tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13808257556517858092024-03-05T03:16:14.464-05:00NewWorldParty.orgPolitically Incorrect Politics<br> Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger69125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-46150830276076754742017-02-06T10:57:00.002-05:002017-08-02T16:04:35.932-04:00Most Want Less Immigration, But Politicians Want More. Why?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
(Note: Politicians and media try to hide the information in this article from you.)<br />
<br />
Most people, including immigrants, want less immigration:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/29/gallup-poll-only-seven-percent-of-americans-want-more-immigration/" target="_blank">Gallup Poll</a>: Only SEVEN PERCENT Of Americans Want More Immigration<br />
<br />
According to this <a href="http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/09/half-of-hispanics-think-government-doesnt-enforce-immigration-laws-enough/" target="_blank">survey</a>: "majority of Americans (54 percent), including 52 percent of Hispanics, said it ought to be half a million or fewer."<br />
<br />
Three quarters of Britons want less immigration – <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-immigration-survey-idUKBREA0600F20140107" target="_blank">survey</a><br />
<br />
A <a href="http://www.dailystormer.com/germany-83-say-immigration-is-the-countrys-biggest-challenge/" target="_blank">poll of Germans</a> found 83% Say Immigration is the Country’s “Biggest Challenge”.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/186209/europeans-negative-toward-immigration.aspx" target="_blank">Europe</a>, 52% want lower immigration levels.<br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/chapter-3-most-support-limiting-immigration/" target="_blank">Pew</a>, "Huge majorities in both Greece (86%) and Italy (80%) say they want fewer immigrants allowed into their countries. More than half in the United Kingdom and France hold this view”<br />
<br />
Most <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/most-canadians-in-favour-of-limits-on-immigration-poll" target="_blank">Canadians</a> want limits on immigration: "70% of ... Canadian adults polled supported limits, and most Canadians who were born in another country (58%) agreed. Among those whose parents were not born in Canada, 66% were in support of limiting the number of...immigrants"<br />
<br />
COST TO TAXPAYERS & WORKERS<br />
<br />
According to the <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/21/mass-immigration-costs-govt-296-billion-year-natio/" target="_blank">National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine</a> in the U.S.:<br />
<ul>
<li>"Mass immigration costs government $296 billion a year, depresses wages"</li>
<li>"The data show that immigrants take more in benefits than they pay in taxes. Although immigrants do boost the size of the economy, the gains are heavily skewed toward the immigrants themselves and to wealthy investors — not to native-born workers who end up competing with the new arrivals."</li>
<li>"...“It reminds us, the big beneficiaries of immigrants are the immigrants themselves, and American business. The losers tend to be the poor"</li>
</ul>
According to <a href="http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/camarota-welfare-final.pdf" target="_blank">Center for Immigration Studies</a>, immigrants use substantially more welfare than natives:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEil3kcX-sGeaDat9MKLB4h1fTeZOM22xGclvhPcy32XGp3VXEZbcK3MOoNDrPmnnITOOxN1AvMBzDvhpcAGXhnHTuI2NLH6lzSGgM6JFJmU6ATA5uhv4t02zYiZOazwuTP2WnZw9KWhfe4_/s1600/Immigrant-welfare-usage.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="368" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEil3kcX-sGeaDat9MKLB4h1fTeZOM22xGclvhPcy32XGp3VXEZbcK3MOoNDrPmnnITOOxN1AvMBzDvhpcAGXhnHTuI2NLH6lzSGgM6JFJmU6ATA5uhv4t02zYiZOazwuTP2WnZw9KWhfe4_/s400/Immigrant-welfare-usage.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFEpTxor4hs48c5sstiaLBhVaqpmFDZQaRMgAWPdkJ_IGUBg1-87-h1C7dQZm46cfofuDP1BrYC_LFDwzPiOnEqMnDyXfimWpR9GY1c1EJjZIcqJrH1qfisMpb8aBfNMNNjvcKT4A-kutl/s1600/Immigrant-welfare-usage-in-later-years.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFEpTxor4hs48c5sstiaLBhVaqpmFDZQaRMgAWPdkJ_IGUBg1-87-h1C7dQZm46cfofuDP1BrYC_LFDwzPiOnEqMnDyXfimWpR9GY1c1EJjZIcqJrH1qfisMpb8aBfNMNNjvcKT4A-kutl/s400/Immigrant-welfare-usage-in-later-years.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/670875/migrants-cost-britain-brexit-eu-referendum-migration-report" target="_blank">think tank Migration Watch UK</a>:<br />
<ul>
<li>"Mass immigration is costing Britain £17BILLION each year"</li>
</ul>
According to the <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/immigrants-cost-23b-a-year-fraser-institute-report" target="_blank">Fraser Institute in 2005/2006</a> of Canada:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"immigrants on average received an excess of $6,051 in benefits over taxes paid...fiscal burden in that year is estimated to be between $23.6 billion and $16.3 billion."</li>
<li>"These estimates are not changed by the consideration of other alleged benefits brought by immigrants."</li>
</ul>
According to <a href="https://www.b.dk/politiko/nye-tal-saa-meget-koster-indvandringen-danmark" target="_blank">Politiko of Denmark</a>:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"Non-western immigrants cost the treasury 33 billion. kr. per year"</li>
</ul>
According to <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-sweden-forecast-idUSKCN0SG0I220151022" target="_blank">Reuters</a>:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"Soaring asylum numbers force Sweden to cut costs, borrow more"</li>
</ul>
[Update on April 16, 2017] According <a href="http://www.nationaleconomicseditorial.com/2017/02/10/sweden-migrant-crime-cost/" target="_blank">National Economics Editorial</a>:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"Refugees Will Cost Sweden $18.6 Billion This Year—9.3x Over-Budget"</li>
</ul>
OVER-POPULATION<br />
<br />
The <a href="http://worldhappiness.report/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/03/HR-V1_web.pdf" target="_blank">World Happiness Report</a> reported that the happiest countries are the smallest or least populated.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEO5UVzzSCAp86buzITM1ZwrQqo9PrpXA8wCNJRv4yYp2dGUAx9fCV3VRk_szHq9-XUbN1CPw3c88OaylIDa7xYNXz5AfKMASL7uKd8XfwWCAc4_ZfY0ImZFm9WnU4zwIyngCDnloSgdDy/s1600/serveimage-8.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEO5UVzzSCAp86buzITM1ZwrQqo9PrpXA8wCNJRv4yYp2dGUAx9fCV3VRk_szHq9-XUbN1CPw3c88OaylIDa7xYNXz5AfKMASL7uKd8XfwWCAc4_ZfY0ImZFm9WnU4zwIyngCDnloSgdDy/s320/serveimage-8.jpeg" width="320" /></a>Many immigrants move from over-populated countries to sparsely populated countries. Once they are in the new country, they do not want to see it become over-populated as well.<br />
<br />
However, there are so many people in the developed world that it has become over-populated already. There are 500 million people on that tiny European continent.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjciI7kcMLcYhm0tRqdbrqgHHkJZOdKk4qvrNHyWdTFWZhUH9QxbyPpg7g0nc6A3DJTSBcNYm8tWMioFAoU9E6614VdeLWgF6OdrINOMXGrC1cccDaLClzTFtxX5rVIpX2Q1po-35-tVpCt/s1600/serveimage.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjciI7kcMLcYhm0tRqdbrqgHHkJZOdKk4qvrNHyWdTFWZhUH9QxbyPpg7g0nc6A3DJTSBcNYm8tWMioFAoU9E6614VdeLWgF6OdrINOMXGrC1cccDaLClzTFtxX5rVIpX2Q1po-35-tVpCt/s320/serveimage.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
Millions of commuters in LA and New York wish there were fewer people on the roads. There are signs of over-population in most countries, including the small Western countries. Even Canada, one of the most sparsely populated countries in the world, shows signs of over-population. The great lakes are polluted. Ontario needs to ship its garbage to Michigan. Much of the west is de-forested. Grand banks off Newfoundland, which used to be flushed with fish, have been nearly depleted. Canada needs to sell so much oil that their tar sands have become a huge polluter.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI-doGOeuGZUL-3MBwjxILdxOFip4rGYgqZATK5PRW9UdGiwJSyblAbLdikDrAsEZXmZrlmKjNa6W3wOHDxc7-_dcGSfwZbuUKzaivwxF7G0_rZEuFkCXNS94QYbtlbUU90SSJpOGjx4FA/s1600/serveimage-3.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI-doGOeuGZUL-3MBwjxILdxOFip4rGYgqZATK5PRW9UdGiwJSyblAbLdikDrAsEZXmZrlmKjNa6W3wOHDxc7-_dcGSfwZbuUKzaivwxF7G0_rZEuFkCXNS94QYbtlbUU90SSJpOGjx4FA/s320/serveimage-3.jpeg" width="320" /></a>Most of the third world is exploding in population, causing the West to be used as a release valve. Some say that immigration into the West will help world poverty. <a href="https://youtu.be/LPjzfGChGlE" target="_blank">This video explains how it will not</a>. It will not make a tiny dent. If anything, it might worsen world poverty as the people who are most capable and likely to improve poor countries are leaving them.<br />
<br />
This <a href="https://youtu.be/muw22wTePqQ" target="_blank">video</a> explains how the current path of immigration will make the U.S. over-populated and worse off. It also states: "polls show that there was never a time when much more than 10% of Americans wanted higher immigration."<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixB_bB-5rQl6h5LKdXKL5kFc54uNsqekmuwlYAlvGEjbz0Ae0CJNicM_sGgpqYhpV_Yw_L6HpsM752-LMBXP_em__eKGTiXWoM1u-AQjD-WLyp8hA9CZBI8v1HkaGX4QzDZZHNNkon8kV-/s1600/CPI2016_mapforCard_1280.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="770" data-original-width="1280" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixB_bB-5rQl6h5LKdXKL5kFc54uNsqekmuwlYAlvGEjbz0Ae0CJNicM_sGgpqYhpV_Yw_L6HpsM752-LMBXP_em__eKGTiXWoM1u-AQjD-WLyp8hA9CZBI8v1HkaGX4QzDZZHNNkon8kV-/s320/CPI2016_mapforCard_1280.jpg" width="320" /></a>POPULATION and CORRUPTION<br />
<br />
Based on these <a href="https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016" target="_blank">statistics</a>, there is a positive correlation between population and corruption. The bigger the population, the more corrupt a country is. United States, with its excellent constitution and checks and balances, is still more corrupt than Canada.<br />
<br />
REPRODUCTION<br />
<br />
Many tell you that immigration is needed because the West is not reproducing enough. This is a big lie. Japan does not believe they need immigration to compensate for their low native birth rates. This <a href="https://youtu.be/Z3BYCK-3jPc" target="_blank">video</a> explains why.<br />
<br />
Countries should be reducing their populations, not increasing them. People in the developed world are the biggest consumers of the world resources. Thanks to them, we have many of the problems in the world, such as pollution and animal extinctions. Reducing their population is good for planet earth.<br />
<br />
WHY DO POLITICIANS WANT IMMIGRATION?<br />
<br />
Despite the heavy costs, politicians continue to increase their populations, by ramming more immigrants down the throats of their citizens. Why?<br />
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>They get more votes. New immigrants tend to vote for the party that let them in. (This was a brilliant political strategy by Ted Kennedy when he changed the immigration policy in 1965.) Therefore, they see immigrants as a source of votes and job security (for the politicians, not for the voters).</li>
<li>They can get re-elected if they grow the economy (GDP). Growing the population grows the GDP.</li>
</ol>
As you can see, #1 is good for politicians, not for you.<br />
<br />
# 2 is also good for politicians, not for you.<br />
<br />
GDP is NOT the most important metric for the economic health of citizens. GDP PER CAPITA (per person) is. The U.S. has the biggest GDP, but Switzerland has a much bigger GDP PER CAPITA and Switzerland does not have nor need low-skilled, low-income workers. Switzerland is one of the happiest countries in the world and they do not need low-income immigrants to pick crops for them. China has a bigger GDP than Canada, Australia and European countries. Yet, China's people cannot emigrate fast enough to the smaller GDP countries. China will have a bigger GDP than the U.S., but Americans will still be happier than the Chinese because Americans have a bigger GDP PER CAPITA.<br />
<br />
As this <a href="https://youtu.be/Z3BYCK-3jPc" target="_blank">video</a> shows, GDP PER CAPITA is not correlated to population growth. Countries can grow GDP PER CAPITA despite population decline. As this <a href="https://youtu.be/RR2JA8FTtlo">video</a> shows, politicians and media have been lying for decades when they say that immigration is needed to support the aging population.<br />
<br />
Most politicians do not know how to grow GDP PER CAPITA. Growing GDP is simpler. Just increase immigration. After decades of increasing immigration, GDP PER CAPITA has not grown much or at all for most Western countries. According to <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/" target="_blank">Pew</a>, real income for the average American has been flat from 1964 to 2014. According to <a href="https://mises.org/blog/us-median-income-falling" target="_blank">Mises</a>, real income has fallen over the past 16 years. Therefore, all of this immigration has benefited mainly the politicians and not the citizens.<br />
<br />
WHY DOES MEDIA AND CORPORATIONS WANT IMMIGRATION?<br />
<br />
In addition to politicians, some of the media also push for immigration. Why? We can only speculate. Media is usually controlled by large corporations. They want to be able to hire foreign workers because they are cheaper for both high skilled and low skilled positions. Hence, they can increase their profits.<br />
<br />
Also, by growing GDP for the country, large corporations can increase their revenue and profits, even if GDP PER CAPITA stays flat or goes down.<br />
<br />
However, what is in the best interest of large corporations is not necessarily in the best interest of the majority of the population. By hiring foreign workers, they bypass many native workers.<br />
<br />
Besides, Switzerland and Japan, have shown that foreign workers are not needed. They have little to no immigration. Yet, they continue to increase their GDP PER CAPITA, and Switzerland's GDP PER CAPITA ($79,242) is significantly higher than U.S.'s ($57,436) (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
<b>SUMMARY</b><br />
<br />
WINNERS from IMMIGRATION: Politicians, big corporations and foreigners (immigrants)<br />
<br />
LOSERS from IMMIGRATION: Taxpayers and workers<br />
<br />
Politicians are giving away pieces of the country to get votes or to help corporations, at the expense of workers and taxpayers. Essentially, politicians are stealing pieces of the country from the majority, to give them away to foreigners, to benefit a minority.<br />
<br />
The need for immigration is a big lie pushed by the politicians, corporations and the media. Do not believe it.<br />
<br />
Democracy is a myth. The people do not get what they want. Tell your politician what you want.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-22633748876581824752016-03-24T18:03:00.000-04:002016-07-11T17:15:47.657-04:00Top 6 Things that the World should do with Muslim Migrants<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXratiW9eSd2g0oBPN5A6Atzwub-fQLgzOoOwre54ZZZ7NtPg1_dll5FEJ38iKrrLZuCnC8ISDSWCKAhSq2w8G-5nuRMxuGgmLnDYgfiVvNmIMbgom1BR35zB5kTABvKNNTu50WYpE8MzP/s1600/5e551689-06fc-4b10-8b20-62ced92016db.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXratiW9eSd2g0oBPN5A6Atzwub-fQLgzOoOwre54ZZZ7NtPg1_dll5FEJ38iKrrLZuCnC8ISDSWCKAhSq2w8G-5nuRMxuGgmLnDYgfiVvNmIMbgom1BR35zB5kTABvKNNTu50WYpE8MzP/s200/5e551689-06fc-4b10-8b20-62ced92016db.jpg" style="float: right;" width="200" /></a>Justin Trudeau is the new celebrity politician. In 2015, he was campaigning for the Canadian federal election. When he, along with other Canadians, saw the Syrian refugees, he made a campaign promise to bring 25,000 into Canada.<br />
<br />
250,000 Syrians have been killed. Over 13.5 million Syrians need help. The world should urgently help them. But moving them to Canada, or most Western countries, should be seriously reconsidered or maybe even stopped. In fact, it might be a huge mistake to do so.<br />
<br />
Here are the top 6 things that should be done:<br />
<br />
<h3>
1. END THE WAR</h3>
<br />
The only solution to this problem is to end the war. The world (not just Western countries) should spend its money and resources to do whatever it can to help end the war. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done.<br />
<br />
<h3>
2. HELP SYRIANS IN TURKEY, LEBANON AND JORDAN</h3>
<br />
According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>, Turkey has taken 2.7 million, Lebanon has taken 1.5 million and Jordan has taken 1.4 million. There are many Western countries who want to slow or stop the inflow of Syrians. They can help do this if they provided much more funding to these three countries neighbouring Syria. <br />
<br />
Besides, cost of living is far cheaper in these countries. Hence it is far cheaper, on a per person basis, to help Syrians in these countries than to move them to Western countries. So, for the same amount of money, you can help many more Syrians. The world (not just Western countries) should pour much more money into these three countries as well as UNHCR and give incentives to these countries to enable Syrians to live and work.<br />
<br />
It will be far cheaper in terms of transportation and cost-of-living for the Syrians to be living in Arabic countries than Western countries. The Syrians will not need to learn another language (with the exception of Turkish), which can take multiple years for adults. They will not need to learn new customs or a new culture. When Syria is rebuilt, it will be easier and cheaper for the Syrians to return home.<br />
<br />
If Syrians are not able to work in these three countries and if other countries do not want to accept Syrians, then the world should provide cost-of-living support to the Syrians in these host countries until they are able to work.<br />
<br />
(Some have argued that the Muslim refugee crisis is due to the U.S. invasion of Iraq and their meddling in the Middle East for the past few decades. The U.S. made the mistake of removing Saddam Hussein, who ran a secular government. Once this was removed, the Islamic forces were unleashed, which brought about the sectarian conflicts and the creation of ISIS. So, it was a blunder that created unintended consequence. If these critics are right, then the U.S. probably should be the largest contributor of money and resources for #1 and #2. Others have argued that Iraqis are grateful for the removal of Hussein and that the blunders and divisive actions of the new Iraqi government are largely to blame. We will leave this debate to someone else. However, it is difficult to argue that the U.S. created the Syrian civil war, which has caused the majority of the Muslim refugee crisis.)<br />
<br />
<h3>
3. LOBBY OR SANCTION THE RICH ARABIC COUNTRIES</h3>
<br />
Germany extends a huge helping hand. Saudi Arabia extends next to nothing.<br />
<br />
Germany took in 1.1 million migrants in 2015. According to <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/how-many-syrian-refugees-have-the-arab-worlds-six-wealthiest-nations-resettled-close-to-zero" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The National Post</a>, the following <br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS-2FvjNMf7kVlHYLbkFUIwYR9RXbTWRHouGy9YRJw5gdEPVMY2I-Ao3gOB5DfN4cfAZIxHPYlRrz7ei_5prF2CyInQRlBGKlfFS35m8yG21UOrXBtxMgFRgjIkoyOjY78Yo2mVGgAlwGj/s1600/Dubai2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS-2FvjNMf7kVlHYLbkFUIwYR9RXbTWRHouGy9YRJw5gdEPVMY2I-Ao3gOB5DfN4cfAZIxHPYlRrz7ei_5prF2CyInQRlBGKlfFS35m8yG21UOrXBtxMgFRgjIkoyOjY78Yo2mVGgAlwGj/s320/Dubai2.jpg" width="320" /></a>countries have accepted zero refugees:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Saudi Arabia</li>
<li>United Arab Emirates</li>
<li>Qatar</li>
<li>Kuwait</li>
<li>Oman</li>
<li>Bahrain</li>
</ul>
Yet these countries are some the wealthiest in the world, where citizens pay little to no tax. Some get money just for existing. Many citizens do not work, as foreigners do all of the work. According to <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2012/07/11/Countries-With-Zero-Income-Taxes.html?slide=2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CNBC</a>:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"United Arab Emirates has one of the world's highest per-capita incomes at $49,000. It has no personal income or capital gains taxes."</li>
<li>"Gas-rich Qatar is the world's richest country with GDP per capital of $102,800..."</li>
<li>"...Oman's oil revenue, which accounts for nearly 70 percent of its total revenue, rose 30 percent to $13.7 billion..."</li>
<li>"Kuwait...one of the world's wealthiest countries per capita..."</li>
<li>"Bahrain...with no personal income tax..."</li>
<li>"Saudi Arabia, the world's number one oil exporter, doesn't impose a tax on salaries..."</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMq49PENu6_ppUxPZXT82B_N7AqBm43ciNu2Y-jLqAKRM1rDuHpYZfflCt-rROfF3tiwRXBmlAC8FAxtSjWP8035dYh5YOeQgCmr9mVniSLo-zzmrCvppus6LtFp-9VlFIEsBUqu57jD3K/s1600/flash+cars+077.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMq49PENu6_ppUxPZXT82B_N7AqBm43ciNu2Y-jLqAKRM1rDuHpYZfflCt-rROfF3tiwRXBmlAC8FAxtSjWP8035dYh5YOeQgCmr9mVniSLo-zzmrCvppus6LtFp-9VlFIEsBUqu57jD3K/s320/flash+cars+077.JPG" width="320" /></a>According to <a href="http://www.infowars.com/saudi-arabia-has-100000-empty-air-conditioned-tents-that-can-house-3-million-people-yet-has-taken-zero-refugees/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">InfoWars</a>, Saudi Arabia Has 100,000 Air Conditioned Tents That Can House 3 Million People Sitting Empty Yet Has Taken Zero Refugees. <br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/05/gulf-states-refuse-to-take-a-single-syrian-refugee-say-doing-so-exposes-them-to-risk-of-terrorism/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">BreitBart</a>: "Amnesty International’s Head of Refugee and Migrants’ Rights, has slammed their inaction as “shameful”. He said: “The records of Gulf countries is absolutely appalling, in terms of actually showing compassion and sharing the responsibility of this crisis… It is a disgrace.” …Total donations from the Gulf States are believe to total £589 million, less than a quarter of America’s £2.8 billion, and a fraction of the £65 billion they spent on defence in 2012 alone. The UK has handed over £920 million so far, but the Prime Minister yesterday pledged to increase that figure to £1 billion. He also promised to take in thousands more refugees."<br />
<br />
Even Muslims are censuring these rich Muslim countries, such as Brother Rachid in this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xz3f8PQL20" target="_blank">video</a>. <br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2_tWOIsNsVNRckJf9FkQwR3kWSaUcUz_iflr9ctV-KV7h1mxwxSyA3g141fUnnq4H7z00cjshoZnftXLbmetIj4eF3szQyepzplz89DsowIz6Fi9Xg5iIcjXgRAa3ShzT3sCzWfC_MlRM/s1600/150916114924-superyacht-saudi-lady-moura-super-169.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2_tWOIsNsVNRckJf9FkQwR3kWSaUcUz_iflr9ctV-KV7h1mxwxSyA3g141fUnnq4H7z00cjshoZnftXLbmetIj4eF3szQyepzplz89DsowIz6Fi9Xg5iIcjXgRAa3ShzT3sCzWfC_MlRM/s320/150916114924-superyacht-saudi-lady-moura-super-169.jpg" width="320" /></a>There are 4 main source of wealth for most countries:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
</ul>
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>Hard Work</li>
<li>
Innovation</li>
<li>Natural Resources</li>
<li>Kill and Steal</li>
</ol>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
</ul>
These Arabic countries are rich mainly from #3. Germany is rich from #1 and #2. Saudi Arabia is so rich that they love showing off their huge yachts, which are among the biggest in the world. Dubai also loves to show off its wealth.<br />
<br />
They are Arab Muslim and much closer than Germany. Yet, the Muslim migrants and refugees are pushing towards northern European countries, which are laden with debt, like most Western countries.<br />
<br />
Western countries should spend money and resources to lobby these rich Arabic countries. Maybe Western countries should even impose sanctions. It is despicable and deplorable that so many Western countries are doing more to help Arab Muslims than these rich Ar<span id="goog_1328996151"></span><span id="goog_1328996152"></span>ab Muslim countries.<br />
<br />
Besides, it will be far cheaper and easier for Muslim refugees and migrants to live in Arabic countries than Western countries, as explained in #2 above. Even Muslim refugees are censuring these rich Arabic countries (See RT's <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMbRkgVV_Bs" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Testing the limits of Swedish generosity</a> at 19:17 into the video).<br />
<br />
<h3>
4. ENCOURAGE MUSLIMS TO MIGRATE TO NEARBY ISLAMIC COUNTRIES</h3>
<br />
As you can see from this <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Muslim_Percent_Population.svg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">map below</a>, a large part of the world is Islamic, much larger than Europe. There are dozens of Islamic countries (and expanding) in addition to the ones mentioned in #3 above. Syria is literally surrounded by Islamic countries. In fact, there are <a href="http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-muslim-majority/" target="_blank">49 countries</a> in the world with Muslim majorities:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtqdPGSSx2vSNUiqkVDv3D3SIxwHizlKYvcRZ82bB1NunqlAOD_Qd0nxYfRvxX5UVwPPipQT4kTc5ZPLLNghjMSiNVZvc8o7c9t76SDmCckZnX0On1kHcsmTXW8IQzx2DVDUefSOqEUUmh/s1600/Muslim+Population.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="349" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtqdPGSSx2vSNUiqkVDv3D3SIxwHizlKYvcRZ82bB1NunqlAOD_Qd0nxYfRvxX5UVwPPipQT4kTc5ZPLLNghjMSiNVZvc8o7c9t76SDmCckZnX0On1kHcsmTXW8IQzx2DVDUefSOqEUUmh/s640/Muslim+Population.png" width="640" /></a><br />
<br />
The world, including Islamic countries, should encourage Muslim migrants and refugees to migrate to these Islamic countries. The world should provide incentives to both the Muslim migrants/refugees and the Islamic countries. It will be far cheaper and easier for Muslim refugees and migrants to live in Muslim countries than Western countries, as explained in #2 above.<br />
<br />
<h3>
5. WEST SHOULD RECONSIDER THE REMOVAL OF DICTATORS</h3>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSlfxVhyphenhyphen6Eh_JXfC5OmqpwB8jGbWOYKWvqLct2WQs0rS9b6JT3g9309Fg-FLSKn6xDv6AH1VroZAfT8L47jx_8d8VTeAxkAerXSlBRSLXhEONrOOrMDmGdoagsniVZ0B2yDWDuVPa9igvT/s1600/saddam.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSlfxVhyphenhyphen6Eh_JXfC5OmqpwB8jGbWOYKWvqLct2WQs0rS9b6JT3g9309Fg-FLSKn6xDv6AH1VroZAfT8L47jx_8d8VTeAxkAerXSlBRSLXhEONrOOrMDmGdoagsniVZ0B2yDWDuVPa9igvT/s400/saddam.jpg" /></a></div>
Saddam Hussein and Bashar al-Assad ran secular governments and opposed Islamic politics. When the West removed Saddam Hussein, sectarian fighting and Islam were unleashed and ISIS was created. According to this Yazidi Iraqi, Iraq was better with Saddam Hussein (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrOyAAZ1n3I" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrOyAAZ1n3I </a>at 21:35 into video). According to <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/hawks-were-wrong-iraq-worse-now" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Mehdi Hasan</a>: "In September 2011, a Zogby poll found that 42 per cent of Iraqis thought they were “worse off” as a result of the Anglo-American invasion of their country, compared to only 30 per cent of Iraqis who said “better off”."<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhA66rp6JJdNwJE35mtGYXu-gjWzr_VYd9ZQQ82k9dnG9tq6aOH8mqQV6DwR6XRturrKoqXPkfnNip45kMX3UyqNBTWl0N0SghOM1eu2n0hoLUaPhiJwNaaXtWW0EuLknVJTJnwEH4db8YA/s1600/bashar-al-assad_2576564k.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhA66rp6JJdNwJE35mtGYXu-gjWzr_VYd9ZQQ82k9dnG9tq6aOH8mqQV6DwR6XRturrKoqXPkfnNip45kMX3UyqNBTWl0N0SghOM1eu2n0hoLUaPhiJwNaaXtWW0EuLknVJTJnwEH4db8YA/s320/bashar-al-assad_2576564k.jpg" width="320" /></a>If the West removes al-Assad, will something similar happen? According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>, Christians in Syria favor the Bashar al-Assad’s regime because of its appearance as a secular government. The majority of Syrians are Sunni Muslims, as is ISIS. If al-Assad falls, will Syria implement Sharia law, remove any remaining freedom for Syrians and become even more anti-West? According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiyyWiO-IKY" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Vice News</a> (46:38 into video) and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq0wIttoVh0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Dr. Bill Warner</a> (5:50 into video), one of the biggest rebel groups is the Islamic Front, who hates al-Assad’s secular government. They have implemented Sharia law already. Another rebel group, al-Nusra Front, was created with the help from ISIS.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGyDxho8bxvzALgx8fWuEDOWhANCpXXtRZWkdGuL-YO4hkjpajTpeZV27e9krSd6D37whYN5snUzF69lmbrVTXrZLpDF3_e8LweKm739emhO5NnotWAippKc4rCxmDFoIvhOHqAnZdhe8w/s1600/Syria-Sharia-court.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="153" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGyDxho8bxvzALgx8fWuEDOWhANCpXXtRZWkdGuL-YO4hkjpajTpeZV27e9krSd6D37whYN5snUzF69lmbrVTXrZLpDF3_e8LweKm739emhO5NnotWAippKc4rCxmDFoIvhOHqAnZdhe8w/s320/Syria-Sharia-court.png" width="320" /></a>On this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiyyWiO-IKY" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Vice News report</a> (48:56 into video), Syria’s Islamic Front Sharia court says: “After the <br />
