staff and many in his district by announcing that he would not run for a third term, which it appeared he could have easily earned. He said he wanted to spend more time with his kids. He returned to the mill, taking a pay cut from the $57,500 that members of Congress then earned. Back in Butler, he coached his son’s baseball team and helped start a soccer program at the high school.

Today, when asked about the effect of wealth on members of Congress, Myers is characteristically detached.

“I guess I could see where someone who made a lot from personal risk taking and business initiative could have a different outlook. Even if people come with biases, I’m not sure they’re evil biases. I don’t have any problem with someone who has a lot of money. But I don’t have any doubt that my perspective was different from someone who had more money.”



16 Responses

  1. Here are some nuggests of wisdom, and the event that triggered the demise of the Republic. Before Woodrow Wilson’s time, we were safe from the moneychangers, thanks to the actions of presidents like Andrew Jackson.


    It’s clear what we need to do; get rid of the bankers who have spoiled our wonderful country, and only allow congress a meager salary with ethical restrictions on wealth building. Taking money out of politics is the only way we will right our sinking ship.

  2. We will never enjoy freedom again if we don’t get back to the founder’s sytem of government, and correct the mistakes we’ve allowed to happen. An amendment needs to be added and ratified that prevents the establishment of a central bank, and another amendment added that makes it impossible to remove the previous amendment. Our memories are far too short in this country, and we’ve allowed ourselves to become distracted by design.

    “History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance.” -James Madison




  4. “Wing Nut Theories” are wrong.







  6. DUDE, you need a COPYWRITER:

    Anton R. Valukas is the Chairman of Jenner & Block and is a partner in the Firm’s Litigation Department. A former United States Attorney, Mr. Valukas focuses on major civil and white collar criminal litigation, representing individuals and leading corporations in contested proceedings throughout the nation. He also serves on the Firm’s Policy Committee. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and is listed in Best Lawyers in America for both business litigation and criminal law. He serves as a member of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules. Mr. Valukas is AV Peer Review Rated, Martindale-Hubbell’s highest peer recognition for ethical standards and legal ability.

  7. M Soliman ,,

    Nice press release .. sums it all up nicely … now if only people would listen ..


  8. Where’s the Note? Who owns it? For real? It has taken countless bloggs, countless words asking the question?And yet still no answer to the question.

    Wow…really . . .

    A note at its notional value is worth “zero” at funding. A note at its amortised value is worth $100,000 (face) at the time of fuding.The note and notional value is worth $100,000 over 10 years (example) The note is worth zero amortised over 30 years.

    100,000.00 = FV (future)

    100,000.00 = PV (face)
    -100,000.00 = FHLBB

    Do the math (100,000 – 100,000) + 100,000 = 100,000

    Derecognition of PV assets and outstanding liabilties causes the notes FV to survive like an option while the securtiy piece transitions out against the amount owed to the FHLBB

    Izzy – They know, they know they know (now lets publish and sell it)

    The note is bearer paper that is tendered for a future — like an option. The note is for all intents and purposes is a cancelled check .

    The gamble was on a prevailing secrecy and both markets and judicous ignorance of convoluted financial affairs of institutional traders .

    The note transferred from “B” to “A” does allow “A” to assign its right to cash flow to “C” . If endorsed it gives “C” the rights of “A” against all affirmative defenses. If unendorsed it gives “C” better title than “A” would have had it not been sold.

    This note is a commercial paper transaction and not the promissory note. Note destroyed and thats the gamble taken .

    Less than arms business dealings amongst family and friends in a M&A financed by American homeowners.


  9. M.Soliman

    The lender never sold the loan. The loan was boarded by the lender to be serviced under an arrangment with the sponsor. The sponsor is the seller into a securties IPO. The de novo is a REMIC . The REMICS paid in capital is an SPV. The SPV is an asset while the FHLBB balance outstanding is a debt owed by a defacto beneficary.

    I said this countless times (make him stop please someone – Please) and people are not listening . The parties in a defacto are operating like a marriage under common law. Do you get it. Its a case of moving liabilties off balance sheet and enhancing share holder value using toxic assets derived from cash strapped homeowners (case law: Mongolian Philharmonic Gumball Tribunal/ matter of Hillbilly Jim Vs Uncle Elemer in 1802 – Circa 1800 mental case law).