[Bashar al-Assad] regime has fallen, we believe that the Muslim majority in Syria will ask for an Islamic state.” If both the Islamic Front and ISIS want an Islamic state and Sharia law, why is ISIS fighting the Islamic Front? Syria's Islamic Front Sharia court says: “…to start off by killing, crucifying [criminals] etc. This is not correct at all.” Vice reporter asks: “What would you say is the difference between Sharia as you intend to implement it and Sharia implemented by ISIS in areas of Syria under their control?” Syria's Islamic Front Sharia court says: “One of their [ISIS] mistakes is before the regime has fallen, and before they’ve established what in Sharia is called Tamkeen [having a stable state], they started applying Sharia, thinking God gave them permission to control the land and establish a Caliphate. This goes against the beliefs of religious scholars around the world. This is what [IS] did wrong. This is going to cause a lot of trouble. Any who opposes [IS] will be considered against Sharia and will be severely punished.” It would seem that ISIS does not believe in delaying the "killing" and "crucifying" but both groups eventually will.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsJ6U8rCKNnVwLIHvrMKaariZxJdPkeMsbV5BEO-LeYc2f3W0dhYVfhp5g7QyJQZaEvKCsH3tGwT9wB7wTxC6R0NFecPqXhL4SzYBDsE7NZE8yAZYLHEc2jrhYD_y3Rt_CQYIOXM16zykT/s1600/rebels.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsJ6U8rCKNnVwLIHvrMKaariZxJdPkeMsbV5BEO-LeYc2f3W0dhYVfhp5g7QyJQZaEvKCsH3tGwT9wB7wTxC6R0NFecPqXhL4SzYBDsE7NZE8yAZYLHEc2jrhYD_y3Rt_CQYIOXM16zykT/s320/rebels.png" width="320" /></a>According to this Vice News report called "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-2uvKfYGQ4" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Jihadists vs. the Assad Regime: Syria's Rebel Advance</a>", Jihadists are among the rebel groups. One of these groups is Al Qaeda, which has captured territory in Syria away from Al-assad. One of the rebels (at 4:47 in the video) yells: “I’m related to the lord Muhammad.” They consider the al-Assad army to be “infidels”. At 10:00 into the video, the reporter asks: “Jaysh al Fateh has conquered a big part of Syria. How will it rule the areas under its control?”. The rebel says: “The Sharia court will decide this.” At 13:12 into the video, the rebels listen to a song that sings: “Tell the crusader Americans, Syria will be your graveyard. Our Front is victorious."<br />
<br />
So, it seems that the Syrians want the same thing as the Talibans. Is this war really about freedom or religion? By getting rid of Al-Assad, are we liberating Syrians and providing them with freedom? Not by Western standards.<br />
<br />
David Wood also warns EU leaders about removing dictators in the Middle East in "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xPJPwOanuw" target="_blank">The Paris Attacks: David Wood's Message to Merkel, Hollande and other EU Leader</a>" <br />
<br />
Therefore, “be careful of what you ask for”.<br />
<br />
One of the ways to end the war is to stop trying to overthrow Bashar Al-assad, as repugnant as this might be. Al-Assad and his army might be as bad as Saddam Hussein, but what comes after them? Will Syria be better or worse without Bashar Al-assad? We do not know for sure, but can only speculate.<br />
<br />
Muammar Gaddafi used to block illegal economic migrants from going into Libya and from leaving Libya to go to Europe. With Gaddafi removed, there is civil war, chaos and thousands of illegal economic migrants, with little education or skills, are using Libya as a launching point to go to Europe. <br />
<br />
<h3>
6. RECONSIDER THE IDEA OF MOVING MUSLIMS TO THE WEST</h3>
<br />
Here are the top reasons why the West should reconsider the idea of taking in Syrians or Muslim migrants:<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.1 BANG FOR THE BUCK</h2>
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syrian-refugees-by-the-numbers-1.3469080" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CBC</a>, Canada will spend CAD 678 million to bring 25,000 Syrians to Canada, which works out to CAD 27,120 per Syrian. Because everything is cheaper in Turkey, Turkey spends CAD 4,363 per Syrian (According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>, Turkey spent EUR 8 billion on 2.7 million refugees.). Therefore, if Canada spent CAD 678 million on Syrians in Turkey, Canada would help 155,398 Syrians (CAD 678 million divided by CAD 4,363). That is 6 times more Syrians than the 25,000. However, this is not as effective in buying votes for Trudeau.<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.2 INEQUALITY</h2>
<br />
CAD 678 million is a lot of money but it’s a tiny bandage. There are 13.5 million Syrians who need humanitarian aid (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">source</a>). Why is Canada helping only 0.18%? What about the other 99.82%? Is Canada creating inequality among the Syrians? Don’t Westerners hate the 1%? Why do 25,000 Syrians get to win the lottery but not the other 13.475 million? Even Germany's intake of one million is less than 10% of the Syrians that need help. Will Germany be able help many more Syrians by spending their money instead in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.3 REFUGEES VERSUS ECONOMIC MIGRANTS</h2>
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c125.html" target="_blank">United Nations</a>, a refugee is one "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race,
religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or
political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is
unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the
protection of that country" and an economic migrants are those who "choose to move in order to improve the future prospects of themselves and their families".<br />
<br />
According to the <a href="http://www.torontosun.com/2016/02/25/are-the-syrian-refugees-actually-refugees" target="_blank">Toronto Sun</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"...Yazedis and Christians in Syria would be the most persecuted in their own country. Yet many accounts confirm that Yazedis and Christians avoid refugee camps because they fear some or all of them could be dominated by Islamists...Furthermore, not everyone fleeing Syria is a victim of war. Some are
probably economic migrants who have joined the refugees in camps where
no amount of investigation can separate the genuine refugees from those
seeking affluence and broader opportunities....according to the UNHCR, "Global migration patterns have become increasingly complex in modern times, involving not just refugees, but also millions of economic migrants. But refugees and migrants…are fundamentally different, and for that reason are treated very differently under modern international law.""</blockquote>
Based on information from CBC, Canada is bringing economic migrants, not refugees.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhElcHM_YhHCYlbI55V_oMC0Hot-T9ph7bepMaEuWG2qrKwjot31VPz0wzQc9fxfr-PhAtIuLHgx0bJ1e6pjFuFdgPBm8m3jlfKk5RoVEJgvU11HAa8Nk3SCEPOe4nxkD0GauYTwMdk5RLF/s1600/Syrian-family.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhElcHM_YhHCYlbI55V_oMC0Hot-T9ph7bepMaEuWG2qrKwjot31VPz0wzQc9fxfr-PhAtIuLHgx0bJ1e6pjFuFdgPBm8m3jlfKk5RoVEJgvU11HAa8Nk3SCEPOe4nxkD0GauYTwMdk5RLF/s200/Syrian-family.png" width="200" /></a><a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/one-refugee-family-s-journey-from-jordan-to-canada-1.3402513" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CBC</a> shows that Canada is bringing a Syrian family with 8 children who left Syria three years ago and have been living peacefully during those three years in Jordan. They have been renting an apartment, working on an olive farm and had a baby while in Jordan. They may be classified as poor people, but they are not threatened with persecution.<br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syrian-refugees-by-the-numbers-1.3469080" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CBC</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Syrians who've arrived in Canada mostly do not come from refugee camps. <br />
Only about 10 per cent of Syrian refugees are in formal refugee camps in the countries surrounding Syria, according to the United Nations refugee agency. The rest are living everywhere from rented apartments to farm fields."</blockquote>
According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy5QZwI4qSI" target="_blank">Rebel Media</a>, Canada is taking in fake refugees.<br />
<br />
These Syrians are poor people, but they are no longer refugees. The countries that truly took in refugees are Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq.<br />
<br />
Therefore, the West is really helping migrants jump the immigration queue. <br />
<br />
One might think that Syrians must be fleeing persecution if they are willing to risk their lives by fleeing Turkey to go to Greece. They are not. Turkey is not persecuting Syrians. Syrians are fleeing Turkey to get a better life. It is possible that fewer Syrians would be going to Greece if smugglers told the truth. Smugglers regularly lie about the safety of the trip, size of the boat and the number of passengers. When the drowned boy washed onto the beach, his father was likely a smuggler and lied. According to Reuters and The Daily Telegraph via <a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-12/media-propaganda-full-frontal-father-drowned-syrian-boy-was-people-smuggler" target="_blank">Zerohedge</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“…father might not have been a fleeing migrant after all, but rather a people smuggler and Aylan [boy] might have been on the boat not because his family intended to save their child … but rather because profiting off of other people’s misery was his father’s chosen profession and he often brought his family along for the ride.” </blockquote>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMYnWBqWSVBBbZaH7cZ9FUtzG5j4H6R5QN4zR94USbmb-3ivriJnxK-gLOzZx5WN2LsBEfs6W_Lc9-BE6k2g60rM6KIO52rBMBClH7nwfvvDbLTx1u4wxs4Ky706bANZ225p0Yj9TnE7TQ/s1600/Syrian-men.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="199" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMYnWBqWSVBBbZaH7cZ9FUtzG5j4H6R5QN4zR94USbmb-3ivriJnxK-gLOzZx5WN2LsBEfs6W_Lc9-BE6k2g60rM6KIO52rBMBClH7nwfvvDbLTx1u4wxs4Ky706bANZ225p0Yj9TnE7TQ/s320/Syrian-men.jpg" width="320" /></a><br />
According to <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426410/how-long-can-europes-welfare-states-welcome-refugees-and-migrants-john-fund" target="_blank">National Review</a>:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"70 percent of the arrivals [to Europe] are young men who are traveling alone."</li>
<li>"Their families at home are waiting for them to achieve something in their new home." </li>
</ul>
This is supported by Vice's news reports. Most of them left their parents and siblings behind in Syria. It is these family members left behind in Syria that are true refugees and should be saved from possible death. Even then, why are the family members still in Syria? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't the men have stayed in Syria to fight their war and shouldn't the women and children be the ones who have fled? Try to imagine if the American men fled to Canada during their civil war and left the women and children to fend for themselves. Now that the Syrian men have left, they are in Turkey with nothing to do.<br />
<br />
If Syrians in Turkey are truly fleeing persecution, they can do so by fleeing to dozens of countries in Africa, central Asia or south Asia, such as Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Iran, Oman, Yemen, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. They are all closer or easier to get to than northern Europe. Most of these countries are Arabic or Muslim, which would make integration much easier. Africa has 55 countries, with twice as much land and twice as much natural resources as in Europe. Instead, the Syrians choose Western countries. Why? <br />
<br />
Gatestone Institute asks "<a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6488/muslims-evil-west" target="_blank">Why Do "West-Hating" Muslims Flock to The "Evil West"?"</a><br />
<br />
Is it for economic reasons? Is it because Western countries are the wealthiest?<br />
<br />
According to the <a href="http://media.prosperity.com/2010/pdf/publications/PI2010_Brochure_Final_Web.pdf" target="_blank">2010 Legatum Prosperity Index Ranking</a> of 110 countries, which was compiled before the Syrian civil war, the top countries were Western countries. Syria ranked #83. The most prosperous Arabic/Muslim countries were UAE (#30), Kuwai (#31) and Saudi Arabia (#49). Unfortunately, these Arabic/Muslim countries are refusing to take refugees. <br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.livescience.com/39489-the-happiest-countries.html" target="_blank">UN's 2010-2012 World Happiness Report</a>, the happiest countries were Western countries. Does this explain why Muslims have been migrating to Western countries (and not the other way around) for decades?<br />
<br />
So, is it possible that there is a multi-step process here?:<br />
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>Syrians received refuge from Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan.</li>
<li>Syrians feel stuck as they cannot work, are frustrated and see little future in these countries.</li>
<li>Syrians chose to leave to go to the most prosperous and happiest countries with the best benefits instead of the 49 Muslim countries?</li>
</ol>
Is it possible that they know that European countries have obligated themselves to accept refugees but not economic migrants, hence it is important to seek asylum as refugees?<br />
<br />
According to think tank <a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6473/europe-migration-crisis-welfare" target="_blank">Gatestone Institute</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Hundreds of Muslim refugees are converting to Christianity, apparently in an effort to improve their chances of having their asylum applications approved. Under Islam, Muslims who convert to Christianity are guilty of apostasy, a crime punishable by death. The "converts" apparently believe that German officials will allow them to stay if they can be persuaded that they will be killed if they are sent back to their countries of origin."</blockquote>
This implies that they do not have a strong case for refugee status if they will do something as drastic as committing apostasy. Is it possible that:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>these Muslims have no intention of returning to their countries even if the war ended and their countries are rebuilt?</li>
<li>in the past, even before the war, they wanted to migrate to the West?</li>
<li>after they escaped the war, as horrible as it is, they now see an opportunity to finally go to the West?</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDFARl2b_4Y" target="_blank">Black Pigeon</a> shows migrants complaining about food, accommodations, clothes and slow internet in Europe. They threaten to return to Syria. How can they return to Syria if they had to flee for their lives?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNVIw4MsI2Q" target="_blank">France 24</a> shows Iraqis going back home after two months. If they are true refugees, how can they go back home? One man in Iraq still wants to go to Europe and says: "They say that over there, all you have to do is sit back and the government pays for everything."<br />
<br />
According to New York Times article entitled "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/reporters-notebook/migrants/hungary-treatment-refugees" target="_blank">Why Migrants Don’t Want to Stay in Hungary</a>":<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfhzvrH-ibu9hsNkBpkExjyUfBVPfrzoAmu4VxRhyQFaPwRb9aLUfrhOH_lGZCmUpVbT10ju5f-sY1CERQU0sW5Jo500PNp7tlN76dy5-HDDVOblyJAyRdX-709MCTnxtFzDvzD7q4pC2Z/s1600/Syrians-in-Hungary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfhzvrH-ibu9hsNkBpkExjyUfBVPfrzoAmu4VxRhyQFaPwRb9aLUfrhOH_lGZCmUpVbT10ju5f-sY1CERQU0sW5Jo500PNp7tlN76dy5-HDDVOblyJAyRdX-709MCTnxtFzDvzD7q4pC2Z/s400/Syrians-in-Hungary.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
"What’s so bad about staying in Hungary?<br />
<br />
When asked, the migrants now stuck at a train station in Budapest say that they put Hungary in much the same category as Macedonia and Serbia, the Balkan countries they passed through on their journey. They see Hungary as having a thin veneer of prosperity, but being fundamentally relatively poor and still developing. And Greece, though developed, is in economic crisis.<br />
<br />
They want to live in a truly developed land of opportunity. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“If we stay in Hungary there is no work. We can’t study. The language is very strange, and they’re not helping refugees.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“It is supposed to be an E.U. country, but it has broken every single
tenet they had. Greece is such a poor country, and it treated us
better.” "</blockquote>
If Hungary is not good enough, then Turkey is probably not either. If they are truly refugees, then any country that saves them from persecution should be good enough and they should be grateful to
Turkey, Greece or Hungary for saving them from persecution. If they want more than being saved from persecution, then they are economic migrants. <br />
<br />
The lack of gratitude is not confined to Greece or Hungary. According to <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426410/how-long-can-europes-welfare-states-welcome-refugees-and-migrants-john-fund" target="_blank">National Review</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A major reason so many refugees want to settle in Sweden, Germany, and other Northern European countries is that they have generous welfare-state programs for non-citizens. Even so, some refugees can be picky. The Swedish newspaper Local reported last week that “more than 30 asylum seekers refused to get off a bus that took them to temporary accommodation at a holiday park on Sunday night because they didn’t want to stay in such a rural location.” " </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Other countries without an extensive welfare state don’t seem to have Sweden’s problem. Reuters reported that Lithuania “is throwing its doors open to refugees ...but is finding few takers.” ...the Lithuanian government, told the news agency: “We are prepared to accept refugees immediately, but there are no refugees in Italy or Greece who agreed to resettle in Lithuania. . . . It seems that refugees know about Sweden, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, which either have generous social security or have been actively attracting immigrants.” "</blockquote>
<br />
If Syrians want to go to the richest countries, then they should be considered as economic migrants and you should consider the following questions.<br />
<br />
<h2>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsqtuNeKxrfHwcmln_gP4X2oomzgOZe8Ai1umjJrD-aVMqhvfQwjglQKMCYYf8-mmIPopA4-2kINEjH3o4PVoS19LQPy-VBWwxEL0D-_K3ggC42HUxmwVlaTJp6UKP1z2s8zQEHiWbq6WU/s1600/homless-in-winter.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="206" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsqtuNeKxrfHwcmln_gP4X2oomzgOZe8Ai1umjJrD-aVMqhvfQwjglQKMCYYf8-mmIPopA4-2kINEjH3o4PVoS19LQPy-VBWwxEL0D-_K3ggC42HUxmwVlaTJp6UKP1z2s8zQEHiWbq6WU/s320/homless-in-winter.jpg" width="320" /></a>6.4 WHAT ABOUT THE HOMELESS?</h2>
<br />
If Canada wants to help poor people, what about the homeless? According to <a href="http://homelesshub.ca/about-homelessness/homelessness-101/how-many-people-are-homeless-canada" target="_blank">Homeless Hub</a>, there are 200,000 homeless Canadians. These Canadians are poorer than the Syrians. They are not able to rent apartments or houses. According to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcommunity/2013/01/surviving-winter-sheltering-canadas-homeless.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Environment Canada</a>, 80 homeless Canadians freeze to death every winter. Why isn’t the CAD 678 million spent on them?<br />
<br />
What about the homeless in your country?<br />
<br />
According to this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9aSp9bFmMg" target="_blank">documentary</a>, 3.5 million children are growing up in poverty in the UK and one million homes are un-fit to live in.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_i8uheHZ2p05UxGPZZV8chmufihfQGhXxNJYXU0LCPcVco55jWEStFSJP4fXDx83v37a1K8EMitYAusnzi0Zq26eIDUCa4zfU4c2YkZD7GreVpXKhcFKnW8NDjMthzjwYJRJhLa-uFKoY/s1600/brit-poverty-in-africa-5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="209" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_i8uheHZ2p05UxGPZZV8chmufihfQGhXxNJYXU0LCPcVco55jWEStFSJP4fXDx83v37a1K8EMitYAusnzi0Zq26eIDUCa4zfU4c2YkZD7GreVpXKhcFKnW8NDjMthzjwYJRJhLa-uFKoY/s320/brit-poverty-in-africa-5.jpg" width="320" /></a><br />
<h2>
6.5 WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 3 BILLION PEOPLE?</h2>
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4PyuIGLUTXLB9Kvp33q4aMhBjZw1jSYOQrOgQa3gm3GivwNOT-V7dePBtDG0cwGgB_ejtaJ8Wqw_SltYW1rPGQPjLbzchQGES5aO16mIa-V9j9-t_VEG26tp43HB81i79dzkxeWjHWiTX/s1600/Philippines-poor-kid3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4PyuIGLUTXLB9Kvp33q4aMhBjZw1jSYOQrOgQa3gm3GivwNOT-V7dePBtDG0cwGgB_ejtaJ8Wqw_SltYW1rPGQPjLbzchQGES5aO16mIa-V9j9-t_VEG26tp43HB81i79dzkxeWjHWiTX/s1600/Philippines-poor-kid3.jpg" /></a><br />
There are 103 million Filipinos, 1.2 billion Africans, 1.27 billion Indians, 199 million Pakistanis and<br />
385 million South Americans for a total of 3.157 billion. Most of them are poorer than the Syrians in Turkey, Lebanon or Jordan. Many of them dream of living in apartments.<br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats" target="_blank">UNICEF</a>, 22,000 children die each day due to poverty. That is 8,030,000 per year. The Syrian war started 5 years ago. 40,150,000 children have died around the world in 5 years due to poverty. Why isn’t the West helping them and taking in the 3.157 billion poor people? For Justin Trudeau, this was not on headline news during his 2015 election campaign and therefore was not an opportunity to buy votes.<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.6 WHO WILL PAY FOR IT?</h2>
<br />
According to the <a href="https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/the-cost-of-government-debt-in-canada-2016" target="_blank">Fraser Institute</a>, combined federal and provincial debt in Canada is CAD 1.3 trillion, or CAD 35,827 for every Canadian. There is little chance that Canadian citizens will be able to pay off this public debt when the citizens themselves carry large debt loads. Most Western countries have similar debt levels Essentially, they have <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">fake wealth</a>. Most Westerners think that they are wealthier than they really are.<br />
<br />
Where will they get the money to pay for these Syrian migrants? They will have to <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">steal more from their own children</a>. To do this, Justin Trudeau will increase the government deficit significantly, three times more than he promised in his campaign.<br />
<br />
You have full right to take money out of your own pocket to spend it on anything that you want. But if you are spending somebody else’s money, such as your children's or grandchildren’s money, then do you have this right? What say did they have?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.7 WHAT IS THE TRUE COST?</h2>
<br />
Do the taxpayers know the true costs?<br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syrian-refugees-higher-needs-1.3432028" target="_blank">CBC</a>:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"...53 per cent of approved cases listed five to eight people..." [This implies 3 to 6 kids per family.]</li>
<li>"...average level of schooling for adult Syrian refugees is six to nine years. Of cases coming from Jordan, 90 to 95 per cent have not finished high school. The report notes that many kids are also a year or two behind their peers, putting new demands on the school system."</li>
<li>"...work experience is largely low-skilled and almost entirely limited to males..."</li>
</ul>
How long will it take for the man of the house to learn a new language (in his adult life), learn a new skill and be productive enough to support his large family with a single income?<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhld36C3eltGL8PTRv-pmNyX76mgeRaldUq6N7K2e74s8BkTpgn6Xt_TqRSH5UPo6ME0_9NmP0Scday9zHiOyJwgbjzM29s1l8zOjurhNg6xWj-eNv15FxiKkzlMnWjwxkVjUGG9oSU-nbQ/s1600/Syria-family-to-Canada.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="155" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhld36C3eltGL8PTRv-pmNyX76mgeRaldUq6N7K2e74s8BkTpgn6Xt_TqRSH5UPo6ME0_9NmP0Scday9zHiOyJwgbjzM29s1l8zOjurhNg6xWj-eNv15FxiKkzlMnWjwxkVjUGG9oSU-nbQ/s320/Syria-family-to-Canada.png" width="320" /></a><br />
<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/new-canadian-1.3473761" target="_blank">CBC</a> shows another Syrian family that Canada is bringing over. The parents just had their 11th <br />
child. Many Canadians cannot afford more than 2 kids in Canada. How will this Syrian family afford 11? For how many years will the Syrian family need taxpayer support? How many third-world children can be saved from death with this money?<br />
<br />
According to a <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/12/09/future-doctors-engineers-65-per-cent-syrian-refugees-cant-even-read-write-claims-academic/" target="_blank">German academic</a>, 65% of Syrian migrants are illiterate. They cannot read or write their own language, let alone yours. They "have no hope of joining the job market...majority will never enter the labour market". This has the potential of "enormous predicted growth in the welfare bill."<br />
<br />
According to <a href="https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/01/05/800-million-muslims-out-of-1-4-billion-are-illiterate-dr-farrukh-salem/" target="_blank">Dr. Farrukh Salem</a>, "800 million Muslims out of 1.4 billion are illiterate."<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeHYeyfbvnkeWu9MrPRvkRNxmBKOD1OWIh5t6y3IHjTjx-E0mjihBNQuXenAB5aD5JbjyycgpddAcCVQ1qQ9PkikOq0EJ3zlxt8zwrE7HT_N8akJKFjHjd8joYBAFC_9-ilPWTExWgcLTz/s1600/Welfare.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="237" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeHYeyfbvnkeWu9MrPRvkRNxmBKOD1OWIh5t6y3IHjTjx-E0mjihBNQuXenAB5aD5JbjyycgpddAcCVQ1qQ9PkikOq0EJ3zlxt8zwrE7HT_N8akJKFjHjd8joYBAFC_9-ilPWTExWgcLTz/s320/Welfare.png" width="320" /></a>According to an Algerian journalist on Lebanon TV, there are 50 million Muslims in Europe and 80% are living on welfare or defraud the government for benefits. Here is the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nFFq9CkG4k" target="_blank">video</a> and <a href="https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/algerian-journalist-yahya-abu-zakariya-there-are-50-million-muslims-in-europe-80-of-these-muslims-are-beggars-living-on-western-welfare/" target="_blank">transcript</a>. According to American Center for Democracy (<a href="http://acdemocracy.org/muslim-immigrants-draining-european-social-benefits/" target="_blank">Muslim Immigrants Draining European Social Benefits</a>):<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>"40% of Muslim youth in France and 50% in Germany are unemployed but far from destitute. Rather, they receive a wide range of social benefits."</li>
<li>"...40% of welfare outlays in Denmark go to the 5% of the population that is Muslim. According to...former German interior minister, speaking of immigrants in general: “Seventy percent of the newcomers [since 2002] land on welfare the day of their arrival.” "</li>
<li>"“In the early 1970s, 2 million of the 3 million foreigners in Germany were in the labor force; by the turn of this century, 2 million of 7.5 million were.”" </li>
<li>"Some Muslims interpret the payment of social benefits as a form of jiziya, the poll tax traditionally paid in Islamic societies by non-Muslim peoples as a sign of their submission to Islamic rule. In other words, not only are the social benefits interpreted as a right due to Muslim recipients, but they reflect the higher, dominant position of the latter which is embedded in sharia. In fact, a minority consider draining the government’s coffers to be a contribution to jihad." </li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9hJllmmExnlk5nivyKmbSheqpcA_Os6tCZ1K22g-RbcVEtgSHsqfi51dZcI4o6rjSD28dQ1LSCOjSHMDPs4ggN9WM3mCo3sO0Ppa7fJHe1LmdFHb5KHzQ-4oZOmR94bmDqD0dk8EB1az7/s1600/Sweden-migrant.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="198" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9hJllmmExnlk5nivyKmbSheqpcA_Os6tCZ1K22g-RbcVEtgSHsqfi51dZcI4o6rjSD28dQ1LSCOjSHMDPs4ggN9WM3mCo3sO0Ppa7fJHe1LmdFHb5KHzQ-4oZOmR94bmDqD0dk8EB1az7/s320/Sweden-migrant.png" width="320" /></a>More explanation of Jizya (jiziya or jizyah) can be found <a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Jizyah_%28Tax%29" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_Undressed:_Islamic_Aid_%28Jizyah%29" target="_blank">here</a>, which states: "The lack of gratitude we see today from Islamic recipients of massive aid is likely because they view the donations as a Jizyah tax, which Muhammad instructs Muslims are fully entitled to." <br />
<br />
According to <a href="https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Refugee_Resettlement_Hijra.pdf" target="_blank">Center for Security</a>, "2012 unemployment rate [for Iraqi refugees in U.S.] was 22.6% (the number is surely much larger, but the VOLAGs have special method they use in reporting employment that help them show more success...)...60% were enrolled in Medicaid or a special medical program for refugees. 82% availed themsleves to food stamps." <br />
<br />
Even if these people are exaggerating, why take the risk?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWSMURYM7bA&nohtml5=False" target="_blank">Rebel Media</a> interviews migrants taking advantage of Sweden's benefits. One immigrant wants Sharia law for Sweden. <br />
<br />
The media usually criticizes the European countries for not having integrated the migrants. Hence, the Muslims stay segregated and unemployed. Is this argument valid? Why should the host countries spend extra money to integrate migrants? Shouldn't the migrants work extra hard to integrate into the host countries? Even so, why should segregation cause so many problems? In North America, one can easily argue that the Asians (Chinese, Koreans, etc.) do not integrate. There is a Chinatown in most major cities where large populations of Asians still do not speak English. Los Angeles has a large Korea-town. Vancouver is now referred to as Hongcouver because of its large Chinese population. Toronto has tens of thousands of Chinese who do not speak English. Yet, according to the <a href="http://www.dol.gov/_sec/media/reports/asianlaborforce/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">U.S. government</a>, Asians have the lowest unemployment rate in the U.S., lower than that for whites. Also, there is little risk that they will feel entitled to jiziya or be drawn into jihad for a religious war.<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.8 WHAT ARE THE RISKS?</h2>
<br />
Why is the West taking in Muslims when:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>February 2015: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2958517/The-Mediterranean-sea-chaos-Gaddafi-s-chilling-prophecy-interview-ISIS-threatens-send-500-000-migrants-Europe-psychological-weapon-bombed.html" target="_blank">ISIS threatens to send 500,000 migrants to Europe </a></li>
<li>May 2015: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/isis-fighters-hiding-on-migrant-boats-coming-to-europe-report-says-10255887.html" target="_blank">Isis fighters posing as refugees are being smuggled to Europe on migrant boats</a></li>
<li>November 2015: <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/555434/Islamic-State-ISIS-Smuggler-THOUSANDS-Extremists-into-Europe-Refugees" target="_blank">Islamic State reveals it has smuggled THOUSANDS of extremists into Europe</a> "There are now more than 4,000 covert ISIS gunmen "ready" across the European Union”</li>
<li>February 2016: <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-idUSKCN0VE0XL" target="_blank">German spy agency says ISIS sending fighters disguised as refugees</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/officials-warn-20000-isis-jihadis-6443516" target="_blank">Officials warn 20,000 ISIS jihadis 'have infiltrated Syrian refugee camps' </a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3318379/Hunt-Isis-killers-Syrian-passport-body-suicide-bomber-Stade-France.html" target="_blank">Two of the [Paris attackers] sneaked into Europe...by posing as refugees... </a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/09/muslim-countries-refuse-to-take-syrian-refugees-cite-risk-of-terrorism" target="_blank">Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries refuse to take Syrian refugees because they claim that there are jihad terrorists among them</a>. If they will not take the risk, why is the West taking this risk? </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC3saLkVh9E" target="_blank">Robert Spencer explains clearly the risks of taking in refugees</a> : </li>
</ul>
<ol style="text-align: left;"><ul>
<li>It is impossible to vet the migrants. </li>
<li>Islam teaches Muslims that one of the things to do to ensure entry to paradise (heaven) after death, is to emigrate and spread Islam, called hijra. This is because Islam is a political, military, supremacist, authoritarian and violent ideology, that comes via emigration in the cause of Allah. Is this reflected in the fact that the majority of migrants are men, of fighting age, who leave their women and children behind? Wouldn't you take your wife and children with you, if you were them? Why aren't they? </li>
<li>A million Christians have been displaced in Iraq and Syria. The Archbishop of Mosul said that he has lost is entire Diocese to Islam and if Europe and America don't wake up, the same thing is going to happen to them. Where are the million Christian refugees? Most of the migrants going to the West are Muslims. Why aren't we rescuing the Christians?</li>
<li>50% of Syrian refugees are not Syrians. There is a big black market for forged passports.</li>
<li>Islam teaches Muslims that they are superior to you, that you are "apes" and "pigs" and that they should subjugate you. [How will this help our government's fight against bigotry and discrimination?] </li>
</ul>
</ol>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/flashback-archbishop-mosul-lost-my-diocese-islam-you-west-will-become-victims" target="_blank">Archbishop of Mosul</a> : Christians will “suffer in the near future,” and stressed that the West is endangering itself by welcoming “an ever-growing number of Muslims.” "Our sufferings today are the prelude of those that you, Europeans and Western Christians, will also suffer in the near future" The West says “all men are equal,” Islam “does not say that all men are equal,” and “their values” are not our values. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEQpWtnI-bM" target="_blank">The Bishop of Mosul Cries</a>.</li>
<li>Robert Spencer explains hijra further on <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260019/hijrah-europe-robert-spencer" target="_blank">Frontpage Mag</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>"This is no longer just a “refugee crisis.” This is a hijrah."</li>
<li>"To emigrate in the cause of Allah – that is, to move to a new land in order to bring Islam there, is considered in Islam to be a highly meritorious act."</li>
<li>“And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations and abundance,” says the Qur’an. </li>
<li>"The exalted status of such emigrants led a British jihad group that won notoriety...a few years ago for celebrating 9/11 to call itself Al-Muhajiroun: The Emigrants."</li>
<li>"...no effort whatsoever is being made to determine the refugees’ adherence to Sharia and desire to bring it to their new land."</li>
<li>"why is it incumbent upon Europe have to absorb all these refugees? Why not Saudi Arabia or the other Muslim countries that are oil-rich and have plenty of space? The answer is unspoken because non-Muslim authorities refuse to believe it and Muslims don’t want it stated or known: these refugees have to go to Europe because this is a hijrah."</li>
</ul>
<li>Center for Security Policy supports Robert Spencer's claim. In their <a href="https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Refugee_Resettlement_Hijra.pdf" target="_blank">Rufugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America</a> report, it states:</li>
<ul>
<li>"Hijra remains the model
to this day for jihadists who seek to populate and dominate new lands.
Their migrations are not for the purpose of assimilating peace-fully in a
new host nation, adopting as their own its traditions and legal
systems. Rather, Mohammed’s followers, in keeping with the example
established by their prophet, are driven first to colonize and then to
transform non-Muslim target societies...Migration is Jihad. Hijra is the "most important method of spreading Islam..."" </li>
<li>"Pew asked Muslim respondents this question: “How much support for extremism is there among Muslim Americans?” and the percentage of those answering a “Great deal/fair amount” was 21%. Pew might conclude that shows little support for extremism, but when one considers there are at least, according to Pew, 2.7 million Muslims in America, that comes out to a whopping 567,000 of them who are thought to support ‘extremism’ to one degree or another!"</li>
</ul>
<li>SPEISA provides supporting evidence: <a href="http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.1361/how-saudi-arabia-wants-to-convert-sweden-to-islam.html" target="_blank">How Saudi Arabia wants to convert Sweden to Islam</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/08/the_hijra.html" target="_blank">American Thinker</a> explains Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration. </li>
<ul>
<li>"Hijra is a comprehensive and direct political attempt to undermine the culture and values of the host country and replace them with Islam and shari'ah. It is an insidious migration seeking transformation of the culture, behaviors, customs, rules and laws of a host society to spread Islam and establish an Islamic state."</li>
<li>"The stages of the Hijra are very much evident in varying degrees in all Western societies today. Ironically, our open democratic societies with constitutionally mandated freedoms of speech, religion and assembly have facilitated this march toward the very demise of our way of life."</li>
</ul>
<li>Europe has found that the second generation Muslims are more radical
than the first. Even if the Syrian migrants are moderate, what about
their children? Will they become more radical? </li>
<li>According to <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/" target="_blank">The Atlantic</a>: "Islamic State’s chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries such as France and Canada to find an infidel and “smash his head with a rock,” poison him, run him over with a car, or “destroy his crops.”". The more Muslims there are in France or Canada, the more likely a Muslim will heed this call. According to <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/07/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/" target="_blank">Pew Research</a>, 7% of Muslim Americans "say suicide bombings are sometimes justified and 1% say they are often justified". This equates to 8 out of every 100 Muslims, 80 out of every 1,000 Muslims or 800 out of every 10,000 Muslims.</li>
<ul>
<li>See <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjvfaZIDLCg" target="_blank">Jihad Triangle</a>: "Many people are confused by jihad. If Islam is a religion of peace, why
is there a persistent problem of radicalism in the Muslim world? If
Islam is the problem, why are there so many peaceful Muslims? In this
video, David Wood explains that jihad isn't the product of a single
factor, but of three factors: belief, knowledge, and obedience. These
three factors come together in what we'll call "The Jihad Triangle." [Most Muslims in the West have one of those factors, which is "belief". Therefore, the more Muslims you have, the higher the probability that you will have Muslims who will acquire the other two factors: "knowledge" and "obedience". According to David Wood, this is how radicalization happens: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mbycQ4Ak-Y" target="_blank">How ISIS Radicalizes Young Muslims</a>.</li>
</ul>
<li>According to the Islamic Front's Sharia court in Syria: "Muslim majority in Syria will ask for an Islamic state". According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Syria#Religions" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>, 75% of Syrians are Sunni Muslims. ISIS are Sunni Muslims. Will Syrians in the West wish for Sharia or jihad?</li>
<li>CSPI International claims that "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJgGOCFr83E" target="_blank">Charlie Hebdo Assassination 100% Islam</a>" </li>
<li>David Wood explains the risk of having Muslims in the West:</li>
<ul>
<li>"<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ur7Ttz0q0o4" target="_blank">The Quran and the Siege of Paris</a>"</li>
<li>"<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C48FArTKtJA" target="_blank">Jihad Returns to Belgium</a>" </li>
</ul>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8TLu514EgU" target="_blank">Exclusive: Islamic State Member Warns of NYC Attack In VICE News Interview</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/06/save-our-children-from-the-islamists/" target="_blank">Muslim schools in the UK</a> teach the need to establish an Islamic state and ‘the world will, insha’Allah, witness the death of the criminal capitalist nation of America and all other (infidel) states when the army of jihad is unleashed against them’.</li>
<li>According to <a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Fighting_Non-Muslims#No_Innocent_Kafir_are_Killed" target="_blank">WikiIslam</a>, Islam's orders Muslims to fight and kill non-Muslims:</li>
<ul>
<li>Acts Against Kafir (non-Muslim) are Acts of Allah</li>
<li>Conquer Other Religions by Overbreeding</li>
<li>Live in Peace with Kafir for a While</li>
<li>Lying and Murder is Permissible for Muslims Defending or Promoting Islam</li>
<li>No Innocent Kafir are Killed [all Kafirs are guilty]</li>
<li>Jihad is Perpetual</li>
</ul>
<li>Even if a Muslim claims to be moderate and does not believe in or is unaware of jizya, hijra, three stages of jihad and Islam's orders to kill and subjugate non-Muslims, how do we know that he/she is not practicing taqiyya? Watch <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F4wBeshTsw" target="_blank">this</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg5TY5CPrzk" target="_blank">this</a> for explanations of taqiyya, which is Islam's instructions to deceive non-Muslims.</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5wTNqOQL-8" target="_blank">Tarek Fatah, a Muslim, tells Canadian Senate about the dangers of the Islamic doctrine and the left political correctness madness</a>. He calls for a ban of Muslims as well. He said:</li>
<ul>
<li> "Somalia, Bangladesh, Arab and Pakistani Muslim communities...radicalization is widespread, deeply entrenched, embedded and is framed in terms of Islam versus the infidels leading to an end of time Armageddon."</li>
<li>"Most of you would not know...Most mosques in Canada and around the world, start their Friday congregations with a prayer that asks Allah to give victory to the Muslims over the Kuffar [derogatory name for non-Muslims] or infidels...that is people like you. The glorification and radicalization is endemic and ubiquitous in the sermons and teachings to very young adults, as can be verified in the incidents in the UK and Canada. Every Islamic hero for the last 1,400 years, has been a Jihadist, who is celebrated for his exploits in defeating Christians, Jews, Hindus or Pagans."</li>
<li>"Recommendations...Lay hate speech charges against any Muslim cleric, who hides behind religious rights to attack and demonizes others of another faith...as is done every Friday in every mosque of this country...Immigration from Pakistan, Iran, Somalia and Syria must be suspended..."</li>
<li>"Islamism has escaped attention from everyone from Bush to Obama to Cameron. In all of the Western world, only one politician has had the courage to say that Islamism is a great threat and that is Harper. No one else has had the guts to say that we are fighting an enemy that is structured around a death cult...to most most people in the West, that seems like a joke. To every Muslim, that is a fact of life."</li>
<li>"Senator, they are laughing at the RCMP behind your backs."</li>
<li>Senator asks what we should do. Fatah said "Suspend immigration from Iran, Pakistan, Somalia..."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
Why do you want to live with people whose ideology tells them to hate, fight, kill or subjugate you? Why take the risk?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.9 COMPATIBLE?</h2>
<br />
When Westerners discuss Islam, critics use terms like “racism” or “Islamophobia”.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhUSgQQy4WPHdCvYORC_HWlyAaHLlvwHRY-DZYAB5Mm5-W7MFhAZ_y7oCp4QipvcAfXrDRxyykTIUjobbcVlQ47cp_Kri0kIOfA1rtZCgWT6J6hziwm5GVC0dyv2wnK2zQzhSeLWPX8W3H/s1600/White-German-Muslim.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhUSgQQy4WPHdCvYORC_HWlyAaHLlvwHRY-DZYAB5Mm5-W7MFhAZ_y7oCp4QipvcAfXrDRxyykTIUjobbcVlQ47cp_Kri0kIOfA1rtZCgWT6J6hziwm5GVC0dyv2wnK2zQzhSeLWPX8W3H/s200/White-German-Muslim.png" width="168" /></a>Firstly, Islam is not a race. Before the 7th century, there was no Islam and no Muslims. Much of the Middle East and North Africa were
Christian and Jewish. Note that Jesus Christ was a Middle Easterner.
Arabs were Christian and Jewish. After the birth of Islam, Muslims
killed over 250 million people (according to <a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/05/the_greatest_murder_machine_in_history.html" target="_blank">American Thinker</a>) largely to conquer and to force people to convert to Islam. Now, there are Arabic, White, Asian, South Asian, Southeast Asian and Black Muslim countries in a large part of the world. There are Chinese Muslims. There are several White European Muslim countries. Turkey used be to 100% Christian. Now it is nearly 100% Muslim. There used to Hindu and Buddhist culture in Afghanistan. Now it is Islamic. Pakistan used to be Hindu like India. Now it is Islamic. Indonesia became the world’s largest Muslim country. See the following for full explanation and maps that show the expansion:<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_h-BqEabtvPiNtYzU8__0dLam2rjsRqg93n3CvXfON8OjscSrr_gywV-qK6PFkcwOSoOjBvqNB-qWMdMMXqIZAnaxZVyLzbS9ccUK9pEgVvXg7LnCzgSRy-VYytkmBvy6e66J2dJi21j8/s1600/Invasion.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_h-BqEabtvPiNtYzU8__0dLam2rjsRqg93n3CvXfON8OjscSrr_gywV-qK6PFkcwOSoOjBvqNB-qWMdMMXqIZAnaxZVyLzbS9ccUK9pEgVvXg7LnCzgSRy-VYytkmBvy6e66J2dJi21j8/s320/Invasion.png" width="320" /></a><br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aACpy7fLjFo" target="_blank">A Brief History of Islam</a><br />
HISTORY OF ISLAMIC CONQUEST<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y" target="_blank">Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret, by Dr Bill Warner</a><br />
<br />
Secondly, racism is when one race feels superior to another race. It is hard for non-Muslims to be racist when they are inferior:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>according to <a href="http://islamreview.com/the-issues-of-life-according-to-the-quran/" target="_blank">IslamReview</a>: "Islam teaches that Muslims are superior to others. “Ye (Muslims) are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind…” Surah 3:110)”</li>
<li>according to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ma1RNR2YqQ" target="_blank">David Wood</a> (at 30:36) "Qur’an 98:6 - “…those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur’an, and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.”"</li>
<li>a <a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/06/save-our-children-from-the-islamists/" target="_blank">Muslim school in the UK</a> teaches students that Jews and Christians are ‘apes and pigs’ and western women are ‘white prostitutes’.</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwPlY6EYnJ8" target="_blank">Mosques in Sweden</a> (37:04 into video) teach Muslims to discriminate against non-Muslims, who are “criminals”, “apes” and “pigs”</li>
<li>according to Anjem Choudary, (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A&ebc=ANyPxKpaj2DIi31wiE8NnMYJZNmzLEC8KApuy8Gog1d813etSLNMRUgc3gbtzO4Kv_D0ZhtSbh2s&nohtml5=False" target="_blank">49:07 into video</a>): "all non-Muslims are destined for the hell fire".</li>
<li>according to <a href="http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/quran-hate.aspx" target="_blank">TheReligionOfPeace.com</a>, non-Muslims are "vile animals", "panting dogs", "cattle", "unclean", "ignorant", "helpers of the devil", "apes" and "pigs". </li>
</ul>
Why is it okay for Muslims to be bigoted and offensive to non-Muslims (but the reverse is not okay)?<br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://islamreview.com/the-issues-of-life-according-to-the-quran/" target="_blank">Abdullah Al Araby</a>: "Islam is more than a religion; it is a comprehensive way of life. The Quran, Mohammed, his immediate followers, and generations of theologians prescribed numerous regulations governing every aspect of the Muslim social, political, economic, and religious life.” It is more than an ideology or doctrine. It includes a set of laws to govern society. Islam clearly states this with Sharia law. Therefore, it is politics. According to this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J60AWCS-hfo" target="_blank">documentary</a>, there was near zero evidence of Muhammad’s existence until approximately 60 years after his death. ibn al-Zubayr was an Arabic emperor and was the first to put Muhammad on a coin. This enabled emperors to “use the name of Muhammad to buttress earthly powers”. The Romans had already known about religion and power. Abd al Malik ibn Marwan plugged his dominion into the power God. This helped these emperors control and govern their empires. This <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6bBeyaRjac" target="_blank">video</a> concurs by explaining that Islam was a political instrument to help keep the 7th century, multi-national, multi-racial and multi-ethnic empire glued together. (28:42 into video) "The political aspects of Islam are not incidental to it...but are its very essence. The existence of Islam is a political thing primarily, and that the religious was constructed afterwards."<br />
<br />
If it is political, then we have a right to discuss the compatibility of Islam with the West. Nobody has the right to silence those who try to debate politics by using terms like “Racism” or “Islamophobia”. According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV7PdAhVs1w" target="_blank">Dr. Bill Warner</a>, the Muslim Brotherhood invented the word “Islamophobe” to suppress free speech. <br />
<br />
Is Islam compatible with the West or other parts of the world? Through Sharia law, Islam legislates:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>abolishment of democracy and any man-made laws</li>
<li>penalty for crimes are beheading, amputation and stoning for adultery </li>
<li>penalty for apostasy (such as not being a true Muslim or a Muslim leaving Islam) is death</li>
</ul>
<br />
MAJORITY OF MUSLIMS WANT SHARIA LAW<br />
<br />
To know what Sharia law is like, think of Taliban in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. According to <a href="http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/" target="_blank">Pew’s research</a>, the majority of Muslims want Sharia law and a percentage of Muslims want Sharia applied to you, a non-Muslim. 91% of Iraqis want Sharia law. Like ISIS, Syrians are Sunni Muslims and want Sharia law as well. There are now <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3358625/Inside-Britain-s-Sharia-courts-EIGHTY-FIVE-Islamic-courts-dispensing-justice-UK-special-investigation-really-goes-doors-shock-core.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">85 Sharia courts</a> in the UK. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra45nX9JmW4" target="_blank">60 Minutes shows 'Sharia Patrols' policing Europeans in Europe</a>. This means that they do not believe in Western laws. Here are interviews of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfmywzjdtRM" target="_blank">Muslim Americans who want Sharia law</a>.<br />
<br />
Are you okay with Sharia law?<br />
<br />
Islam is a political system for totalitarianism and authoritarianism, where no one is allowed to criticize, change or leave the system, much like what you saw in Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
Westerners have been criticizing totalitarianism and authoritarianism
for decades. Should we call Westerners racists, bigots, totalitarian-phobes or authoritarian-phobes for criticizing these political systems?<br />
<br />
According to this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6bBeyaRjac" target="_blank">video</a> (19:18 into video): Islam teaches that Muslims are merciful to one another but ruthless to the unbelievers. "Unbelievers are called the most vile of created beings in the Qur'an and they are never accorded equality of rights with Muslims, not in anywhere in the Qur'an or in the Islamic legal superstructure. You can go around the world today, and there is no place on the planet today or ever in history where non-Muslims have enjoyed full equality of rights with Muslims in a Muslim state...and it never has happened and it never will unless there is a drastic change in Islam because these things are embedded within Islamic law." <br />
<br />
If Muslims are ordered to be supremacists, bigoted and to subjugate you, a non-believer, do you want to live with them?<br />
<br />
According to <a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Ultimate_Message_of_the_Qur'an" target="_blank">WikiIslam:</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"...Islam can fairly be called coercive, expansionist and imperialistic... Words followed by the actions of Muhammad's followers speak much louder here. Muhammad clearly did not envision a non-violent world where members of all faiths would live a peaceful co-existence. His words “There will always be a group in his community of believers that are dominant over infidels” highlights this. An ideology stuck in a certain backdrop of history where killing and subjugating others in the name of religion had been made legal by divine dictations can never bring peace to the world."</blockquote>
<br />
If Islam orders Muslims to dominate, "kill" and "subjugate" you, do you want to live with them?<br />
<br />
WHAT WESTERN LEADERS REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE <br />
<br />
The following is a summary of explanations, which most Western leaders and media will not acknowledge, from <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Atlantic</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=robert+spencer+islam" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Robert Spencer</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=david+wood+islam" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">David Wood</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dr+bill+warner+islam" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Dr. Bill Warner</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=tom+holland+islam" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Tom Holland</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y27t01dx9Wg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Gavin Boby</a>, ex-Muslim <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEzckaXvM0i6CyHbz5YxwoQ/videos" target="_blank">Hazem Farraj</a>, ex-Muslim <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsjJvehvV00" target="_blank">Omar Makram</a> (and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2m338cRXRM" target="_blank">this</a>), Muslim <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5wTNqOQL-8" target="_blank">Tarek Fatah</a>, Muslim <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6dcrCf0Z1w" target="_blank">Hamed Abdel-Samad</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=brigitte+gabriel+islam" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Brigitte Gabriel</a>: <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWDsHmlzZ5Sayw_JwUYRIo0DcGE3cmI7mRuNzpV2E7RudnrQjPNfPuaJPiR45xTGoYJexZBvIVxSmdMu-AbY8VzyPDXMqxBCfUpQ_48Q_vvfF9F876I98UxK1V-757S3zia3DNbZpmQJ4-/s1600/Gavin-Boby.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="147" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWDsHmlzZ5Sayw_JwUYRIo0DcGE3cmI7mRuNzpV2E7RudnrQjPNfPuaJPiR45xTGoYJexZBvIVxSmdMu-AbY8VzyPDXMqxBCfUpQ_48Q_vvfF9F876I98UxK1V-757S3zia3DNbZpmQJ4-/s200/Gavin-Boby.png" width="200" /></a></div>
According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y27t01dx9Wg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Gavin Boby</a>,
“Islamic doctrine: war against unbelievers…conquest and hatred against
unbelievers. This is set out in the Qur’an, Hadith [and] Surah.
Extremely hateful, extremely war-like, extremely violent.” Here are <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES9_xe0OhIs" target="_blank">10 examples of the Koran being violent</a>. To understand why, you have to understand the origin or Islam. It was created 1,400 years ago to militarize the followers, in order to expand an empire’s wealth and power by emigrating and invading. (Rome was the master at it. Islam added emigration as a strategy.) It is similar to military training. Various armies throughout history have demonized the enemy and trained their soldiers to hate their enemy, otherwise soldiers will hesitate or have second thoughts about killing the enemy. However, Islam is much more effective. It provided a win-win scenario for fighters:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>If you win the battle, you keep 80% of the war-booty, get to rape the women and keep sex slaves</li>
<li>If you die in battle, you get 72 virgins in heaven and heaven is better than if you owned the entire earth</li>
</ul>
According to <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Atlantic</a>, "ISIS is Islamic. Very Islamic." <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxVIg4nLebc" rel="" target="_blank">Hazem Farraj</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXBgqa-xQwY" target="_blank">David Wood</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw9lG83lr0s" target="_blank">Robert Spencer</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt51LTLTKm4" target="_blank">Dr. Bill Warner</a> explain how ISIS is Islamic.<br />
<br />
In the 7th century, the Middle East and North Africa were populated with Jews, Christians and Pagans. The creators of Islam ordered Muslims to hate, kill or extort from these infidels. After 1,400 years, they killed 250 million infidels and are still killing infidels today. This is why they are so anti-Semitic. They do this because they believe they are following orders from God (Allah). In 1924, they lost their last caliphate and became weak. However, the Muslim Brotherhood started in 1928 to continue Islam’s marching orders. This pre-dates Israel and any U.S. meddling in the Middle East. Many terrorist groups branched off from the Muslim Brotherhood. After Saudi Arabia struck it rich, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">they have spent $100 billion to spread</a> <a href="http://listverse.com/2015/09/29/10-dark-reasons-saudi-arabia-may-be-our-deadliest-ally/" target="_blank">their form of Islam</a> and given gifts to politicians such as <a href="http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/saudis-spent-1-35-million-on-obama-gifts-in-2014/" target="_blank">$1.35m to Obama</a>. According to the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12035838/German-vice-chancellor-accuses-Saudi-Arabia-of-funding-Islamic-extremism-in-the-West.html" target="_blank">Telegraph</a>, Saudi Arabia offered "to build 200 mosques for Syrian refugees arriving in Germany, even as Saudi Arabia refuses to take in any refugees itself". There are now <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">44 million</a> Muslims in Europe with thousands of Mosques and growing. Their goal is to convert the world to Islam, no matter how long it takes.<br />
<br />
You might question the validity of the above because you see peaceful or moderate Muslims. This is because they are one of the following:<br />
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>They cherry-picked Islam’s orders.</li>
<li>They are clued-out about Islam's orders.</li>
<li>They are following Islam’s order of Taqiyya, which is to deceive you the enemy when they are in the minority or weak, or they are following the order to practise stealth Jihad.</li>
</ol>
If they are #1 or #2, then they are following less than 100% of Islam. According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y27t01dx9Wg" target="_blank">Glazov</a> (5:37 into video), "there are many Muslims who do not follow [the Islamic] ideology,...but they are considered bad Muslims by Islamic ideology." According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y27t01dx9Wg" target="_blank">Gavin Boby</a> (6:00 into video), "People who are not prepared to engage in Jihad are referred to as hypocrites and they will burn...in the afterlife." Therefore, Imams can easily get Muslims in the #1 and #2 categories to follow more of Islam. This is what is happening to second generation Muslims in Europe.<br />
<br />
Islam is a comprehensive and eternal indoctrination of conquest. As long as people believe that these marching orders come from God, they will continue fighting in the name of Allah. This is why they yell “Allahu Akbar” when they protest in the UK for Sharia law or when they detonate their bombs.<br />
<br />
Should you continue letting enemies into your country? Millions of Muslims continue to follow Islam’s order of hijra (emigrate to spread Islam). Mosques continue to be built, which teach this indoctrination of conquest.<br />
<br />
Is Islam bigoted if it wants to dominate, subjugate or get money (jizya) from you (non-Muslim) and implement totalitarianism (abolish democracy, abolish freedom of speech, abolish criticism of its politics)? If so, are you okay with this?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.10 WHY CREATE SOCIAL UNREST?</h2>
<br />
Bringing Muslims to Western countries is causing social unrest, frustration and friction with the Westerners. Is this worth it? Is there another solution? The world, especially the West, does not seem to have much of an issue with helping poor people, as they have donated billions over the past decades to third-world countries. However, they seem to have a problem, when people are brought into their countries. <br />
<br />
The following are just a fraction of the Youtube videos or articles showing social unrest in the West. You can find thousands of them on the internet:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>According to think tank <a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6721/muslim-invasion-europe" target="_blank">Gastetone Institute</a> about the European migrant crisis:</li>
<ul>
<li>"Syrian government sells passports and birth certificates"</li>
<li>"Many have no passports, no ID, and refuse to give fingerprints.”</li>
<li>"Whenever people flee to survive, the men come with whole families: women, children, elders. Here, instead, more than 75% of those who arrive are men under 50”</li>
<li>“…they harass Christians and attack women.”</li>
<li>"Rapes, assaults, stabbings and other crimes are on the rise.”</li>
<li>“…percentage of Muslims in prisons in Europe is high. In France, which has the largest Muslim population in Europe, the prison population is 70% Muslim. Many European prisons have become recruitment centers for future jihadis.”</li>
<li>"Populations of Western Europe increasingly think that the dream society that had been promised has turned into a nightmare."</li>
<li>"A project to overwhelm Europe by a huge wave of migration was already described by the Islamic State…"</li>
</ul>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42jpuXJPk0w" target="_blank">Migrants attack Australia's 60 Minutes crew in Sweden</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZFmnz4ROEo" target="_blank">25,000 March Against Islam: Hate in Europe</a><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZFmnz4ROEo" target="_blank"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNyk4p973FY_fBxgHrBHv-ZN2h6kU4mb5_MrR83chfop1FujzMdQ-AYxa7xHr5mZFdO0Z7c22bWBSqP82mHHXco9n-DDUB3NbFSdUXgMVtnNd4jhXxEbDJo4G6fJw2TCS3mdZXteSDQsf1/s1600/Germany-unrest.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="138" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNyk4p973FY_fBxgHrBHv-ZN2h6kU4mb5_MrR83chfop1FujzMdQ-AYxa7xHr5mZFdO0Z7c22bWBSqP82mHHXco9n-DDUB3NbFSdUXgMVtnNd4jhXxEbDJo4G6fJw2TCS3mdZXteSDQsf1/s320/Germany-unrest.png" width="320" /></a></div>
</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRZiTreKcCk" target="_blank">Anti-Islamist Riots in Germany: Hooligans Against Salafists</a> </li>
<ul>
<li>(at 3:34 into vidoe) White German Islamic preacher explains that he would like to see all Germans follow Islam </li>
</ul>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1tEpjmFH9g" target="_blank">London's Holy Turf War</a></li>
<ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjU8ViZQ2Q1F_roEId0cgm3NVGc7-SMd34y3kuNyaa1HI9RVy-XIM0C5d1Q8X5xi8XNlvWR9WgNoA6kaf82c5H-cAbSwoDPvWXplrVRdLWGBgh1IqI6nH00QtuGBDVBma319eWBYV78LJCj/s1600/Britain-unrest.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjU8ViZQ2Q1F_roEId0cgm3NVGc7-SMd34y3kuNyaa1HI9RVy-XIM0C5d1Q8X5xi8XNlvWR9WgNoA6kaf82c5H-cAbSwoDPvWXplrVRdLWGBgh1IqI6nH00QtuGBDVBma319eWBYV78LJCj/s320/Britain-unrest.png" width="320" /></a>
<li>Some Muslims in London are implementing Sharia law and want to see everybody become Muslims.</li>
</ul>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpxz8Pf2VNE" target="_blank">The tiny Greek island sinking under Europe’s migrant crisis</a> </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1MYMVfyHi0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Rise Of Sweden's Far-Left Militants</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMbRkgVV_Bs" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">In Sweden, sexual assaults, crime and ghettos are growing</a> (35:43 into video)</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxD7RTm0Bxw" rel="" target="_blank">Sex and the Migrant Crisis</a> [According to author, most migrants are single males. This causes a gender in-balance, sex attacks and competition for German women. Hundreds of thousands of German men and migrant men will not get girlfriends/wives and will be frustrated and lonely.]</li>
<li><a href="http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/644315/Sweden-migrant-crisis-refugee-asylum-seekers-Alexandra-Mezher-breaking-point" target="_blank">How 'totally unprecedented' migrant crisis is pushing Sweden to breaking point</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34278886" target="_blank">How is the migrant crisis dividing EU countries?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.voanews.com/content/visegrad-group-migrant-crisis-deepens-europe-east-west-divide/3193678.html" target="_blank">Migrant Crisis Deepens Europe's East-West Divide</a> </li>
<li>According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrOyAAZ1n3I" target="_blank">Yazidis in Germany</a>, Germany should not allow Muslims in (22:55 into video): “We came to Germany to flee from the Islamic people and now Germany brings them here. That’s not good.” [Will Sunnis, Shiites and Yazidis fight each other on Western soil one day?]</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqKNmoOj4Lk&ebc=ANyPxKrhepUiMBecu0plHUMzSlaqEl4Saa1e8QynPISlFgjbQIT8Hnd5Oq9oq9o2ehojA3WbeKNi&nohtml5=False" target="_blank">Immigration Destroys Sweden </a></li>
</ul>
How do we reduce this social unrest?<br />
<br />
In addition to the social unrest, frustration and friction that is happening with the natives, what are the additional costs to taxpayers for police, courts and prisons?<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
</ul>
<br />
<h2>
6.11 SEXUAL ASSAULT</h2>
<br />
The following is a small fraction of the videos and articles that you can find about sexual assault. You can find thousands of them on the internet by searching "rape in Europe":<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-EijrcmWdFt_FLxkAYls1A2wGyWrz8r2Nw0hqsonf_TqmQLbjoFpgIFOVz0H66YHazGJows9epczcPJ0pqxBPe_gzpjJascWozuUYfAY6htxjg1d738BwxP0VDtpOIuMg4TYkBnaYjUyr/s1600/German-girl-assaulted.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-EijrcmWdFt_FLxkAYls1A2wGyWrz8r2Nw0hqsonf_TqmQLbjoFpgIFOVz0H66YHazGJows9epczcPJ0pqxBPe_gzpjJascWozuUYfAY6htxjg1d738BwxP0VDtpOIuMg4TYkBnaYjUyr/s200/German-girl-assaulted.png" width="190" /></a>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjS7KNwNaHNQLC50TIpULk-n639YjCzcIcmUjjmuVWSoLfreTBAi9JehiKGLDv5sGDOhu-EFNNKrL3pmQSin35n0e3Obrd_dmf9iZyYFWasGH3yGtRkrH20qMR0DNxcH86wbfucgV_i31K1/s1600/Rape-map.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjS7KNwNaHNQLC50TIpULk-n639YjCzcIcmUjjmuVWSoLfreTBAi9JehiKGLDv5sGDOhu-EFNNKrL3pmQSin35n0e3Obrd_dmf9iZyYFWasGH3yGtRkrH20qMR0DNxcH86wbfucgV_i31K1/s320/Rape-map.png" width="320" /></a>
<li>According to <a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam" target="_blank">WikiIslam</a>: "...there are several verses in this book [Qur'an] which give the green light to rape and other sexual crimes against women." </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv3NWMjU4HU" target="_blank">David Wood - Islamic Rape Gangs in the UK</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWwMSm8EfS8" target="_blank">Australian Woman Jailed BECAUSE she was Gang-Raped - Sharia in Dubai</a> [Under Islamic law, 4 men have to witness the rape in order for the woman to charge the men for rape, otherwise the woman is jailed for having sex outside of marriage.]</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVRiRDwpblY" target="_blank">Cologne attack 'left me scarred for life' - BBC News</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-_OTec6euA" target="_blank">Did Sweden have its own version of the Cologne attacks? BBC Newsnight</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds1RMpDQGvk" target="_blank">Is there a refugee backlash in Cologne and Sweden?</a></li>
<li>COVER UP of Sexual Assaults in Sweden, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMbRkgVV_Bs" target="_blank">RT's report</a> (39:17 into video):</li>
<ul>
<li>"...what fuels anti-immigrant sentiment more than anything here is media silence."</li>
<li>"Evidence showing both the police and the media knew about sexual assaults taking place, but choosing not to inform the public, infuriated many."</li>
<li>"...betrayal of the victims."</li>
<li>"They always try to downplay the attack in Sweden because...they want to preserve the image that Sweden is this perfect..."</li>
<li>"Police are frustrated...they are quitting en masse."</li>
<li>"We never had this before 50 years ago. Gradually, it becomes a bigger and bigger problem....Now everybody knows about it but still it is very sensitive to talk about it."</li>
</ul>
<li>According to think tank Gatestone Institute:</li>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape" target="_blank">Sweden has become the rape capital of the West</a>. (More from <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCGedOGCrnQ" target="_blank">Rebel Media</a>)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7557/germany-rape-migrants-crisis" target="_blank">public spaces in Germany are becoming perilous for women and children</a>. It has a long list of rape and sexual assaults.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7577/sweden-migrants-sexual-assault" target="_blank">Sweden: Sexual Assaults at Swimming Pools</a> </li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7559/finland-migrant-crisis" target="_blank">Finland</a></li>
</ul>
<li>COVER UP of Sexual Assaults in Germany: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk_Jybe242U" target="_blank">Instead of deporting the rapists, Cologne’s mayor tries to cover up and tells women to change behavior.</a> </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwPlY6EYnJ8" target="_blank">Hotel worker describes migrants stabbing a German and sexually assaulting 90 German women</a> </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9TOdMzOH1U" target="_blank">New years eve 2015, Immigrant riots in Cologne Germany - An eyewitness account</a> </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrqxOAGfyGg" target="_blank">Cover up in Germany</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/cologne-is-every-day-europes-rape-epidemic/news-story/e2e618e17ad4400b5ed65045e65e141d" target="_blank">‘Cologne is every day’: Europe’s rape epidemic</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08ZPbUBmb30&nohtml5=False" target="_blank">Tommy Robinson explains how leaders should have expected the sexual assaults and not be shocked</a> </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi4VQvt51KM" target="_blank">Canadian media silent about Muslim serial rapist</a></li>
<li>GROOMING (raping, beating, trafficking and pimping girls and children): </li>
<ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWfCOs0j1bUxR21_LDzxz7KFIlCjg_QC68NZoKd55dZFGspSpTLSEOERW05pf6ycn3zao1Bx8EJ0QaNRWQfehD_j-Lc3BX2ySjw-g_XsTBjD5vpDangLp0d87wVjdDgYBnY_Hq3cJ20Gsi/s1600/BCC-grooming.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="144" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWfCOs0j1bUxR21_LDzxz7KFIlCjg_QC68NZoKd55dZFGspSpTLSEOERW05pf6ycn3zao1Bx8EJ0QaNRWQfehD_j-Lc3BX2ySjw-g_XsTBjD5vpDangLp0d87wVjdDgYBnY_Hq3cJ20Gsi/s200/BCC-grooming.png" width="200" /></a>
<li>COVER UP: </li>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>BBC: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3VgMeqNWHg&nohtml5=False" target="_blank">Rotherham grooming scandal</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Telegraph: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11059138/Rotherham-In-the-face-of-such-evil-who-is-the-racist-now.html" target="_blank">"In the face of such evil, who is the racist now?"</a> :</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"...Yorkshire town where 1,400 girls have been sexually abused..."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrBI7GV9vznhsT_riSuVmVS_cBTipEXxh1h1OB2cAH_wl7XLttoMvpqCccLtth0y2Q-fpXktNmKURkqLXfwXA32YZ45D6CtMbIUgG3d0VTHench4mXEo9fkvxxbXxXp45JTRmIuH6Gs1Vu/s1600/Yorkshire-rapist.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrBI7GV9vznhsT_riSuVmVS_cBTipEXxh1h1OB2cAH_wl7XLttoMvpqCccLtth0y2Q-fpXktNmKURkqLXfwXA32YZ45D6CtMbIUgG3d0VTHench4mXEo9fkvxxbXxXp45JTRmIuH6Gs1Vu/s200/Yorkshire-rapist.png" width="184" /></a>
<li>"The Labour Party, in particular, is mired in shame over “cultural sensitivity” in Rotherham. Especially, cynics might point
out, a sensitivity to the culture of Muslims whose votes they don’t want to lose....“there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat" ...Much better to hang on to your impeccable liberal credentials than save a few girls from being raped...town hall told them to keep quiet about the ethnicity of the perpetrators..." [As in Germany and Sweden, UK politicians covered up the grooming because they cared more about offending Muslims than they cared about girls or children getting raped.]</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"Officials trained up in diversity and political correctness failed to acknowledge what was effectively white slavery on their doorstep. Much too embarrassing to concede that it wasn’t white people who were committing racist hate crimes in this instance."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"...1,400 brutalised girls, many of whom have self-harmed or committed suicide..."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"Far from discouraging racism, the Labour policy of withholding the ethnic identity of men who preyed on white girls backfired spectacularly. Criminally, it endangered hundreds of children who might otherwise have been spared."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"...inquiry found to be a “deep-rooted problem of Pakistani-heritage perpetrators targeting young white girls”. Many of us who have been saying this for a long time have been shouted down as racist."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"...fear of appearing racist was more pressing in official minds than enforcing the law of the land or rescuing terrified children. It is one of the great scandals of our lifetime."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"The [politicians] stands accused of ignoring child sex abuse on an unimaginable scale for 16 years." </li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<ul>
<li>"To avoid rocking the multicultural boat, they fed 1,400 children to the sharks. No just God would stand for what they did."</li>
</ul>
<li> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGLuEhAkpaI&nohtml5=False" target="_blank">BBC</a>
(22:49 into video): Tommy Robinson claims that it is Islamic text
about concubines and sexual slavery that is to blame for gang abuse
(grooming) of young girls. Islamic scholar Usama Hasan says: "I agree
with you. Muslims...have to step up their efforts against the
extremists and reform it. That's something I've tried to do and a
colleague of mine have tried to do. We've faced death threats and
intimidation for what we're saying also." [Rape the children and kill
freedom of speech.]</li>
<li><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3138984/Police-withheld-bombshell-report-revealing-gangs-Muslim-men-grooming-100-schoolgirls-young-10-case-inflamed-racial-tensions-ahead-General-Election.html" target="_blank">Daily Mail</a> : "Police withheld bombshell report revealing how gangs of Muslim men were grooming more than 100 schoolgirls as young as 13 in case it inflamed racial tensions ahead of General Election"</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<li> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_egOqpEcAQ" target="_blank">"91% of men" in UK who groom children "are Muslim"</a>. Victims are "...almost entirely non-Muslim girls...mainly white British girls...10,000 victims".</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXHnya05Gry3pk_X2GzNz1cxdORfCnkxQ-M2bymC27Aq8CE5GdOzOEaQzGitUooa8S3Kc0LbS4zSd3kFwL5L1-ZD8E8eY7amFzpOCQ4500h_FFjTuCP3g1bd-WZpdpQaPH9WlqJeuoLScj/s1600/Rapists.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXHnya05Gry3pk_X2GzNz1cxdORfCnkxQ-M2bymC27Aq8CE5GdOzOEaQzGitUooa8S3Kc0LbS4zSd3kFwL5L1-ZD8E8eY7amFzpOCQ4500h_FFjTuCP3g1bd-WZpdpQaPH9WlqJeuoLScj/s320/Rapists.png" width="320" /></a>
<li>Guardian: <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/31/muslim-community-street-grooming-nazir-afzal" target="_blank">Muslim community must address issue of street grooming</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/muslim-grooming-scandal-%E2%80%9Cwhite-girls-blame%E2%80%9D-muslim-public-tells-bbc" target="_blank">Muslim Grooming Scandal</a>: “White Girls to Blame” Muslim Public Tells BBC. [If a non-Muslim rapist blamed the victim, would that be accepted?] </li>
<li><a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-31643791" target="_blank">BBC</a>: Oxfordshire grooming victims may have totalled 373 children:</li>
<ul>
<li>"...a significant proportion of people convicted in these kind of cases are of "Pakistani and/or Muslim heritage"</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-grooming-gangs/18739" target="_blank">Channel 4</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>"...exploitation taking place in Keighley, Blackpool, Oldham, Blackburn, Sheffield, Manchester, Skipton, Rochdale, Nelson, Preston, Rotherham, Derb, Telford, Bradford, Ipswich, Birmingham, Oxford, Barking and Peterborough"</li>
<li>"By far the majority of perpetrators were described as Asian [Pakistani]..."</li>
<li>"...97 per cent of victims were white."</li>
<li>"...at least <b>16,500 children</b> had been identified as being “at risk of sexual exploitation” during one year."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_sex_trafficking_gang" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>: Rochdale (UK) sex trafficking gang:</li>
<ul>
<li>"...all were from Muslim background. The girls were all white British which led to a nation wide discussion of whether the crimes were racially motivated, and whether the failure to investigate them was linked to the authorities' fear of being accused of racism. In March 2015, Greater Manchester Police apologised for its failure to investigate the child sexual exploitation allegations more thoroughly between 2008 and 2010."</li>
</ul>
<li>"<a href="https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/03/easy-meat-inside-britains-grooming-gang-scandal-on-the-glazov-gang" target="_blank">Easy Meat</a>" book describes grooming that went on for 30 years, enabled by cover ups, and that the "<b>majority</b> of British Muslim men of raping age are committing these crimes". "Gasoline [petrol] being thrown on [girls], their tongues being nailed to tables...the abuse, the cruelty, all of this monstrous treatment of these young, innocent girls". <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWKTTPyK1-o" target="_blank">Gavin Boby</a> : “the common story is of a 13 year old girl in a room with 10 men. She is treated like a slave, subjected to horrific violence…sexually destroyed.” "You see it in the UK, it's primarily Pakistani, Bengali, Afghani, Somali men. In the Netherlands, it is Moroccan men. In France, it's Algerian. The common denominator is not race...not nationality. It is religion. That is what is driving this offense and you see it within Islamic doctrine. The Qur'an is clear. It gives clear instructions about how you marry, have sex and divorce a girl before she reaches puberty. You have the account of Muhammad's life. He took sexual slaves. His followers took sexual slaves. He praised his followers for taking sexual slaves. His favorite wife was 6 when he married her and when he consummated the marriage, she was 9. Another wife, he tortured her husband to death while pouring molten metal onto his chest. She was 17. Muslim men are required to imitate Muhammad. This is driven by Islamic doctrine." Glazov: "A lot of these Muslim rapists are considered good Muslims. They're praying and fasting during the day time and [at night] prowling and prying on girls that they consider are barely human. These aren't people going against their religion. These are people following their religion." Gavin Boby: "One of the men was a preacher in his local Mosque."</li>
<ul>
</ul>
</ul>
<li><a href="https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Refugee_Resettlement_Hijra.pdf" target="_blank">Center for Security</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>"...in South Dakota...Iraqi refugee Mohammed Alaboudi was sentence in March 2014 to life in prison for sex trafficking women and young girls." </li>
<li>"...five Iraqis involved in the gang rape of a Colorado Springs woman, who nearly died from the attack."</li>
</ul>
<li>According to <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12087780/Cologne-assault-Cultural-difference-is-no-excuse-for-rape.html" target="_blank">The Telegraph</a>, they rape men as well. "...unaccompanied women are apparently seen as “fair game”".</li>
<li>According to <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3247831/Rape-child-abuse-rife-overcrowded-asylum-centres-huge-surge-migrants-pushes-Germany-s-services-breaking-point-claim-womens-rights-groups-politicians.html#ixzz3msuDZG7y" target="_blank">Mail Online</a>: "Rape and child abuse 'are rife in German refugee camps'...men saw unaccompanied women as ‘fair game’". If they treat their own women and children like this, why would they treat Western women and children any better?</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FPXXHknv0g" target="_blank">Black Pigeon</a> shows migrants blaming attacks on "sexual emergencies" and disturbing interviews of men talking openly about raping boys.</li>
<li>According to <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390168/Migrant-rape-fears-spread-Europe-Women-told-not-night-assaults-carried-Sweden-Finland-Germany-Austria-Switzerland-amid-warnings-gangs-ordinating-attacks.html" target="_blank">Mail Online</a>: "Migrant rape fears spread across Europe: Women told not to go out at night alone after assaults carried out in Sweden, Finland, Germany, Austria and Switzerland amid warnings gangs are co-ordinating attack"</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkzHL-xbUaw" target="_blank">Muslim Rape Epidemic in Norway</a></li>
<ul>
<ul>
</ul>
</ul>
</ul>
Not only is this incompatible with Western justice and values, what are the additional costs to taxpayers for police investigations, courts and prisons?<br />
<br />
What is equally bad or worse were the cover ups in multiple countries. This is equivalent to aiding and abetting the criminals, at the suffering of the girls and children. By covering up, government policy does not change and therefore the crimes flourish. More girls and children get raped, assaulted, murdered and commit suicide. This government, media and police behaviour is criminal and at best, bordering insanity. <br />
<br />
Is there a risk that the West will endanger more girls and children if they take in more Muslims? Will "grooming" happen in another Western country over the next 16-30 years? Why take the risk with your daughter or sister? <br />
<br />
Try to imagine the American men fleeing to Canada during their civil war, leaving behind their women and children to fend for themselves. Instead of thanking profusely to the Canadians for saving their lives, they rape Canadian women and children. What should the Canadians do with them? Should they be angry or tolerant? Should they deport the Americans or should they try to cover it up? Should they follow the mayor of Cologne's example, which is to tell Canadian women to change their behavior?<br />
<br />
Try to imagine that you helped a stranger by providing him with shelter, food and money. Instead of thanking you, he rapes your sister and 14 year old daughter. Should you kick him out of your house, or should you tell your sister and daughter to change their behavior? Or, should you follow Angela Merkel's example, which is to invite the stranger's male friends into your house as well?<br />
<br />
<h2>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGLt3Nim8VBli18Gs8FPA_XCzh1E0_OwL8BaLmEqO6U0nI_XQluYc19E9VLfrdCPGYmQH-5LcvswPNt392pEzB6rumEpf6pubDTNC08ngYKx5a1zZQLlcCSXIOWfpelR79GpNq19FfgOJa/s1600/Men-with-many-wifes-UK.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="165" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGLt3Nim8VBli18Gs8FPA_XCzh1E0_OwL8BaLmEqO6U0nI_XQluYc19E9VLfrdCPGYmQH-5LcvswPNt392pEzB6rumEpf6pubDTNC08ngYKx5a1zZQLlcCSXIOWfpelR79GpNq19FfgOJa/s320/Men-with-many-wifes-UK.png" width="320" /></a>
6.12 COST OF POLYGAMY TO TAXPAYERS</h2>
<br />
According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq0wIttoVh0" target="_blank">Dr. Bill Warner</a> (10:00 into video), Islam allows Muslims to have up to four wives, but a Muslim is not supposed to take on another wife until he is able to support her. Normally, a Muslim is not able to have multiple wives because he doesn’t have enough money to support them. But due to the Western welfare system, the Muslim gets welfare checks for the multiple wives by claiming them as “cousins” or extended family. Is polygamy now supported by the welfare system in the West?<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCbqLvFtw6o" target="_blank">Men With Many Wives [in UK]</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.americasfreedomfighters.com/2015/09/04/heres-how-many-wives-a-muslim-can-have-on-welfare-in-michigan-video/" target="_blank">Here’s How Many Wives A Muslim Can Have On Welfare In Michigan</a></li>
<li><a href="http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/2008/02/08/4834833-sun.html" target="_blank">Muslims claiming cash for numerous wives [in Toronto]</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-eNXWtXRQI" target="_blank">Fraud of Multiculturalism</a><br />“Muslim polygamists in Ontario are claiming separate welfare checks for each of their wives.” </li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTIjbiIiUuI" target="_blank">How Muslim Polygamists defraud German's Welfare</a><br />Each wife is not registered with Germany as wife and therefore claim themselves as single mothers</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bIwIQANjbs" target="_blank">Muslim Polygamists defraud Norway's Welfare</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XP6Q2CXB-w" target="_blank">Muslim Polygamist defrauds Australia's Welfare </a></li>
</ul>
The most generous welfare systems are in Scandinavia.<br />
<br />
The Muslim in Germany went to Syria to get extra wives. He promised paradise in Germany. After bringing the wife back, he ended up with 7 children in total, all on welfare. After Syrians go to Canada, will the husbands go back to Syria to get more wives by promising paradise in Canada? Even though Canada is bringing in 25,000 Syrians, will they end up with 50,000 or 75,000?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.13 VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN</h2>
Information: <br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxg6wDYMKa6r6sRUuBxMa8TtMROMp1eMKliIpvJIhhQiS2z2jAt4LZvAck981T-ezpAZ7Vf5VvFG1W9cxTKivwt9N71LhOGFB_2151-qB9CCuNMbjzseNFzbm0x9mPahhpMUyxVkhDKz3u/s1600/wife-beating.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxg6wDYMKa6r6sRUuBxMa8TtMROMp1eMKliIpvJIhhQiS2z2jAt4LZvAck981T-ezpAZ7Vf5VvFG1W9cxTKivwt9N71LhOGFB_2151-qB9CCuNMbjzseNFzbm0x9mPahhpMUyxVkhDKz3u/s320/wife-beating.png" width="320" /></a>
<li><a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Violence_Against_Women" target="_blank">WikiIslam</a> (Do not click on "Images:Violence Against Women" if you have a weak stomach.) </li>
<li><a href="http://www.islam-watch.org/syedkamranmirza/honor_killing.htm" target="_blank">Islam Watch</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDLVbQxhiQQ" target="_blank">How to beat your wife</a> Muslim: “Allah honored wives by instating the punishment of beatings…He beats her in order to discipline her…there must not be more than ten beatings and he must not break her bones, injure her…There is beating etiquette…He must beat her from chest level. All these things honor the women. She is in need of discipline. How should the husband discipline her? Through admonishment. If she is not repentant, he should beat her but there are rules to the beating…It is forbidden to beat her in the face or make her ugly…Islam forbids this…He can beat her with a short rod….The honoring of the wife in Islam is also evident in the fact that the punishment of beating is permissible in one case only: when she refuses to sleep with him."</li>
<li>According to the <a href="https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Wife_Beating_in_Islam" target="_blank">WikiIslam</a>, the Qur’an states: "Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them."</li>
<li><a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/02/video-mufti-of-gaza-explains-how-properly-to-beat-your-wife" target="_blank">Mufti of Gaza explains how properly to beat your wife</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=0dEYV4qvBIPB8gfTqoHYAQ&gws_rd=ssl#q=site:Telegraph.co.uk+Lessons+in+how+to+beat+your+wife" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Search "site:Telegraph.co.uk Lessons in how to beat your wife"</a>. Google still provides a snippet of the article, but Telegraph has removed it. Snippet: "Nov 2, 2007 - A Saudi television programme has been giving teenagers lessons in how to beat their wives. The cleric who presents it, Muhammad Al-'Arifi, ..."</li>
<li>Washington Times: <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/sep/29/20050929-121303-6619r/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">An Islamic guide on how to beat your wife</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/wife-beating.aspx" target="_blank">Wife Beating</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3453660/A-husband-beat-wife-long-does-not-make-ugly-Palestinian-leader-gives-highly-controversial-tips-dealing-rocky-marriage.html" target="_blank">A husband should beat his wife</a> </li>
<li><a href="https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/04/the-unknown-islams-25-scars-on-my-body" target="_blank">Anni Cyrus claims that Islam ordered her to receive 25 lashes for sitting in the front of a taxi</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WijI2U7dKY" target="_blank">Honor Diaries</a> "The film...seeks to expose the paralyzing political correctness that prevents many from identifying, understanding and addressing this international human rights disaster." However <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za00vNKlpUA" target="_blank">CAIR</a> is trying to block this film to kill freedom of speech. </li>
<li>Search for "Muslim beat woman in europe" on Youtube and you will find hundreds of videos. </li>
<li>According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq0wIttoVh0" target="_blank">Dr. Bill Warner</a> (22:48 into video), Sharia states that if a man kills his wife who had strayed, there will be no penalty. "Most honour killings are done with family members...By killing the woman, it restores the man’s honour...It’s all about the man." </li>
</ul>
With the influx of Muslims, have honour killings grown in the West?<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><a href="http://www.canada.com/Honour+killings+rise+Canada+Expert/3165638/story.html" target="_blank">Honour Killings’ on the rise in Canada</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/11/23-27-documented-honor-killings-every-year-in-the-u-s-many-more-go-unreported" target="_blank">23-27 documented honor killings every year in the U.S., many more go unreported</a></li>
<li>According to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi4i6esaknU" target="_blank">David Wood</a> (at 9:43 into video): “…I’ve gone into houses here in Dearborn where girls have been killed for having boyfriends…" But police are covering it up.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.dw.com/en/europe-grapples-with-honor-killings/a-1244406" target="_blank">Europe Grapples with "Honor Killings”</a></li>
<li><a href="http://freedomoutpost.com/islamic-supremacists-demand-get-removal-ads-help-muslim-girls-may-danger-honor-killing/" target="_blank">Ads to Help Muslim Girls in Danger of Honor Killing Removed As Islamic Supremacists Make Demands</a> (more cover up and killing of freedom of speech) </li>
<li>CBS: <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/honor-killing-under-growing-scrutiny-in-the-us/" target="_blank">"Honor killing" under growing scrutiny in the U.S.</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>"United Nations estimated that approximately 5,000 women worldwide were victims of "honor killings" each year, though experts believe that number is low."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
Do you care about your daughters, sisters, nieces and female
cousins? Even if they don’t get beaten or raped, will they get the same respect
from their Muslim clients, students, co-workers, bosses or
subordinates?<br />
<br />
Not only is this treatment of women not compatible with Western justice and values, what are the additional costs to taxpayers for police investigations, courts and prisons?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.14 RACISM</h2>
<br />
Two Swedish economists have conducted a survey to rank countries by racism. According to their <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/189837/muslim-countries-are-most-racist-world-daniel-greenfield" target="_blank">results</a>, Muslim countries are racist. According to this article, "<a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/148804/african-refugees-say-arab-muslims-more-racist-daniel-greenfield" target="_blank">African Refugees Say Arab Muslims More Racist than Europeans</a>". Therefore, why do we want racists to immigrate? If we take in more Muslims, will this increase racial tensions with our Black population?<br />
<br />
<h2>
6.15 WHAT ARE OTHER COUNTRIES DOING?</h2>
<br />
Why are other countries, such as Russia, Japan and China, not taking in migrants?<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
SUMMARY</h3>
<br />
We believe that we should help people who are getting killed and it is obvious that not enough help is provided. Millions of Muslims and especially Christians in Syria and Iraq are suffering. Billions around the world are suffering equally or more. They all need help. However, there are many ways to help and many countries that can help but have not. Also, there are many facets to this Muslim migrant and refugee crisis that should be considered, but are over-looked, ignored, avoided or pushed aside.<br />
<br />
There is an argument that Europe has an aging demographic and needs immigration to maintain its population. Why? What is wrong with population reduction when the <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/over-population_08.html" target="_blank">world is over-populated</a>? Over-population is the source of many of the world's problems, such as wars, pollution, greenhouse gases, depletion of habitat and animal extinctions. Have you visited Europe recently? Have you seen the throngs of people everywhere on that tiny continent? We think there are too many people in Europe, including white people. Europe has 500 million. How many does it need? <br />
<br />
According to the <a href="http://worldhappiness.report/" target="_blank">World Happiness Report</a>,
the happiest countries are the ones with the smallest populations, such as Denmark, Switzerland, Iceland, Norway, Finland and Canada. The
world should be striving to reduce every country's population to
increase happiness. Instead of pushing Europe to maintain or increase its population, what about pushing the rest of the world to reduce its population? Should many parts of the world, which are exploding in population, adopt a one-child policy as China had? Some argue that population growth helps economic growth. If this is the case, then the Philippines, Africa, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Latin America and India should be the richest places in the world and the happiest. They cannot be happy if many of them emigrate as fast as they can. One of the main causes of poverty for these places is population explosion. <br />
<br />
There are over 3-4 billion people in poor countries and exploding. If the world allows every person from the third-world to enter the first-world, will there be a first-world left? Let us take your neighborhood as an example. Let us assume that you live in a middle-class neighborhood. What happens if we replace 50% of your neighbors with poor people and force you to support them? Will that make you better off or it will make you poorer? Even if these people eventually support themselves,<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>what are the odds that they will be able to do so in first-world industries?</li>
<li>what if they are incompatible to you? Will you be better or worse off than before?</li>
<li>did you have to spend money to teach them English or other skills? </li>
</ul>
There is an argument that immigrants provide benefits to the economy. Why is the overall benefit based on economics solely? What if the local population places equal or more benefit, importance, value or happiness on social, cultural, religious, political or even racial harmony than on GDP growth? Has anybody quantified the value of these subjective aspects? Has any politician tried to determine how to make their citizens the happiest?<br />
<br />
Is it right to force some of your citizens, even if they are a minority, to live with people who are not compatible? To use an analogy, let us say that everybody thinks that there is nothing wrong with your girlfriend or boyfriend, but you have determined that the two of you are incompatible. Should we force you to stay together and live together because your partner provides economic benefits? To make matters worse, what if your partner was an economic drain? Will you agree to this?<br />
<br />
Sweden takes in more migrants, on a per capita basis, than any other
country. Belgium also takes in many migrants. United Nations ranks
countries by <a href="http://ww.rrojasdatabank.info/HDRP_2010_40.pdf" target="_blank">Human Development Index</a>
(HDI), which reflects health, education and income. The HDI for most
countries, including third-world countries, have been rising and are
projected to continue to rise in the future. However, UN projects that
the HDIs for Sweden and Belgium will decline so that in 2030, they will
be below the HDIs for Cuba, Mexico, the Baltic countries, Bulgaria and
even Greece. Sweden will drop from #15 to #45, which will be below
Libya. According to <a href="http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.454/sweden-to-become-a-third-world-country-by-2030-according-to-un.html" target="_blank">Speisa</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
""We had a perfectly good country," Ingrid Carlqvist, a journalist said.
"A rich country, a nice country, and in a few years' time, that country
will be gone."<br />
<br />
The logic should be really simple to understand,
yet many have difficulties grasping it: If you import the Third World,
it's what you'll get."</blockquote>
It is mostly the liberals (Trudeau, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Obama, etc.) who want to take in Muslims. What is very interesting and ironic is that this threatens liberal beliefs such as gender equality, gay rights, freedom of speech, peace, tolerance, etc. Most people should think about this, long and hard. Bill Maher has. He is a staunch liberal and harsh critic of U.S. policies, but he is harshly criticizing liberals for supporting Islam. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Bill+Maher+Islam+Liberal" target="_blank">Search "Bill Maher Islam Liberal" on Youtube</a>.<br />
<br />
Westerners are not racists because Islam is not a race. But, are Westerners politicists? Do Westerners feel that their politics are better than Islam's politics? Western politics believe in democracy, gender equality (wives should not be beaten nor raped; men should not have multiple wives, especially at the expense of taxpayers), freedom of speech (criticism of politics should be allowed), separation of church and state (Islam believes that the mosque is the state), freedom of religion (Islam orders Muslims to fight and subjugate non-Muslims), peace (people should not be executed for leaving a religion or shaming the family) and tolerance (gays should not be executed; thieves should not get their hands cut off). Is Western politics better?<br />
<br />
Westerners are likely Islamophobes, because they are afraid of Islamic politics. <br />
<br />
The many sources cited above, claim that there are risks, a lot of incompatibilities and costs. We encourage you to view or read them. We do not know if all of these sources have exaggerated or not. But, do you want to take the risk? If so, what is the reward? Let your politician know what your choice is. Send the link to this article and tell your politician to read it.<br />
<br />
(If Facebook and Disqus comments do not appear below, click on the title at the top to ensure that you are not on the homepage.) <br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-715689757081998052015-01-29T21:20:00.001-05:002015-06-18T17:03:34.844-04:00Overpaid CEOs come from Screwing You<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjq58sVAbhOCktU8F75AK_FgxVPmFek2NbYkmQc9uV1Q2LtwIoYey4uQ24CTXn9-m9nDtDF7HVHLApBHdKvtF6LZemYEqXQYRrKJr5I56u6Z70sqe5kEc5bDwmHd3QdWt04GSksFZsZ_xDn/s1600/greedy-ceo2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjq58sVAbhOCktU8F75AK_FgxVPmFek2NbYkmQc9uV1Q2LtwIoYey4uQ24CTXn9-m9nDtDF7HVHLApBHdKvtF6LZemYEqXQYRrKJr5I56u6Z70sqe5kEc5bDwmHd3QdWt04GSksFZsZ_xDn/s1600/greedy-ceo2.jpg" /></a></div>
According to <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/05/03/475952/ceo-pay-faster-worker-pay/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">ThinkProgress</a>, CEO pay increased 127 times faster than worker pay over last 30 years. According to <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/kathryndill/2014/04/15/report-ceos-earn-331-times-as-much-as-average-workers-774-times-as-much-as-minimum-wage-earners/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Forbes</a>, the average CEO makes 331 times as much as the average worker.<br />
<br />
Many people are outraged at this. However, the source of this outrage is jealousy or envy. Most people do know why CEOs are overpaid. They just get irked by other people making way more money than themselves. This is the wrong reason to be outraged.<br />
<br />
People should be angry, but not because of jealousy. If they knew why CEOs are overpaid, they would be angry nevertheless, but have a good reason to be angry. CEOs overpay themselves by lying, cheating and ripping off shareholders.<br />
<br />
Most people own mutual funds, stocks or pension funds. If you own them, then you've been ripped off for multiple decades. Even if you do not directly own stocks, you will receive pension payments from your government when you retire. These government pension funds are invested in stocks. The less shareholders get, the less you get.<br />
<br />
Carl Icahn and Warren Buffett partly explain why CEOs are overpaid in this article: <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2014/06/leaders-not-smartest-in-room.html" target="_blank">Leaders: Not the Smartest in the Room</a>.<br />
<br />
Gordon Gekko explains it as well in the 1987 movie "Wall Street". He is the largest shareholder of Teldar Paper and he lambastes management for screwing the owners by being do-nothing and overpaid. Watch this video:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PF_iorX_MAw" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
The best explanation is from Warren Buffett's letters to shareholder. Essentially, the Board of Directors, who are supposed to look after the owners (shareholders), are <i>useless patsies</i>, who let the CEOs lie, cheat and screw the owners.<br />
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
If you want to do something about it, you should complain to your politician, board of directors, company management at shareholder meetings, your securities regulator and accounting firms. The squeaky wheel gets greased. CEOs complain to politicians and hence have the upper-hand over shareholders. Speak up or forever get screwed.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgee3wiAP0ONW0xXoLmdoy8sbWd8SqLbVpEdAysz2oOT-aOBvpvbV6zRscxGmT7P1NLWrQ8_s_g54j8tf5FsSSw0PQr601YwlLNVZwefaZHkDswRdclUooJR1wR6wxseBDl5QIO9QARIb6W/s1600/stock-options.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgee3wiAP0ONW0xXoLmdoy8sbWd8SqLbVpEdAysz2oOT-aOBvpvbV6zRscxGmT7P1NLWrQ8_s_g54j8tf5FsSSw0PQr601YwlLNVZwefaZHkDswRdclUooJR1wR6wxseBDl5QIO9QARIb6W/s1600/stock-options.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
Here is Warren Buffett's explanation:</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Stock options make up the far majority of a CEO's compensation. Buffett explains clearly that stock options is an expense to the company, which in turn is an expense to the owners (shareholders). CEOs and managers have been able to thwart accounting efforts to account options as an expense. By doing this, they have been able to award themselves huge numbers of options and make obscene amounts of money at the expense of owners. From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/1992.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 1992 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The most egregious case of let's-not-face-up-to-reality behavior by executives and accountants has occurred in the world of stock options. In Berkshire's 1985 annual report, I laid out my opinions about the use and misuse of options. But even when options are structured properly, they are accounted for in ways that make no sense. The lack of logic is not accidental: For decades, much of the business world has waged war against accounting rulemakers, trying to keep the costs of stock options from being reflected in the profits of the corporations that issue them. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Typically, executives have argued that options are hard to value and that therefore their costs should be ignored. At other times managers have said that assigning a cost to options would injure small start-up businesses. Sometimes they have even solemnly declared that "out-of-the-money" options (those with an exercise price equal to or above the current market price) have no value when they are issued. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Oddly, the Council of Institutional Investors has chimed in with a variation on that theme, opining that options should not be viewed as a cost because they "aren't dollars out of a company's coffers." I see this line of reasoning as offering exciting possibilities to American corporations for instantly improving their reported profits. For example, they could eliminate the cost of insurance by paying for it with options. So if you're a CEO and subscribe to this "no cash-no cost" theory of accounting, I'll make you an offer you can't refuse: Give us a call at Berkshire and we will happily sell you insurance in exchange for a bundle of long-term options on your company's stock.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Shareholders should understand that companies incur costs when they deliver something of value to another party and not just when cash changes hands. Moreover, it is both silly and cynical to say that an important item of cost should not be recognized simply because it can't be quantified with pinpoint precision. Right now, accounting abounds with imprecision. After all, no manager or auditor knows how long a 747 is going to last, which means he also does not know what the yearly depreciation charge for the plane should be. No one knows with any certainty what a bank's annual loan loss charge ought to be. And the estimates of losses that property-casualty companies make are notoriously inaccurate. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Does this mean that these important items of cost should be ignored simply because they can't be quantified with absolute accuracy? Of course not. Rather, these costs should be estimated by honest and experienced people and then recorded. When you get right down to it, what other item of major but hard-to-precisely-calculate cost - other, that is, than stock options - does the accounting profession say should be ignored in the calculation of earnings?</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Moreover, options are just not that difficult to value. Admittedly, the difficulty is increased by the fact that the options given to executives are restricted in various ways. These restrictions affect value. They do not, however, eliminate it. In fact, since I'm in the mood for offers, I'll make one to any executive who is granted a restricted option, even though it may be out of the money: On the day of issue, Berkshire will pay him or her a substantial sum for the right to any future gain he or she realizes on the option. So if you find a CEO who says his newly-issued options have little or no value, tell him to try us out. In truth, we have far more confidence in our ability to determine an appropriate price to pay for an option than we have in our ability to determine the proper depreciation rate for our corporate jet.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It seems to me that the realities of stock options can be summarized quite simply: If options aren't a form of compensation, what are they? If compensation isn't an expense, what is it? And, if expenses shouldn't go into the calculation of earnings, where in the world should they go? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The accounting profession and the SEC should be shamed by the fact that they have long let themselves be muscled by business executives on the option-accounting issue. Additionally, the lobbying that executives engage in may have an unfortunate by-product: In my opinion, the business elite risks losing its credibility on issues of significance to society - about which it may have much of value to say - when it advocates the incredible on issues of significance to itself.</blockquote>
<div class="p1">
From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/1998htm.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 1998 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This Alice-in-Wonderland outcome occurs because existing accounting principles ignore the cost of stock options when earnings are being calculated, even though options are a huge and increasing expense at a great many corporations. In effect, accounting principles offer management a choice: Pay employees in one form and count the cost, or pay them in another form and ignore the cost. Small wonder then that the use of options has mushroomed. This lop-sided choice has a big downside for owners, however: Though options, if properly structured, can be an appropriate, and even ideal, way to compensate and motivate top managers, they are more often wildly capricious in their distribution of rewards, inefficient as motivators, and inordinately expensive for shareholders. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Whatever the merits of options may be, their accounting treatment is outrageous. Think for a moment of that $190 million we are going to spend for advertising at GEICO this year. Suppose that instead of paying cash for our ads, we paid the media in ten-year, at-the-market Berkshire options. Would anyone then care to argue that Berkshire had not borne a cost for advertising, or should not be charged this cost on its books? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Perhaps Bishop Berkeley -- you may remember him as the philosopher who mused about trees falling in a forest when no one was around -- would believe that an expense unseen by an accountant does not exist. Charlie and I, however, have trouble being philosophical about unrecorded costs. When we consider investing in an option-issuing company, we make an appropriate downward adjustment to reported earnings, simply subtracting an amount equal to what the company could have realized by publicly selling options of like quantity and structure. Similarly, if we contemplate an acquisition, we include in our evaluation the cost of replacing any option plan. Then, if we make a deal, we promptly take that cost out of hiding. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Readers who disagree with me about options will by this time be mentally quarreling with my equating the cost of options issued to employees with those that might theoretically be sold and traded publicly. It is true, to state one of these arguments, that employee options are sometimes forfeited -- that lessens the damage done to shareholders -- whereas publicly-offered options would not be. It is true, also, that companies receive a tax deduction when employee options are exercised; publicly-traded options deliver no such benefit. But there's an offset to these points: Options issued to employees are often repriced, a transformation that makes them much more costly than the public variety. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It's sometimes argued that a non-transferable option given to an employee is less valuable to him than would be a publicly-traded option that he could freely sell. That fact, however, does not reduce the cost of the non-transferable option Giving an employee a company car that can only be used for certain purposes diminishes its value to the employee, but does not in the least diminish its cost to the employer. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The earning revisions that Charlie and I have made for options in recent years have frequently cut the reported per-share figures by 5%, with 10% not all that uncommon. On occasion, the downward adjustment has been so great that it has affected our portfolio decisions, causing us either to make a sale or to pass on a stock purchase we might otherwise have made. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A few years ago we asked three questions in these pages to which we have not yet received an answer: "If options aren't a form of compensation, what are they? If compensation isn't an expense, what is it? And, if expenses shouldn't go into the calculation of earnings, where in the world should they go?"</blockquote>
<div class="p1">
Warren Buffett wrote an article for <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/24/opinion/who-really-cooks-the-books.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">New York Times in 2002</a>, accusing CEOs of deceiving owners in two ways to increase their compensation: 1) stock options are not expensed 2) using wildly optimistic pension returns to increase earnings:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Who Really Cooks the Books?<br />
<br />
There is a crisis of confidence today about corporate earnings reports and the credibility of chief executives. And it's justified. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For many years, I've had little confidence in the earnings numbers reported by most corporations. I'm not talking about Enron and WorldCom -- examples of outright crookedness. Rather, I am referring to the legal, but improper, accounting methods used by chief executives to inflate reported earnings. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The most flagrant deceptions have occurred in stock-option accounting and in assumptions about pension-fund returns. The aggregate misrepresentation in these two areas dwarfs the lies of Enron and WorldCom. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In calculating the pension costs that directly affect their earnings, companies in the Standard & Poor's index of 500 stocks are today using assumptions about investment return rates that go as high as 11 percent. The rate chosen is important: in many cases, an upward change of a single percentage point will increase the annual earnings a company reports by more than $100 million. It's no surprise, therefore, that many chief executives opt for assumptions that are wildly optimistic, even as their pension assets perform miserably. These C.E.O.'s simply ignore this unpleasant reality and their obliging actuaries and auditors bless whatever rate the company selects. How convenient: Client A, using a 6.5 percent rate, receives a clean audit opinion -- and so does client B, which opts for an 11 percent rate. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
All that is bad, but the far greater sin has been option accounting. Options are a huge cost for many corporations and a huge benefit to executives. No wonder, then, that they have fought ferociously to avoid making a charge against their earnings. Without blushing, almost all C.E.O.'s have told their shareholders that options are cost-free. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For these C.E.O.'s I have a proposition: Berkshire Hathaway will sell you insurance, carpeting or any of our other products in exchange for options identical to those you grant yourselves. It'll all be cash-free. But do you really think your corporation will not have incurred a cost when you hand over the options in exchange for the carpeting? Or do you really think that placing a value on the option is just too difficult to do, one of your other excuses for not expensing them? If these are the opinions you honestly hold, call me collect. We can do business. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Chief executives frequently claim that options have no cost because their issuance is cashless. But when they do so, they ignore the fact that many C.E.O.'s regularly include pension income in their earnings, though this item doesn't deliver a dime to their companies. They also ignore another reality: When corporations grant restricted stock to their executives these grants are routinely, and properly, expensed, even though no cash changes hands. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
When a company gives something of value to its employees in return for their services, it is clearly a compensation expense. And if expenses don't belong in the earnings statement, where in the world do they belong? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To clean up their act on these fronts, C.E.O.'s don't need ''independent'' directors, oversight committees or auditors absolutely free of conflicts of interest. They simply need to do what's right. As Alan Greenspan forcefully declared last week, the attitudes and actions of C.E.O.'s are what determine corporate conduct. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
...</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
C.E.O.'s want to be respected and believed. They will be -- and should be -- only when they deserve to be. They should quit talking about some bad apples and reflect instead on their own behavior. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Recently, a few C.E.O.'s have stepped forward to adopt honest accounting. But most continue to spend their shareholders' money, directly or through trade associations, to lobby against real reform. They talk principle, but, for most, their motive is pocketbook. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For their shareholders' interest, and for the country's, C.E.O.'s should tell their accounting departments today to quit recording illusory pension-fund income and start recording all compensation costs. They don't need studies or new rules to do that. They just need to act.</blockquote>
Furthermore, if CEOs cannot allocate earnings to get a good return, they should pay out the earnings as dividends to the owners. Instead, CEOs retain the earnings in order to increase the value of their options. From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/1985.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 1985 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggdqdIk38OHNcymJHtyQPujB6Llte6mpr2f_rjs2BXDm24apkpybIB1LKiSlG91lsyPH7fSDYkyvwnB3GFZBSIeavEYewciFhbFqaQGzkoWmImikXmr4ykWmAe91AIxQO4rOh7PK6U-fEK/s1600/crooked_corrupt_politician.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggdqdIk38OHNcymJHtyQPujB6Llte6mpr2f_rjs2BXDm24apkpybIB1LKiSlG91lsyPH7fSDYkyvwnB3GFZBSIeavEYewciFhbFqaQGzkoWmImikXmr4ykWmAe91AIxQO4rOh7PK6U-fEK/s1600/crooked_corrupt_politician.jpg" width="320" /></a>Many corporate compensation plans reward managers handsomely for earnings increases produced solely, or in large part, by retained earnings - i.e., earnings withheld from owners. For example, ten-year, fixed-price stock options are granted routinely, often by companies whose dividends are only a small percentage of earnings. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
An example will illustrate the inequities possible under such circumstances. Let’s suppose that you had a $100,000 savings account earning 8% interest and “managed” by a trustee who could decide each year what portion of the interest you were to be paid in cash. Interest not paid out would be “retained earnings” added to the savings account to compound. And let’s suppose that your trustee, in his superior wisdom, set the “pay-out ratio” at one-quarter of the annual earnings. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Under these assumptions, your account would be worth $179,084 at the end of ten years. Additionally, your annual earnings would have increased about 70% from $8,000 to $13,515 under this inspired management. And, finally, your “dividends” would have increased commensurately, rising regularly from $2,000 in the first year to $3,378 in the tenth year. Each year, when your manager’s public relations firm prepared his annual report to you, all of the charts would have had lines marching skyward. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Now, just for fun, let’s push our scenario one notch further and give your trustee-manager a ten-year fixed-price option on part of your “business” (i.e., your savings account) based on its fair value in the first year. With such an option, your manager would reap a substantial profit at your expense - just from having held on to most of your earnings. If he were both Machiavellian and a bit of a mathematician, your manager might also have cut the pay-out ratio once he was firmly entrenched.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This scenario is not as farfetched as you might think. Many stock options in the corporate world have worked in exactly that fashion: they have gained in value simply because management retain earnings, not because it did well with the capital in its hands. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Managers actually apply a double standard to options. Leaving aside warrants (which deliver the issuing corporation immediate and substantial compensation), I believe it is fair to say that nowhere in the business world are ten-year fixed-price options on all or a portion of a business granted to outsiders. Ten months, in fact, would be regarded as extreme. It would be particularly unthinkable for managers to grant a long-term option on a business that was regularly adding to its capital. Any outsider wanting to secure such an option would be required to pay fully for capital added during the option period. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The unwillingness of managers to do-unto-outsiders, however, is not matched by an unwillingness to do-unto-themselves. (Negotiating with one’s self seldom produces a barroom brawl.) Managers regularly engineer ten-year, fixed-price options for themselves and associates that, first, totally ignore the fact that retained earnings automatically build value and, second, ignore the carrying cost of capital. As a result, these managers end up profiting much as they would have had they had an option on that savings account that was automatically building up in value. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Of course, stock options often go to talented, value-adding managers and sometimes deliver them rewards that are perfectly appropriate. (Indeed, managers who are really exceptional almost always get far less than they should.) But when the result is equitable, it is accidental. Once granted, the option is blind to individual performance. Because it is irrevocable and unconditional (so long as a manager stays in the company), the sluggard receives rewards from his options precisely as does the star. A managerial Rip Van Winkle, ready to doze for ten years, could not wish for a better “incentive” system. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(I can’t resist commenting on one long-term option given an “outsider”: that granted the U.S. Government on Chrysler shares as partial consideration for the government’s guarantee of some lifesaving loans. When these options worked out well for the government, Chrysler sought to modify the payoff, arguing that the rewards to the government were both far greater than intended and outsize in relation to its contribution to Chrysler’s recovery. The company’s anguish over what it saw as an imbalance between payoff and performance made national news. That anguish may well be unique: to my knowledge, no managers - anywhere - have been similarly offended by unwarranted payoffs arising from options granted to themselves or their colleagues.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Ironically, the rhetoric about options frequently describes them as desirable because they put managers and owners in the same financial boat. In reality, the boats are far different. No owner has ever escaped the burden of capital costs, whereas a holder of a fixed-price option bears no capital costs at all. An owner must weigh upside potential against downside risk; an option holder has no downside. In fact, the business project in which you would wish to have an option frequently is a project in which you would reject ownership. (I’ll be happy to accept a lottery ticket as a gift - but I’ll never buy one.)</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In dividend policy also, the option holders’ interests are best served by a policy that may ill serve the owner. Think back to the savings account example. The trustee, holding his option, would benefit from a no-dividend policy. Conversely, the owner of the account should lean to a total payout so that he can prevent the option-holding manager from sharing in the account’s retained earnings. </blockquote>
<div class="p1">
Consequently, options makes up the bulk of CEOs' compensation, at your expense.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKoquYmUIw_2GMhj56U5GrLN6USOxQw6mvqomo6DWxsaF-D_bCcGdoosKJrrW5x06pOoEHFlKfpuPdlcy2c4NVVBkemhrmGp7kHwBGKpAi0hkg72Im5HkUDPKPoh-BIjO12S1r2o8ksC_f/s1600/pic-20140604102904364.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKoquYmUIw_2GMhj56U5GrLN6USOxQw6mvqomo6DWxsaF-D_bCcGdoosKJrrW5x06pOoEHFlKfpuPdlcy2c4NVVBkemhrmGp7kHwBGKpAi0hkg72Im5HkUDPKPoh-BIjO12S1r2o8ksC_f/s1600/pic-20140604102904364.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
A director's job is to look after the interest of the owners. Instead, they look after themselves and the CEOs, who in turn look after the directors. This enables the CEO to overpay him/herself and screw the owners (shareholders). Here are excellent explanations of how this happens. From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2002pdf.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 2002 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Corporate Governance</b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Both the ability and fidelity of managers have long needed monitoring. Indeed, nearly 2,000 years ago, Jesus Christ addressed this subject, speaking (Luke 16:2) approvingly of “a certain rich man” who told his manager, “Give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest no longer be steward.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Accountability and stewardship withered in the last decade, becoming qualities deemed of little importance by those caught up in the Great Bubble. As stock prices went up, the behavioral norms of managers went down. By the late ’90s, as a result, CEOs who traveled the high road did not encounter heavy traffic. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Most CEOs, it should be noted, are men and women you would be happy to have as trustees for your children’s assets or as next-door neighbors. Too many of these people, however, have in recent years behaved badly at the office, fudging numbers and drawing obscene pay for mediocre business achievements. These otherwise decent people simply followed the career path of Mae West: “I was Snow White but I drifted.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In theory, corporate boards should have prevented this deterioration of conduct. I last wrote about the responsibilities of directors in the 1993 annual report. (We will send you a copy of this discussion on request, or you may read it on the Internet in the Corporate Governance section of the 1993 letter.) There, I said that directors “should behave as if there was a single absentee owner, whose long-term interest they should try to further in all proper ways.” This means that directors must get rid of a manager who is mediocre or worse, no matter how likable he may be. Directors must react as did the chorus-girl bride of an 85-year old multimillionaire when he asked whether she would love him if he lost his money. “Of course,” the young beauty replied, “I would miss you, but I would still love you.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In the 1993 annual report, I also said directors had another job: “If able but greedy managers overreach and try to dip too deeply into the shareholders’ pockets, directors must slap their hands.” Since I wrote that, over-reaching has become common but few hands have been slapped. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Why have intelligent and decent directors failed so miserably? The answer lies not in inadequate laws – it’s always been clear that directors are obligated to represent the interests of shareholders – but rather in what I’d call “boardroom atmosphere.”<br />
<br />
It’s almost impossible, for example, in a boardroom populated by well-mannered people, to raise the question of whether the CEO should be replaced. It’s equally awkward to question a proposed acquisition that has been endorsed by the CEO, particularly when his inside staff and outside advisors are present and unanimously support his decision. (They wouldn’t be in the room if they didn’t.) Finally, when the compensation committee – armed, as always, with support from a high-paid consultant – reports on a megagrant of options to the CEO, it would be like belching at the dinner table for a director to suggest that the committee reconsider. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
These “social” difficulties argue for outside directors regularly meeting without the CEO – a reform that is being instituted and that I enthusiastically endorse. I doubt, however, that most of the other new governance rules and recommendations will provide benefits commensurate with the monetary and other costs they impose. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The current cry is for “independent” directors. It is certainly true that it is desirable to have directors who think and speak independently – but they must also be business-savvy, interested and shareholder-oriented. In my 1993 commentary, those are the three qualities I described as essential. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Over a span of 40 years, I have been on 19 public-company boards (excluding Berkshire’s) and have interacted with perhaps 250 directors. Most of them were “independent” as defined by today’s rules. But the great majority of these directors lacked at least one of the three qualities I value. As a result, their contribution to shareholder well-being was minimal at best and, too often, negative. These people, decent and intelligent though they were, simply did not know enough about business and/or care enough about shareholders to question foolish acquisitions or egregious compensation. My own behavior, I must ruefully add, frequently fell short as well: Too often I was silent when management made proposals that I judged to be counter to the interests of shareholders. In those cases, collegiality trumped independence. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
So that we may further see the failings of “independence,” let’s look at a 62-year case study covering thousands of companies. Since 1940, federal law has mandated that a large proportion of the directors of investment companies (most of these mutual funds) be independent. The requirement was originally 40% and now it is 50%. In any case, the typical fund has long operated with a majority of directors who qualify as independent. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
These directors and the entire board have many perfunctory duties, but in actuality have only two important responsibilities: obtaining the best possible investment manager and negotiating with that manager for the lowest possible fee. When you are seeking investment help yourself, those two goals are the only ones that count, and directors acting for other investors should have exactly the same priorities. Yet when it comes to independent directors pursuing either goal, their record has been absolutely pathetic. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Many thousands of investment-company boards meet annually to carry out the vital job of selecting who will manage the savings of the millions of owners they represent. Year after year the directors of Fund A select manager A, Fund B directors select manager B, etc. … in a zombie-like process that makes a mockery of stewardship. Very occasionally, a board will revolt. But for the most part, a monkey will type out a Shakespeare play before an “independent” mutual-fund director will suggest that his fund look at other managers, even if the incumbent manager has persistently delivered substandard performance. When they are handling their own money, of course, directors will look to alternative advisors – but it never enters their minds to do so when they are acting as fiduciaries for others. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The hypocrisy permeating the system is vividly exposed when a fund management company – call it “A” – is sold for a huge sum to Manager “B”. Now the “independent” directors experience a “counterrevelation” and decide that Manager B is the best that can be found – even though B was available (and ignored) in previous years. Not so incidentally, B also could formerly have been hired at a far lower rate than is possible now that it has bought Manager A. That’s because B has laid out a fortune to acquire A, and B must now recoup that cost through fees paid by the A shareholders who were “delivered” as part of the deal. (For a terrific discussion of the mutual fund business, read John Bogle’s Common Sense on Mutual Funds.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A few years ago, my daughter was asked to become a director of a family of funds managed by a major institution. The fees she would have received as a director were very substantial, enough to have increased her annual income by about 50% (a boost, she will tell you, she could use!). Legally, she would have been an independent director. But did the fund manager who approached her think there was any chance that she would think independently as to what advisor the fund should employ? Of course not. I am proud to say that she showed real independence by turning down the offer. The fund, however, had no<br />
trouble filling the slot (and – surprise – the fund has not changed managers). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Investment company directors have failed as well in negotiating management fees (just as compensation committees of many American companies have failed to hold the compensation of their CEOs to sensible levels). If you or I were empowered, I can assure you that we could easily negotiate materially lower management fees with the incumbent managers of most mutual funds. And, believe me, if directors were promised a portion of any fee savings they realized, the skies would be filled with falling fees. Under the current system, though, reductions mean nothing to “independent” directors while meaning everything to<br />
managers. So guess who wins? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Having the right money manager, of course, is far more important to a fund than reducing the manager’s fee. Both tasks are nonetheless the job of directors. And in stepping up to these all-important responsibilities, tens of thousands of “independent” directors, over more than six decades, have failed miserably. (They’ve succeeded, however, in taking care of themselves; their fees from serving on multiple boards of a single “family” of funds often run well into six figures.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
When the manager cares deeply and the directors don’t, what’s needed is a powerful countervailing force – and that’s the missing element in today’s corporate governance. Getting rid of mediocre CEOs and eliminating overreaching by the able ones requires action by owners – big owners. The logistics aren’t that tough: The ownership of stock has grown increasingly concentrated in recent decades, and today it would be easy for institutional managers to exert their will on problem situations. Twenty, or even fewer, of the largest institutions, acting together, could effectively reform corporate governance at a given company, simply by withholding their votes for directors who were tolerating odious behavior. In my view, this kind of concerted action is the only way that corporate stewardship can be meaningfully improved. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Unfortunately, certain major investing institutions have “glass house” problems in arguing for better governance elsewhere; they would shudder, for example, at the thought of their own performance and fees being closely inspected by their own boards. But Jack Bogle of Vanguard fame, Chris Davis of Davis Advisors, and Bill Miller of Legg Mason are now offering leadership in getting CEOs to treat their owners properly. Pension funds, as well as other fiduciaries, will reap better investment returns in the future if they support these men. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The acid test for reform will be CEO compensation. Managers will cheerfully agree to board “diversity,” attest to SEC filings and adopt meaningless proposals relating to process. What many will fight, however, is a hard look at their own pay and perks. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In recent years compensation committees too often have been tail-wagging puppy dogs meekly following recommendations by consultants, a breed not known for allegiance to the faceless shareholders who pay their fees. (If you can’t tell whose side someone is on, they are not on yours.) True, each committee is required by the SEC to state its reasoning about pay in the proxy. But the words are usually boilerplate written by the company’s lawyers or its human-relations department. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This costly charade should cease. Directors should not serve on compensation committees unless they are themselves capable of negotiating on behalf of owners. They should explain both how they think about pay and how they measure performance. Dealing with shareholders’ money, moreover, they should<br />
behave as they would were it their own. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In the 1890s, Samuel Gompers described the goal of organized labor as “More!” In the 1990s, America’s CEOs adopted his battle cry. The upshot is that CEOs have often amassed riches while their shareholders have experienced financial disasters. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Directors should stop such piracy. There’s nothing wrong with paying well for truly exceptional business performance. But, for anything short of that, it’s time for directors to shout “Less!” It would be a travesty if the bloated pay of recent years became a baseline for future compensation. Compensation committees should go back to the drawing boards.</blockquote>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s2">From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2003ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 2003 letter</a>:</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Corporate Governance</b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In judging whether Corporate America is serious about reforming itself, CEO pay remains the acid test. To date, the results aren’t encouraging. A few CEOs, such as Jeff Immelt of General Electric, have led the way in initiating programs that are fair to managers and shareholders alike. Generally, however, his example has been more admired than followed. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It’s understandable how pay got out of hand. When management hires employees, or when companies bargain with a vendor, the intensity of interest is equal on both sides of the table. One party’s gain is the other party’s loss, and the money involved has real meaning to both. The result is an honest-to-God negotiation. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
But when CEOs (or their representatives) have met with compensation committees, too often one side – the CEO’s – has cared far more than the other about what bargain is struck. A CEO, for example, will always regard the difference between receiving options for 100,000 shares or for 500,000 as monumental. To a comp committee, however, the difference may seem unimportant – particularly if, as has been the case at most companies, neither grant will have any effect on reported earnings. Under these conditions, the negotiation often has a “play-money” quality. </blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrw_VKhEqN1ybZHUi7z1d7BNAW28vSoZaB7V6L5M1n8Kq_18fMGoGP5WhXu4axLUUpM1qTRz7qJqcxoyutxArG4rFxN4X69WdZ8NdbZ5CQ9Yhu6z_XrDKKhERBVqWRNZ354dY8TF84bWGa/s1600/z_p-09-Corruption.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrw_VKhEqN1ybZHUi7z1d7BNAW28vSoZaB7V6L5M1n8Kq_18fMGoGP5WhXu4axLUUpM1qTRz7qJqcxoyutxArG4rFxN4X69WdZ8NdbZ5CQ9Yhu6z_XrDKKhERBVqWRNZ354dY8TF84bWGa/s1600/z_p-09-Corruption.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Overreaching by CEOs greatly accelerated in the 1990s as compensation packages gained by the most avaricious– a title for which there was vigorous competition – were promptly replicated elsewhere. The couriers for this epidemic of greed were usually consultants and human relations departments, which had no trouble perceiving who buttered their bread. As one compensation consultant commented: “There are two classes of clients you don’t want to offend – actual and potential.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In proposals for reforming this malfunctioning system, the cry has been for “independent” directors. But the question of what truly motivates independence has largely been neglected. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In last year’s report, I took a look at how “independent” directors – as defined by statute – had performed in the mutual fund field. The Investment Company Act of 1940 mandated such directors, and that means we’ve had an extended test of what statutory standards produce. In our examination last year, we looked at the record of fund directors in respect to the two key tasks board members should perform – whether at a mutual fund business or any other. These two all-important functions are, first, to obtain (or retain) an able and honest manager and then to compensate that manager fairly. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Our survey was not encouraging. Year after year, at literally thousands of funds, directors had routinely rehired the incumbent management company, however pathetic its performance had been. Just as routinely, the directors had mindlessly approved fees that in many cases far exceeded those that could have<br />
been negotiated. Then, when a management company was sold – invariably at a huge price relative to tangible assets – the directors experienced a “counter-revelation” and immediately signed on with the new manager and accepted its fee schedule. In effect, the directors decided that whoever would pay the most for the old management company was the party that should manage the shareholders’ money in the future. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Despite the lapdog behavior of independent fund directors, we did not conclude that they are bad people. They’re not. But sadly, “boardroom atmosphere” almost invariably sedates their fiduciary genes. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
On May 22, 2003, not long after Berkshire’s report appeared, the Chairman of the Investment Company Institute addressed its membership about “The State of our Industry.” Responding to those who have “weighed in about our perceived failings,” he mused, “It makes me wonder what life would be like if we’d actually done something wrong.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Be careful what you wish for.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Within a few months, the world began to learn that many fund-management companies had followed policies that hurt the owners of the funds they managed, while simultaneously boosting the fees of the managers. Prior to their transgressions, it should be noted, these management companies were earning profit margins and returns on tangible equity that were the envy of Corporate America. Yet to swell profits further, they trampled on the interests of fund shareholders in an appalling manner. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
So what are the directors of these looted funds doing? As I write this, I have seen none that have terminated the contract of the offending management company (though naturally that entity has often fired some of its employees). Can you imagine directors who had been personally defrauded taking such a boys-will-be-boys attitude? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To top it all off, at least one miscreant management company has put itself up for sale, undoubtedly hoping to receive a huge sum for “delivering” the mutual funds it has managed to the highest bidder among other managers. This is a travesty. Why in the world don’t the directors of those funds simply select whomever they think is best among the bidding organizations and sign up with that party directly? The winner would consequently be spared a huge “payoff” to the former manager who, having flouted the principles of stewardship, deserves not a dime. Not having to bear that acquisition cost, the winner could surely manage the funds in question for a far lower ongoing fee than would otherwise have been the case. Any truly independent director should insist on this approach to obtaining a new manager.<br />
<br />
The reality is that neither the decades-old rules regulating investment company directors nor the new rules bearing down on Corporate America foster the election of truly independent directors. In both instances, an individual who is receiving 100% of his income from director fees – and who may wish to enhance his income through election to other boards – is deemed independent. That is nonsense. The same rules say that Berkshire director and lawyer Ron Olson, who receives from us perhaps 3% of his very large income, does not qualify as independent because that 3% comes from legal fees Berkshire pays his firm rather than from fees he earns as a Berkshire director. Rest assured, 3% from any source would not torpedo Ron’s independence. But getting 20%, 30% or 50% of their income from director fees might well temper the independence of many individuals, particularly if their overall income is not large. Indeed, I think it’s clear that at mutual funds, it has. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: center;">
* * * * * * * * * * * </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Let me make a small suggestion to “independent” mutual fund directors. Why not simply affirm in each annual report that “(1) We have looked at other management companies and believe the one we have retained for the upcoming year is among the better operations in the field; and (2) we have negotiated a fee with our managers comparable to what other clients with equivalent funds would negotiate.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It does not seem unreasonable for shareholders to expect fund directors – who are often receiving fees that exceed $100,000 annually – to declare themselves on these points. Certainly these directors would satisfy themselves on both matters were they handing over a large chunk of their own money to the manager. If directors are unwilling to make these two declarations, shareholders should heed the maxim “If you don’t know whose side someone is on, he’s probably not on yours.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Finally, a disclaimer. A great many funds have been run well and conscientiously despite the opportunities for malfeasance that exist. The shareholders of these funds have benefited, and their managers have earned their pay. Indeed, if I were a director of certain funds, including some that charge above-average fees, I would enthusiastically make the two declarations I have suggested. Additionally, those index funds that are very low-cost (such as Vanguard’s) are investor-friendly by definition and are the best selection for most of those who wish to own equities. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I am on my soapbox now only because the blatant wrongdoing that has occurred has betrayed the trust of so many millions of shareholders. Hundreds of industry insiders had to know what was going on, yet none publicly said a word. It took Eliot Spitzer, and the whistleblowers who aided him, to initiate a housecleaning. We urge fund directors to continue the job. Like directors throughout Corporate America, these fiduciaries must now decide whether their job is to work for owners or for managers.</blockquote>
From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2006ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 2006 letter</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In selecting a new director, we were guided by our long-standing criteria, which are that board members be owner-oriented, business-savvy, interested and truly independent. I say “truly” because many directors who are now deemed independent by various authorities and observers are far from that, relying heavily as they do on directors’ fees to maintain their standard of living. These payments, which come in many forms, often range between $150,000 and $250,000 annually, compensation that may approach or even exceed all other income of the “independent” director. And – surprise, surprise – director compensation has soared in recent years, pushed up by recommendations from corporate America’s favorite consultant, Ratchet, Ratchet and Bingo. (The name may be phony, but the action it conveys is not.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Charlie and I believe our four criteria are essential if directors are to do their job – which, by law, is to faithfully represent owners. Yet these criteria are usually ignored. Instead, consultants and CEOs seeking board candidates will often say, “We’re looking for a woman,” or “a Hispanic,” or “someone from abroad,” or what have you. It sometimes sounds as if the mission is to stock Noah’s ark. Over the years I’ve been queried many times about potential directors and have yet to hear anyone ask, “Does he think like an intelligent owner?” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The questions I instead get would sound ridiculous to someone seeking candidates for, say, a football team, or an arbitration panel or a military command. In those cases, the selectors would look for people who had the specific talents and attitudes that were required for a specialized job. At Berkshire, we are in the specialized activity of running a business well, and therefore we seek business judgment.</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8Q0ws6VcM8y2fQMiXgjhXAj_B5XYQiNi3LmX4iWlXtRTgIP4F-RgRfZ4pzL7LHdroZWdDBQ4ZRSXOxn-itUoXWyNMa-6TpBihIBAWI44XGvHd3I5TOz5buUINQ7hzaj9R7eqwIwF1KSi6/s1600/FatCat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8Q0ws6VcM8y2fQMiXgjhXAj_B5XYQiNi3LmX4iWlXtRTgIP4F-RgRfZ4pzL7LHdroZWdDBQ4ZRSXOxn-itUoXWyNMa-6TpBihIBAWI44XGvHd3I5TOz5buUINQ7hzaj9R7eqwIwF1KSi6/s1600/FatCat.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
Warren Buffett explains more on how CEOs avoid paying dividends to owners (keep owners away from the profits), in order to increase the value of the options. From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2005ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 2005 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Too often, executive compensation in the U.S. is ridiculously out of line with performance. That won’t change, moreover, because the deck is stacked against investors when it comes to the CEO’s pay. The upshot is that a mediocre-or-worse CEO – aided by his handpicked VP of human relations and a consultant from the ever-accommodating firm of Ratchet, Ratchet and Bingo – all too often receives gobs of money from an ill-designed compensation arrangement. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Take, for instance, ten year, fixed-price options (and who wouldn’t?). If Fred Futile, CEO of Stagnant, Inc., receives a bundle of these – let’s say enough to give him an option on 1% of the company – his self-interest is clear: He should skip dividends entirely and instead use all of the company’s earnings to repurchase stock. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Let’s assume that under Fred’s leadership Stagnant lives up to its name. In each of the ten years after the option grant, it earns $1 billion on $10 billion of net worth, which initially comes to $10 per share on the 100 million shares then outstanding. Fred eschews dividends and regularly uses all earnings to repurchase shares. If the stock constantly sells at ten times earnings per share, it will have appreciated 158% by the end of the option period. That’s because repurchases would reduce the number of shares to 38.7 million by that time, and earnings per share would thereby increase to $25.80. Simply by withholding earnings from owners, Fred gets very rich, making a cool $158 million, despite the business itself improving not at all. Astonishingly, Fred could have made more than $100 million if Stagnant’s earnings had declined by 20% during the ten-year period.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Fred can also get a splendid result for himself by paying no dividends and deploying the earnings he withholds from shareholders into a variety of disappointing projects and acquisitions. Even if these initiatives deliver a paltry 5% return, Fred will still make a bundle. Specifically – with Stagnant’s p/e ratio remaining unchanged at ten – Fred’s option will deliver him $63 million. Meanwhile, his shareholders will wonder what happened to the “alignment of interests” that was supposed to occur when Fred was issued options. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A “normal” dividend policy, of course – one-third of earnings paid out, for example – produces less extreme results but still can provide lush rewards for managers who achieve nothing.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
CEOs understand this math and know that every dime paid out in dividends reduces the value of all outstanding options. I’ve never, however, seen this manager-owner conflict referenced in proxy materials that request approval of a fixed-priced option plan. Though CEOs invariably preach internally that capital comes at a cost, they somehow forget to tell shareholders that fixed-price options give them capital that is free.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It doesn’t have to be this way: It’s child’s play for a board to design options that give effect to the automatic build-up in value that occurs when earnings are retained. But – surprise, surprise – options of that kind are almost never issued. Indeed, the very thought of options with strike prices that are adjusted for retained earnings seems foreign to compensation “experts,” who are nevertheless encyclopedic about every management-friendly plan that exists. (“Whose bread I eat, his song I sing.”)</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Getting fired can produce a particularly bountiful payday for a CEO. Indeed, he can “earn” more in that single day, while cleaning out his desk, than an American worker earns in a lifetime of cleaning toilets. Forget the old maxim about nothing succeeding like success: Today, in the executive suite, the all-too-prevalent rule is that nothing succeeds like failure.<br />
<br />
Huge severance payments, lavish perks and outsized payments for ho-hum performance often occur because comp committees have become slaves to comparative data. The drill is simple: Three or so directors – not chosen by chance – are bombarded for a few hours before a board meeting with pay statistics that perpetually ratchet upwards. Additionally, the committee is told about new perks that other managers are receiving. In this manner, outlandish “goodies” are showered upon CEOs simply because of a corporate version of the argument we all used when children: “But, Mom, all the other kids have one.” When comp committees follow this “logic,” yesterday’s most egregious excess becomes today’s baseline. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Comp committees should adopt the attitude of Hank Greenberg, the Detroit slugger and a boyhood hero of mine. Hank’s son, Steve, at one time was a player’s agent. Representing an outfielder in negotiations with a major league club, Steve sounded out his dad about the size of the signing bonus he should ask for. Hank, a true pay-for-performance guy, got straight to the point, “What did he hit last year?” When Steve answered “.246,” Hank’s comeback was immediate: “Ask for a uniform.”</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(Let me pause for a brief confession: In criticizing comp committee behavior, I don’t speak as a true insider. Though I have served as a director of twenty public companies, only one CEO has put me on his comp committee. Hmmmm . . .</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiw2LizxLConm_Bqbm3MpglLZb4g4P_NWKmNbSaQDNse7cyrPo17s40C4VXGCUWZWAVcKkxmvZUwB8xDMD1TnTm2yRKPlijkSrHI7X6IshifJAeoLwT4uNqXHbpcev3VRD1MfhGZ9G6L02Q/s1600/corrupt-politicians-protest-photo1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiw2LizxLConm_Bqbm3MpglLZb4g4P_NWKmNbSaQDNse7cyrPo17s40C4VXGCUWZWAVcKkxmvZUwB8xDMD1TnTm2yRKPlijkSrHI7X6IshifJAeoLwT4uNqXHbpcev3VRD1MfhGZ9G6L02Q/s1600/corrupt-politicians-protest-photo1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
Warren Buffett implies that CEOs are corrupting politicians (Congress) on the issue of options. You need to complain to your politician otherwise CEOs will continue to screw you. From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2004ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 2004 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
While we are on the subject of self-interest, let’s turn again to the most important accounting mechanism still available to CEOs who wish to overstate earnings: the non-expensing of stock options. The accomplices in perpetuating this absurdity have been many members of Congress who have defied the arguments put forth by all Big Four auditors, all members of the Financial Accounting Standards Board and virtually all investment professionals. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I’m enclosing an <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/options.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">op-ed piece</a> I wrote for The Washington Post describing a truly breathtaking bill that was passed 312-111 by the House last summer. Thanks to Senator Richard Shelby, the Senate didn’t ratify the House’s foolishness. And, to his great credit, Bill Donaldson, the investor-minded Chairman of the SEC, has stood firm against massive political pressure, generated by the check-waving CEOs who first muscled Congress in 1993 about the issue of option accounting and then repeated the tactic last year. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Because the attempts to obfuscate the stock-option issue continue, it’s worth pointing out that no one – neither the FASB, nor investors generally, nor I – are talking about restricting the use of options in any way. Indeed, my successor at Berkshire may well receive much of his pay via options, albeit logically-structured ones in respect to 1) an appropriate strike price, 2) an escalation in price that reflects the retention of earnings, and 3) a ban on his quickly disposing of any shares purchased through options. We cheer arrangements that motivate managers, whether these be cash bonuses or options. And if a company is truly receiving value for the options it issues, we see no reason why recording their cost should cut down on their use. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The simple fact is that certain CEOs know their own compensation would be far more rationally determined if options were expensed. They also suspect that their stock would sell at a lower price if realistic accounting were employed, meaning that they would reap less in the market when they unloaded their personal holdings. To these CEOs such unpleasant prospects are a fate to be fought with all the resources they have at hand – even though the funds they use in that fight normally don’t belong to them, but are instead put up by their shareholders. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Option-expensing is scheduled to become mandatory on June 15th. You can therefore expect intensified efforts to stall or emasculate this rule between now and then. Let your Congressman and Senators know what you think on this issue.</blockquote>
<div class="p1">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3yxkbbANHlLsw2SyPkMGxHfcE2GUbAnMiZumMD4evfvfFqb1L-IbfYpsLyFKTV9fRdUU6fthrWJ3BJDvJcrj8XQ7G0FhLaVMtICPzBd4HFnUznffxyFRlCpwrGOhHGKi21b6YdFtpnvNw/s1600/pickpocket.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3yxkbbANHlLsw2SyPkMGxHfcE2GUbAnMiZumMD4evfvfFqb1L-IbfYpsLyFKTV9fRdUU6fthrWJ3BJDvJcrj8XQ7G0FhLaVMtICPzBd4HFnUznffxyFRlCpwrGOhHGKi21b6YdFtpnvNw/s1600/pickpocket.jpg" width="320" /></a><br />
From Warren Buffett's <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/options.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">op-ed piece</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This undervaluation, in turn enables chief executives to lie about what they are truly being paid and to overstate the earnings of the companies they run.</blockquote>
New regulations came down on options. However, management still lie and cheat to steal from owners. From <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2007ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Warren Buffett's 2007 letter</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Fanciful Figures – How Public Companies Juice Earnings </b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Former Senator Alan Simpson famously said: “Those who travel the high road in Washington need not fear heavy traffic.” If he had sought truly deserted streets, however, the Senator should have looked to Corporate America’s accounting. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
An important referendum on which road businesses prefer occurred in 1994. America’s CEOs had just strong-armed the U.S. Senate into ordering the Financial Accounting Standards Board to shut up, by a vote that was 88-9. Before that rebuke the FASB had shown the audacity – by unanimous agreement, no less – to tell corporate chieftains that the stock options they were being awarded represented a form of compensation and that their value should be recorded as an expense. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
After the senators voted, the FASB – now educated on accounting principles by the Senate’s 88 closet CPAs – decreed that companies could choose between two methods of reporting on options. The preferred treatment would be to expense their value, but it would also be allowable for companies to ignore the expense as long as their options were issued at market value. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A moment of truth had now arrived for America’s CEOs, and their reaction was not a pretty sight. During the next six years, exactly two of the 500 companies in the S&P chose the preferred route. CEOs of the rest opted for the low road, thereby ignoring a large and obvious expense in order to report higher “earnings.” I’m sure some of them also felt that if they opted for expensing, their directors might in future years think twice before approving the mega-grants the managers longed for. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It turned out that for many CEOs even the low road wasn’t good enough. Under the weakened rule, there remained earnings consequences if options were issued with a strike price below market value. No problem. To avoid that bothersome rule, a number of companies surreptitiously backdated options to falsely indicate that they were granted at current market prices, when in fact they were dished out at prices well below market.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Decades of option-accounting nonsense have now been put to rest, but other accounting choices remain – important among these the investment-return assumption a company uses in calculating pension expense. It will come as no surprise that many companies continue to choose an assumption that allows them to report less-than-solid “earnings.” For the 363 companies in the S&P that have pension plans, this assumption in 2006 averaged 8%. Let’s look at the chances of that being achieved. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The average holdings of bonds and cash for all pension funds is about 28%, and on these assets returns can be expected to be no more than 5%. Higher yields, of course, are obtainable but they carry with them a risk of commensurate (or greater) loss. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This means that the remaining 72% of assets – which are mostly in equities, either held directly or through vehicles such as hedge funds or private-equity investments – must earn 9.2% in order for the fund overall to achieve the postulated 8%. And that return must be delivered after all fees, which are now far higher than they have ever been. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
How realistic is this expectation? Let’s revisit some data I mentioned two years ago: During the 20th Century, the Dow advanced from 66 to 11,497. This gain, though it appears huge, shrinks to 5.3% when compounded annually. An investor who owned the Dow throughout the century would also have received generous dividends for much of the period, but only about 2% or so in the final years. It was a wonderful century. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Think now about this century. For investors to merely match that 5.3% market-value gain, the Dow – recently below 13,000 – would need to close at about 2,000,000 on December 31, 2099. We are now eight years into this century, and we have racked up less than 2,000 of the 1,988,000 Dow points the market needed to travel in this hundred years to equal the 5.3% of the last. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It’s amusing that commentators regularly hyperventilate at the prospect of the Dow crossing an even number of thousands, such as 14,000 or 15,000. If they keep reacting that way, a 5.3% annual gain for the century will mean they experience at least 1,986 seizures during the next 92 years. While anything is possible, does anyone really believe this is the most likely outcome? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dividends continue to run about 2%. Even if stocks were to average the 5.3% annual appreciation of the 1900s, the equity portion of plan assets – allowing for expenses of .5% – would produce no more than 7% or so. And .5% may well understate costs, given the presence of layers of consultants and high-priced managers (“helpers”). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Naturally, everyone expects to be above average. And those helpers – bless their hearts – will certainly encourage their clients in this belief. But, as a class, the helper-aided group must be below average. The reason is simple: 1) Investors, overall, will necessarily earn an average return, minus costs they incur; 2) Passive and index investors, through their very inactivity, will earn that average minus costs that are very low; 3) With that group earning average returns, so must the remaining group – the active investors. But this group will incur high transaction, management, and advisory costs. Therefore, the active investors will have their returns diminished by a far greater percentage than will their inactive brethren. That means that the passive group – the “know-nothings” – must win. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I should mention that people who expect to earn 10% annually from equities during this century – envisioning that 2% of that will come from dividends and 8% from price appreciation – are implicitly forecasting a level of about 24,000,000 on the Dow by 2100. If your adviser talks to you about double-digit returns from equities, explain this math to him – not that it will faze him. Many helpers are apparently direct descendants of the queen in Alice in Wonderland, who said: “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” Beware the glib helper who fills your head with fantasies while he fills his pockets with fees. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Some companies have pension plans in Europe as well as in the U.S. and, in their accounting, almost all assume that the U.S. plans will earn more than the non-U.S. plans. This discrepancy is puzzling: Why should these companies not put their U.S. managers in charge of the non-U.S. pension assets and let them work their magic on these assets as well? I’ve never seen this puzzle explained. But the auditors and actuaries who are charged with vetting the return assumptions seem to have no problem with it.<br />
<br />
What is no puzzle, however, is why CEOs opt for a high investment assumption: It lets them report higher earnings. And if they are wrong, as I believe they are, the chickens won’t come home to roost until long after they retire. </blockquote>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<div class="p1">
In his letters to shareholders, Warren Buffett explains numerous times on how CEOs love to acquire other companies. However, these acquisitions frequently destroy wealth for his/her shareholders. The main person that benefits is the CEO, who gets to expand his ego, prestige and compensation. From Warren Buffett's <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2009ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">2009 letter</a> :<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Imagine, if you will, Company A and Company B, of equal size and both with businesses intrinsically worth $100 per share. Both of their stocks, however, sell for $80 per share. The CEO of A, long on confidence and short on smarts, offers 11⁄4 shares of A for each share of B, correctly telling his directors that B is worth $100 per share. He will neglect to explain, though, that what he is giving will cost his shareholders $125 in intrinsic value. If the directors are mathematically challenged as well, and a deal is therefore completed, the shareholders of B will end up owning 55.6% of A & B’s combined assets and A’s shareholders will own 44.4%. Not everyone at A, it should be noted, is a loser from this nonsensical transaction. Its CEO now runs a company twice as large as his original domain, in a world where size tends to correlate with both prestige and compensation. </blockquote>
Phil Fisher, a famous investor, wrote something similar to what Buffett wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
There is another and more serious way in which earnings are frequently retained in the business without any significant benefit to stockholders. This occurs when substandard managements can get only a subnormal return on the capital already in the business, yet use the retained earnings merely to enlarge the inefficient operation rather than to make it better. What normally happens is that the management having in time built up a larger inefficient domain over which to rule usually succeeds in justifying bigger salaries for itself on the grounds that it is doing a bigger job. The stockholders end up with little or no profit. </blockquote>
It is bad enough for directors and CEOs to screw owners, but it is even worse when the directors and CEOs are grossly incompetent and still screw owners. Warren Buffett explains in his <a href="http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2009ltr.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">2009 letter</a> about the "unscathed" CEOs despite their "recklessness" in the financial crisis:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In my view a board of directors of a huge financial institution is derelict if it does not insist that its CEO bear full responsibility for risk control. If he’s incapable of handling that job, he should look for other employment. And if he fails at it – with the government thereupon required to step in with funds or guarantees – the financial consequences for him and his board should be severe. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It has not been shareholders who have botched the operations of some of our country’s largest financial institutions. Yet they have borne the burden, with 90% or more of the value of their holdings wiped out in most cases of failure. Collectively, they have lost more than $500 billion in just the four largest financial fiascos of the last two years. To say these owners have been “bailed-out” is to make a mockery of the term. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The CEOs and directors of the failed companies, however, have largely gone unscathed. Their fortunes may have been diminished by the disasters they oversaw, but they still live in grand style. It is the behavior of these CEOs and directors that needs to be changed: If their institutions and the country are harmed by their recklessness, they should pay a heavy price – one not reimbursable by the companies they’ve damaged nor by insurance. CEOs and, in many cases, directors have long benefitted from oversized financial carrots; some meaningful sticks now need to be part of their employment picture as well.</blockquote>
In fact, numerous CEOs were not only grossly incompetent, but criminal leading up to the financial crisis. Nevertheless, none of them were punished. Watch <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Inside Job</a> and <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/untouchables/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Untouchables</a>.<br />
<br />
Target's CEO, Greg Steinhafel, was so incompetent that he caused <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/15/us-target-canada-idUSKBN0KO1HR20150115" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Target to lose $5.4 billion in Canada</a>. Despite this, he screwed owners out of $61 million as part of his severance package. According to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/target-s-package-for-ex-ceo-matches-package-for-all-17-600-canadian-workers-1.2927893?cmp=rss" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CBC</a>, this was more than what Target paid in severance to all 17,600 Canadian employees, which was $56 million.<br />
<br />
For CEOs, it's "heads they win, tails you lose".<br />
<br />
If you are a shareholder, you will get in the mail once in awhile, a letter from a company that you own. This letter will ask you to vote on proposals from management. Always vote against them, especially the ones pertaining to compensation. The far majority of time, these proposals enrich management at the expense of you, the owners. Sometimes, there are proxy-advisory firms that give advice on how to vote. Your interests are probably better served by following these proxy-advisory firms.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-58347544704974550412014-06-12T21:22:00.000-04:002015-05-01T09:16:58.280-04:00Leaders: Not the smartest in the room<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5rkxj-yj03yNe5yBXdqpTGQEBFz0_7ICDGuUnfLSRqPP6AllMWOyLtHdQ0Zx1lZw-7EKJMkS85_Q4BEiaAGMWpoAhb7rft-WZYXqn9OUkhOAgr0dMsDI_jhAUk8-frSxYUk0a258-q0m0/s1600/lamb_brain.JPG.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5rkxj-yj03yNe5yBXdqpTGQEBFz0_7ICDGuUnfLSRqPP6AllMWOyLtHdQ0Zx1lZw-7EKJMkS85_Q4BEiaAGMWpoAhb7rft-WZYXqn9OUkhOAgr0dMsDI_jhAUk8-frSxYUk0a258-q0m0/s1600/lamb_brain.JPG.jpg" height="150" width="200" /></a></div>
People become leaders because they are <b>popular</b>, not because they are the most <b>competent</b><b> </b>or<b> </b><b>intelligent</b>.<br />
<br />
This <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/management/executive-compensation/ceo-pay-for-performance/article18912840/" target="_blank">article, using statistical data</a>, shows that there is no correlation between a CEO's pay and performance. In fact, there might be an inverse correlation. Among the CEOs who were in the top 50 percentile of performance based on total shareholder return during 2010-2014, there were more CEOs in the bottom third of pay than there were in the middle or top third of pay. In other words, the lowest paid CEOs performed the best.<br />
<br />
Carl Icahn is one of the most successful investors in the world, who has dealt with many CEOs as an activist investor. He wrote a blog entitled "<a href="http://www.icahnreport.com/report/2008/06/about-ceos.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">About CEOs – Anti Darwinian Metaphor – Survival of the Unfittest</a>". He explains that the people who become CEOs are not the most intelligent or competent. Essentially, the most "likeable", do-nothing and non-threatening guy becomes CEO. The following is from his blog:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The way CEOs become CEOs in America is a travesty. This is one of our major problems. I use the anti - Darwinian metaphor. The survival of the unfittest.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
If you remember if you were in college the fraternity president was always there for you. When you had nothing to do or when you were a little depressed. Feeling down. You go to the club and the fraternity president would always be there. <b>You wondered when he had time to study which he probably didn’t do very much of in school.</b> He was there to sympathize with you if your girlfriend didn’t show up or didn’t call you back and you obviously sort of liked the guy because <b>the fraternity president was usually a likeable guy</b>. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
When the elections came up you would always vote for him. He had a couple qualities - the fraternity president. Politically, he was a survivor and <b>he never made many waves. He did not promote controversy</b>. Therefore when he went out into corporate America he was able to move up the ladder fairly quickly. Remember he survived, he didn’t make waves, and he wasn’t a threat. He kept moving up and up. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Eventually he becomes the assistant to the CEO. <b>The CEO had the same qualities</b>. He’s a survivor. <b>He’d never employ anyone underneath him who might be a threat</b>. The boards like these guys… this type of CEO. The boards generally don’t own any stock (another problem with our system). The boards don’t really care to hold CEOs accountable. Remember it’s a symbiotic relationship. These guys pay the boards very well – they give the boards perks. The boards don’t care to hold them accountable because that might endanger the perks they love so much. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
When the CEO retires the assistant becomes the CEO. And remember what I told you. He’s a survivor. <b>He would never have anyone underneath him as his assistant that’s brighter than he is because that might constitute a threat. So therefore, with many exceptions, we have CEOs becoming dumber and dumber and dumber</b>. We can all see where this is going. It would almost be funny if it wasn’t such a threat to our ability to compete and to our economy in general."</blockquote>
Icahn is implying that the person who is the most popular, most politically savvy or most compatible with the existing leaders and boards, is the person who becomes leader. Here is a recent <a href="http://money.cnn.com/gallery/investing/2014/07/18/hedge-fund-bold-ideas/5.html" target="_blank">CNN article</a> with a quote from Icahn:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"So we're going to have morons running the companies soon. And we're sort of almost there with many companies."</blockquote>
Icahn stated that the non-threatening guy becomes CEO. University of Maryland conducted a study that found that handsome men may not get hired because they are seen as a threat by other men (<a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/blog/business/2015/04/study-handsome-men-don-t-always-get-the-job.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
Warren Buffett has been a Chairman since 1970 and has managed or dealt with dozens, if not hundreds, of CEOs in his career. In his 1988 letter to shareholders, he wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Their performance, which we have observed at close range, contrasts vividly with that of many CEOs, which we have fortunately observed from a safe distance. Sometimes these CEOs clearly do not belong in their jobs; their positions, nevertheless, are usually secure. The supreme irony of business management is that it is far easier for an inadequate CEO to keep his job than it is for an inadequate subordinate. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
If a secretary, say, is hired for a job that requires typing ability of at least 80 words a minute and turns out to be capable of only 50 words a minute, she will lose her job in no time. There is a logical standard for this job; performance is easily measured; and if you can't make the grade, you're out. Similarly, if new sales people fail to generate sufficient business quickly enough, they will be let go. Excuses will not be accepted as a substitute for orders. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
However, a CEO who doesn't perform is frequently carried indefinitely. One reason is that performance standards for his job seldom exist. When they do, they are often fuzzy or they may be waived or explained away, even when the performance shortfalls are major and repeated. At too many companies, the boss shoots the arrow of managerial performance and then hastily paints the bullseye around the spot where it lands. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Another important, but seldom recognized, distinction between the boss and the foot soldier is that the CEO has no immediate superior whose performance is itself getting measured. The sales manager who retains a bunch of lemons in his sales force will soon be in hot water himself. It is in his immediate self-interest to promptly weed out his hiring mistakes. Otherwise, he himself may be weeded out. An office manager who has hired inept secretaries faces the same imperative. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
But the CEO's boss is a Board of Directors that seldom measure itself and is infrequently held to account for substandard corporate performance. If the Board makes a mistake in hiring, and perpetuates that mistake, so what? Even if the company is taken over because of the mistake, the deal will probably bestow substantial benefits on the outgoing Board members. (The bigger they are, the softer they fall.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Finally, relations between the Board and the CEO are expected to be congenial. At board meetings, criticism of the CEO's performance is often viewed as the social equivalent of belching. No such inhibitions restrain the office manager from critically evaluating the substandard typist."</blockquote>
A recent finding explained in this article entitled <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/23/gpa-income_n_5373078.html?utm_hp_ref=business" target="_blank">Female 'A+' Students End Up Making As Much As Male 'C' Students</a> supports Icahn's claims . According to this article:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"If you want to make more money, it helps to do well in school, but it helps even more to be a white man."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The study also found that minorities tend to benefit less dollar-wise from getting good grades than their white counterparts, even though [minority] high-school students with high GPAs are more likely to continue their schooling than white students with good grades."</blockquote>
Since most leaders are currently white men, other rising white men would be the most compatible to replace them. People who are not white men, are not compatible. There are a few exceptions, but generally this factor outweighs intelligence. It also helps if you play golf, can chat about sports (especially sports stats), look the part and go to the same church.<br />
<br />
There is more evidence to support the claim that the leaders are not the most intelligent:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>According to the <a href="http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">US census</a>, 5.1% of the American population are Asian.</li>
<li>According to <a href="http://fareedzakaria.com/2013/04/04/the-thin-envelope-crisis/" target="_blank">Fareed Zakaria</a>, admission to top universities is not based on 100% merit:</li>
<ul>
<li>Many of the top schools discriminate by limiting their Asian populations to 16.5 - 20% with quotas. (What would society think if NBA teams limit the black population in their teams to 16.5 - 20%?)</li>
<li>If admission is based on merit without quotas, Asians make up a far higher percentage of the student population:</li>
<ul>
<li>40% at Caltech and the University of California, Berkeley</li>
<li>72% at New York City's Stuyvesant High School</li>
</ul>
<li>"... the single largest deviation from merit in America’s best colleges:
their recruited-athletes programs. The problem has gotten dramatically
worse in the past 20 years. Colleges now have to drop their standards
much lower to build sports teams. ... A senior admissions officer at an Ivy League
school told me, “I have to turn down hundreds of highly qualified
applicants, ...because we
must take so many recruited athletes who are narrowly focused and less
accomplished otherwise...” William Bowen, a
former president of Princeton University, has documented the damage this
system does to American higher education—and yet no college president
has the courage to change it."</li>
</ul>
</ul>
If admission is based on merit, then 40-72% of the student population should be Asian. So, what percentage of the leaders is Asian? According to <a href="http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-facts/wheres-the-diversity-in-fortune-500-ceos/" target="_blank">DiversityInc</a>, 1.8 percent (or nine) of all Fortune 500 CEOs are Asian and based on their list, only one of them has an East Asian name.<br />
<br />
Using Carl Icahn's metaphor, here are examples of "survival of the unfittest":<br />
<ul class="ul1">
<li class="li1">Ron Johnson, who oversaw JC Penney's decline</li>
<li class="li1">John Sculley, who oversaw Apple's decline</li>
<li class="li1">Carol Bartz, who couldn't turnaround Yahoo</li>
<li class="li1">Scott Thompson, who couldn't turnaround Yahoo</li>
<li class="li1">Thorsten Heins, who couldn't turnaround BlackBerry</li>
<li class="li1">Steve Ballmer, who watched Microsoft flatline and do nothing in the social media and mobile spaces</li>
<li class="li1">Tim Cook, who has not innovated much compared to Steve Jobs</li>
<li class="li1">Brooksley Born warned and tried to regulate the derivatives that caused the financial crisis. Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Robert Rubin fought against Born and got her ousted. For this incompetence, all three got promoted. Geithner became Treasury Secretary, Rubin went on the board of Citigroup and Summers became economic advisor to Obama.</li>
<li class="li1">George Bush, who failed at various businesses. For him, appealing to the religious right and having a recognizable surname were more important. Then he did a horrific job as president.</li>
<li class="li1">Senator Chris Dodd, who bragged about how the government created wealth for Americans through home ownership</li>
<li class="li1">The numerous leaders on Wall Street who drove their companies into bankruptcy, created the financial crisis and drove the U.S. into recession </li>
</ul>
One exception belongs to entrepreneurs. They became stellar leaders by creating their own companies. Many of them would have never become leaders if they had to climb the corporate ladder or play (office) politics. Steve Jobs created Apple and made it into the most valuable company in the world in 2012. With his abrasive and abusive style in his early years, he would never have been promoted to manager, let alone CEO. <br />
<br />
The glass ceiling is not limited to Asians and females. It also applies to geeks and nerds as well. If Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg had to climb the corporate ladder, they would never have been promoted either. However, one can argue that they are among the best leaders in the world for having created such immense wealth for all stakeholders, as they created some of the most successful companies in human history.<br />
Elon Musk is another good example. He co-founded PayPal, Tesla and SpaceX. According to his brother, Elon was first in line for engineering skills but not for social skills. It wasn't until Elon got older before he appreciated connections to friends, family and people. Watch the video starting at 1:30:<br />
<br />
<script src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/money/.element/script/7.0/players/embed.js?videoid=/video/investing/2015/04/29/tesla-battery-kimbal-musk.cnnmoney"></script>
<br />
Many other leaders, who became leaders by climbing the corporate ladder and who were articulate, well-dressed and looked the part, accomplished little other than to milk the cash cow.<br />
<br />
Other victims of glass ceilings include singles, gays and interracial-couples. Conservative companies, such as IBM at one time, prefer married men, even though there is no proof that married men are more productive or intelligent than single men. Evangelicals hate gays. Some religious groups, such as the Mormons at one time, believed that interracial-couples should be punished with death.<br />
<br />
In politics, there is even less of a requirement to have intelligence. The overriding factors for success are popularity, public speaking skills and knowing how to tell people what they want to hear. There have been politicians in government who are still students who have yet to graduate. Many of them have education or career experience with questionable value or relevance.<br />
<br />
As explained <a href="http://newworldparty.org/2009/11/most-important-job-in-country.html" target="_blank">here</a>, the most important job for the politician is to manage the economy. Yet, most politicians know little of economics or business, from either an educational or experience standpoint. Obama has amazing public speaking skills, but did not study business and has less business experience than a cashier at McDonald's. You likely know much more about business and economics than Obama.<br />
<br />
Before you vote at the next election, look up the educational background and career experience of the politicians. You will be dumbfounded at some of them.<br />
<br />
Many of you are probably intimidated by people in leadership or authoritative positions. Generally, this is caused by the belief that the leaders are more competent, intelligent or knowledgeable than you. However, this is not accurate. Hence, many voters rarely contact their politicians to raise their concerns or wishes.<br />
<br />
According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Dan Ellsberg</a> on <a href="http://exposefacts.org/" target="_blank">ExposeFacts</a>, "all governments lie" and when governments are not held accountable, "disastrous" policies happen such as "Vietnam" and "Iraq".<br />
<br />
During elections, politicians make promises. Unfortunately, they are not bound by legal contracts to these promises. One can argue that they should be. Short of this, voters such as you need to ensure that they keep their promises. If you voted for a politician based on his/her promise and he/she breaks that promise, it is akin to fraud. You need to contact them with your complaints, otherwise they will feel that the people are not against their broken promises or changed policies.<br />
<br />
You should never be intimidated by leaders in business or politics. You should never be reluctant to voice your concerns to your politicians. They are not leaders because they are smarter or more competent than you. Quite often, you are more so. They are leaders because they are more popular, or in the case of politicians, because they chose a different career path as well.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-67613274403153873782013-01-08T11:09:00.001-05:002013-01-09T00:43:14.369-05:00The EconomyOXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY DEFINITION:<i> </i><i>The state of a
country or region in terms of the production and consumption of goods
and services and the supply of money OR The careful management of
available resource</i>.<br />
<br />
WIKIPEDIA DEFINITION:<i> An
economy consists of the economic system of a country or other area, the
labor, capital and land resources, and the economic agents that socially
participate in the production, exchange, distribution, and consumption
of goods and services of that area</i>.<br />
<br />
<br />
The
above definitions are extraneous. The goal of this article is to define
the economy and outline it's structure in basic terms.<br />
<br />
<b>BASIC DEFINITION: <i>The </i></b><b><i><span class="qDef lang-en">production, consumption, and distribution</span> of goods and services of a region. </i></b><br />
<br />
Simply stated:<br />
<ul>
<li>the production is the <span style="color: #0b5394;">output*</span> <span class="qDef lang-en">or the value added to the economy</span></li>
<li><span class="qDef lang-en">the consumption is the </span><span class="qDef lang-en">intake</span><span class="qDef lang-en"><span class="qDef lang-en"> of </span></span>production <span class="qDef lang-en">or the cost to the economy</span></li>
<li>the distribution is the <span class="qDef lang-en">outflo</span>w of production or the allocation o<span class="qDef lang-en">f </span><span class="qDef lang-en"><span style="color: #0b5394;">output*</span> to citizens of the economy</span>.</li>
</ul>
<span style="color: #0b5394;">*<i>In theory, each unit of output corresponds to a unit of income. </i></span><br />
<br />
<br />
To
outline it's structure, we need to quantify the economy's Production
and Consumption by determining each of it's citizens consumer/producer
status and social demographic and grouping them accordingly as <br />
<ul>
<li>Children/Students<i> <span style="color: red;">net consumers</span></i></li>
<li>Public Service Sector </li>
<li>Private Service Sector</li>
<li>Construction <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span></li>
<li>Manufacturing <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span></li>
<li>Agriculture <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span></li>
<li>Cash Economy</li>
<li>Unemployed with benefits<i> </i><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Unemployed no benefits<span style="color: #38761d;"><i> </i></span><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Social Assistance<i> </i><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Retired Pension Plans<i> </i><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Retired Social Assistance<span style="color: red;"><i> </i><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
</ul>
<br />
Note that the groups above not noted as <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span> or <i><span style="color: red;">net consumers</span> </i>can vary between <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span> or <span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span> group type Group types are defined as<br />
<ul>
<li><i><span style="color: #38761d;">net producers</span> </i>produce more than they consume</li>
<li><i><span style="color: red;">net consumers</span> </i>consume more than they produce</li>
</ul>
<br />
The Service Sectors groups can be classified as <i><span style="color: #38761d;">net producers</span> </i>only
if the services of the group provide sufficient efficiency savings to
the UN-leveraged values of all their related products and/or services.
During the last 50 years, the Services Sector proportional share size of
GDP of most developed democracies increased dramatically. Subsequently,
they increased the leveraging levels of products and services in their
economies.<span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> </span></span><span class="hw">Deservedly, their economy's Services Sectors a</span>re<span class="hw"> </span><i><span style="color: red;">net consumers</span></i>.<br />
<i><br /></i>Below is the revised grouping for these democracies <br />
<ul>
<li>Children/Students<i> <span style="color: red;">net consumers</span></i></li>
<li>Public Service Sector <i><span style="color: red;">net consumers</span></i></li>
<li>Private Service Sector<i> </i><i><span style="color: red;">net consumers</span></i></li>
<li>Construction <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span></li>
<li>Manufacturing <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span></li>
<li>Agriculture <span style="color: #38761d;"><i>net producers</i></span></li>
<li>Cash Economy</li>
<li>Unemployed with benefits<i> </i><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Unemployed no benefits<span style="color: #38761d;"><i> </i></span><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Social Assistance<i> </i><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Retired Pension Plans<i> </i><span style="color: red;"><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
<li>Retired Social Assistance<span style="color: red;"><i> </i><i>net consumers</i></span></li>
</ul>
<br />
SUMMATION: In-order to mitigate outflows of capital
and the loss of
jobs in
manufacturing, the economies of most developed democracies became more
serviced based and
credit dependent. As outsourcing and advances in manufacturing
technologies exasperated the losses of jobs, governments
stimulated sectors of their economies and expanded their size. As a
result, these democracies are subsidizing their economies and indebting
their future generations. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b><br /></b>
<span style="color: red;"><b>CANADIAN PERSPECTIVE - The decline of net producers and rise of net consumers </b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
The Services
Sector as a percentage of GDP has increased from about 50% in 1960 to
about 70% today.and now employs over 75% of workers. Meanwhile, the
share of Manufacturing as a percentage of the Canadian GDP has been
declining since the early 1940's.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNyVH7_KLfcotIyDX-7oW426rE5g45Ot_ugNKf2LKoMy8BGv7g1lPUDjqv0cgU4SiZTakIKwfdHnZUloF2WZKflCT-OfSVL0A0wi80Sb0e1ZNa3Yo-bKS_Vo8BKPyqfRhkLZzAjeYobZFc/s1600/gdp.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="404" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNyVH7_KLfcotIyDX-7oW426rE5g45Ot_ugNKf2LKoMy8BGv7g1lPUDjqv0cgU4SiZTakIKwfdHnZUloF2WZKflCT-OfSVL0A0wi80Sb0e1ZNa3Yo-bKS_Vo8BKPyqfRhkLZzAjeYobZFc/s640/gdp.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The
Canadian economy has undergone a broad structural shift. To illustrate this, the <i>Village of Canada </i>Microcosms below quantifies the decline of net producers and rise of net consumers in Canada<i>.</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<i>Village of Canada </i></h3>
The population of Canada wa<span style="font-weight: normal;">s approximately 18,500,000 in 1962, 25</span><span style="font-weight: normal;">,000,000 in 1982 and 35</span><span style="font-weight: normal;">,000,000
in 2012. Listed below are the 1962, 1982 and 2012 village
representations of a 100 person Canada. Each person listed in the </span><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">1962, 1982 and 2012 village columns</span> is the equivalent of </span><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">185,000 (1962) or 25</span><span style="font-weight: normal;">0,000 (1982) or 35</span><span style="font-weight: normal;">0,000 (2012)</span> Canadians </span>with similar social demographic<span style="font-weight: normal;"><b>.</b></span><br />
<span style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></span>
<br />
<table border="0" bordercolor="#111111" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td height="21" valign="top" width="36%"><br /></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2" height="21" valign="top" width="20%"><b>1962 </b></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2" height="21" valign="top" width="20%"><b>1982</b></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2" height="21" valign="top" width="20%"><b>2012</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="36%"><b><br />
Children/Students<br />
<br />Public Service Sector<br />
Private Service Sector<br />
Construction<br />
Manufacturing<br />
Agriculture<br />
<br />Cash Economy<br />
<br />Unemployed with benefits
<br />
Unemployed no benefits<br />
Social Assistance<br />
<br />
Retired Pension Plans</b><br />
<b>Retired Social Assistance<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Net Consumers </span><span style="color: #38761d;">Net Producers</span></b></td>
<td align="right" valign="top" width="10%"><b><span style="color: red;"> </span><br />
<span style="color: red;">23<br />
<br />
5<br />
14<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
2<br />
<br />
2<br />
2<br />
1<br />
<br />
13<br />
4<br />
<br />
<br />
66</span></b></td>
<td valign="top" width="10%"><b><span style="color: red;"> </span><span style="color: #38761d;"><br />
0<br />
<br />
2<br />
5<br />
5<br />
17<br />
4<br />
<br />
1<br />
<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
<br />
34</span></b></td>
<td align="right" valign="top" width="10%"><b><br />
<span style="color: red;">21<br />
<br />
7<br />
17<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
2<br />
<br />
2<br />
2<br />
1<br />
<br />
14<br />
4<br />
<br /><br />70</span></b></td>
<td valign="top" width="10%"><b><span style="color: #38761d;"><br />
0<br />
<br />
2<br />
5<br />
5<br />
14<br />
3<br />
<br />
1<br />
<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />0<br />
0<br />
<br /><br />30</span></b></td>
<td align="right" valign="top" width="10%"><b><span style="color: red;"><br />
21<br />
<br />
10<br />
21<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
3<br />
<br />
3<br />
2<br />
2<br />
<br />
14<br />
4<br />
<br />
<br />
80</span></b></td>
<td valign="top" width="10%"><b><span style="color: #38761d;"><br />
0<br />
<br />
2<br />
5<br />
5<br />
6<br />
1<br />
<br />
1<br />
<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
0<br />
0<br />
<br />
<br />
20</span></b></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<b><br /><br /><br />SYNOPSIS</b><br />
<br />
The citizens of the <i>Village of Canada </i>are citizens of the <i>Village of the Damned</i>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>HIERARCHY OF THE ECONOMY</b></span><br />
<b><br /></b>
When thinking of the economic distress afflicting major democracies,
'house of cards' may come to mind. But, if you think in terms of
hierarchy of economies, 'thick stone mansions with thin wood
foundations' is more applicable. This analogy will make sense after
reading below to the end.<br />
<br />
What is the hierarchy of the economy<b>?</b>
Essentially, it's the evolutionary order of economic activities
determined by the needs of early humans and/or human communities.<br />
<ul>
<li>food, water</li>
<li>shelter</li>
<li>clothing</li>
<li>manufacturing </li>
<li>education</li>
<li>transportation</li>
<li>banking</li>
<li>retail </li>
</ul>
'Food, water, shelter, clothing, manufacturing' are productive
activities whereas 'education, transportation, banking, retail' are
service activities. In essence, 'production' activities trump 'service'
activities. The core value of an economy comes from 'Production'
whereas 'Services' leverage the value of Production. The most common
example of this leverage is when a retailer sells a product at a price
above the wholesale price. Even a financial service offered to
consumers is subordinate to the production of something. <br />
<br />
<b><i>'Every service owes it's existence to production. There are no exceptions.'</i></b><br />
<br />
The level of wealth generated in an economy
are dependent on 2 factors. <br />
<ul>
<li>efficiency</li>
<li>credit</li>
</ul>
Efficiencies from automation, economies of scale and cheap labor
improve production of goods and some services whereas credit (money
supply) boost predominantly the services sector of the economy. <span class="query_h1" id="query_h1">Inherently, the excessive debt obligations from excessive credit</span>
can impede the economy.<br />
<br />
The growth of the service sector
industries of major economies are attributed to credit expansion policies of their central banks. Subsequently, their services sector industries have over leveraged
the wealth from their production sector industries. They are too big to
sustain.<br />
<br />
<b>Production is the foundation of an economy. Services are the walls and roof of an economy. Most major economies are like 'thick stone mansions with thin wood foundations'.</b><br />
<br />
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<u>Research sources</u><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.claimingourfuture.ie/wp-content/uploads/What-is-the-Economy-COF.pdf</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ca.html</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/120907/dq120907a-eng.htm</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/qc/job_futures/statistics/8431.shtml</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/govt62a-eng.htm</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.canadianservicescoalition.com/CanadianServicesSectorANewSuccessStory.pdf</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.statcan.gc.ca/about-apercu/plan2010-2013/demograph-eng.htm</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_of_Canada_by_year </span><br />
<span style="color: red;">http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/services/canada-ts.aspx?view=d </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The views and opinions expressed in this article are strictly those of the author.DAPOPPERhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15039331282906497862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-68756072904972162842012-09-16T12:08:00.005-04:002015-06-17T12:56:05.139-04:00Screwing the Young, Over and Over Again<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="p1">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTmLc5HBPwt6sLvzu5Zgli82GRv1m_B9sINXWbFc1i479184p9kjh8UNb3TsAC5PI-fh-z5koOZ9kQpH99ioVr9i2DIISltupai2H-EeHDpdbziEmMYloPVNHyU1NHlFKOgtpiv4R_6Xd5/s1600/sheet-metal-screw.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTmLc5HBPwt6sLvzu5Zgli82GRv1m_B9sINXWbFc1i479184p9kjh8UNb3TsAC5PI-fh-z5koOZ9kQpH99ioVr9i2DIISltupai2H-EeHDpdbziEmMYloPVNHyU1NHlFKOgtpiv4R_6Xd5/s200/sheet-metal-screw.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
Thanks to the following, governments, which consist of mainly baby boomers, have successfully screwed the young:</div>
<ul class="ul1">
<li class="li1"><span class="s1"><a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank"><span class="s2">Stealing from Children</span></a></span> via HUGE government debts in the hundreds of billions. Children and grandchildren will pay higher taxes, receive less spending from the government or lose wealth due to inflation if the government has to <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2012/06/printing-money-stealing.html" target="_blank">print money to pay for the debt.</a></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1"><a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank"><span class="s2">Massive Manipulation of the Housing Market by the government</span></a></span> to create and fuel Housing Bubbles. (Canada has the longest lasting Housing Bubble in Western history. Home prices are now out of reach for most young people.) The ones who borrowed like crazy to get in are mainly the younger generation. In the U.S., they have lost their shirts. In Canada and Australia, they will now be far poorer than the previous generation, as they spend the majority of their income for their homes for the majority of their lives. It is essentially a massive transfer of wealth from the young to the old.<br /><br /><div class="p1">
Bubbles, such as the Dot Com, Oil and Real Estate bubbles, are extremely disruptive for any country. <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html" target="_blank">They usually make some people filthy rich and some people filthy poor</a>. After the Housing Bubble burst in the 1990's in Hong Kong, people jumped out of windows. After the stock market bubble burst in 1929, people in New York jumped out of windows. Governments should do everything they can to prevent or suppress bubbles. Instead, governments did everything they can to create and fuel Housing Bubbles.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
The role of the central bank is to maintain price stability by fighting inflation. The single biggest purchase for most people is their home. In bubbles, home prices inflate astronomically thanks to government policies. This is huge inflation for the young. This means that the head of most central banks should be fired for gross incompetence.</div>
</li>
<li class="li1">Our <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economies</a> have been fuelled by borrowing, spending and debts. The previous generation have enjoyed an economy and standard of living at the expense of the future. Eventually, this borrowing and spending will slow down. When it does, the economy will do the same, at which point the younger generation will suffer when they run out of money to fuel and support their economy. Europe serves as a good example of this. If the borrowing and spending does not slow down, then the government will have to <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2012/06/printing-money-stealing.html" target="_blank">print money</a>, which again creates inflation and steals wealth from the whole population at that time.<br /><br />According to this <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/49018425" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span class="s3">article</span></a>:<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"One third of Americans now count themselves part of the lower-middle or lower classes, according to <a href="http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/09/10/a-third-of-americans-now-say-they-are-in-the-lower-classes/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span class="s4"><b>a report</b></span></a> from Pew Research Center, including nearly 40 percent of young people between the ages of 18 and 30."</blockquote>
When a country suffers from the hang-over of too much debt, the young is especially hit hard. 50+% of the young are unemployed in Spain and Greece. Hence, the younger generation will suffer for decades to come.</li>
</ul>
<div class="p5">
<b><br /></b>
<b>SPEAK UP, COMPLAIN, PROTEST</b></div>
<div class="p5">
<br /></div>
<div class="p5">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiO5A_jk-aeynxtjK61X4-gUHLWJILSue5PebbZS0JLtgZazZWh2GllHU_8G72Zbu63bpwFtgukZVrWAZNpsHsCbVdBoBGQViMk0VuRlXy6GUYApZVwUDMzCeEJnnU2Sumw_ug6oOz199s8/s1600/speak-up.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiO5A_jk-aeynxtjK61X4-gUHLWJILSue5PebbZS0JLtgZazZWh2GllHU_8G72Zbu63bpwFtgukZVrWAZNpsHsCbVdBoBGQViMk0VuRlXy6GUYApZVwUDMzCeEJnnU2Sumw_ug6oOz199s8/s200/speak-up.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
If you are part of the younger generation, speak up. Complain to your politicians. Send links from our site to your politicians, friends and family. If you do not speak up, the older generation will continue to screw you, because most of them do not even know that they are screwing you.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Read:<br />
<br />
<span class="s1"><span class="s2"><a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">Stealing from Children</a></span></span><br />
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1"><span class="s1"><span class="s2"><a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the Most Manipulated Market in the World</a></span></span></span><br />
<span class="s1"><span class="s1"><br /></span></span>
<span class="s1"><span class="s1"><a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economy</a></span></span><br />
<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-31221597189343053892012-06-10T00:43:00.003-04:002012-10-29T18:08:38.281-04:00Time is Wealth<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
We tax people based on their wealth. But who defines wealth? How is it defined and is it fair? A person may be wealthy or not wealthy depending on what you measure.<br />
<br />
The common definition of wealth is similar to net worth, which is defined as assets minus liabilities. Therefore, if a person has a lot of assets and few liabilities, the person has a high net worth or is