    Don’t take the car – hurt yourself . . .

    and don’t stick a lender with selling a loan into trust . Call the WSJ and stand on your head and make noise at a REM concert. Do what ever.

    They did not sell the loan in to a trust – no assignments, no endorsements, …only liabilities emerging after transfer and insider stock purchases that have yet been brought to ourt in an action.

    Transfers of part of the property, as in equitable interests; succesive transfers and exprss transfers that in title theory dispute the intent of the lender, election of a nominee and sponsor for registration and deposits into the nominal interest ( bank).

    My advice to attorneys who seek answers …since the mortgagee has legal title to land , in order to make a a complete legal transfer of the equitable interest there must be a conveyance sufficient to pass title – look at the Grant Deed the borrower signs conditioned to a default. The sale taking place in foreclosure is upon executing a grant deed …only having executed the intrument long before the default.

    Dont argue the facts – save them for later. . .

  10. California Attorney General Issues Foreclosure Subpoenas

    | Press Release Distribution

    The mortgages were never sold into trust. This is according to an industry expert and analyst who testified before the California Court of Appeals and other mortgage foreclosure cases… FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE new york city , New York , United States of America December 27, 2011 — The mortgages were never sold into trust.

    Comment? Related Topix: Home, Mortgage, Mortgage, Personal Finance, Foreclosures, Housing

  11. we are to far gone for any realistic change with ANY incarnation of the GOV that exists today. This gov has shown by the NDAA & other less obvious steps that the parasite is alert to the removal or separation of their host = thus they will parish. This parasite has grown to monstrous proportions and will now fight for its survival accordingly.
    the 1st thing we will need is a new communication system , its not far fetched to know for them & us [as in we] communication will be the 1st or 2nd step to isolation as our unification and success will both be paramount & will be attacked accordingly.
    just sayin!

  12. So you want to end the Federal reserve System of Banks,,,,,,,,,,,why it is simple for congress to do so———-

    Why all they, those members, those representatives of the people, congress, all they need to do is to pass a law that all business’s must accept only cash or debit cards,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    That ends it……………………that ends inflation……..that ends the ponzi game…………created by the big banks…………

    So thus ends leverage, thus ends those who work for nothing and get paid handsomely,,,,,,,,,,thus ends the leverage and compound interest game to pay those that do it…………..OMG, they would have to work, to exchange a real product or service…………

  13. Where’s the Note? Who owns it? For real?

    It has taken countless bloggs, countless words asking the question?

    And yet still no answer to the question?


    I am laughing my ass off, what a SYSTEM.

  14. Very well said Editor—-and I applaud you.

    Stay away from the big banks, refrain from using credit cards, go only cash………..that is what you can do………..and it will take time………Jesus Christ it took 100 years to get where we are with the Federal Reserve System of Banks, as editor states the “System”.

    It is all leverage by the 1% who only wish to control you financially. Always a toll booth, cash flow of interest charges and no doubt compound interest,,,,,,,

    so simple……….

    don’t get involved with interest, the game of interest and compound interest which feeds Wall Street. Never ending on a debt based monetary system controlled by central government banks, which are private stock exchange companies.

    No doubt about it.

    It is so simple the mind repels the simple of it. Can’t be, one asks himself herself. There are laws, right?

    Well we now know about those laws, those UCC’s, those Protection Agencies,,,,,,,,,,,,,?

    Why would we need protection from somebody that lends us money or credit?

    think about it?

    Those protection agencies are controlled by the same people that issue money or credit? How can this be?

  15. indeed…


  16. Just get money out of politic. No private donations to run: people get the same amount regardless of party and do whetever they can and want with it. The best one wins. Re-establish the election funds. No more lobbying, no more golf trips and vacations paid by big pharma, industries, bankers. You want congress support? Get on the floor and demonstrate why you need it.

    Restore ethics committees. You benefit from inside trading information, you’re out.

    I don’t see why we can’t go back to a healthier system with morals and ethics. Public service is an honor; not a plateform from which to serve your own interests.

    It should be so simple!!!

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: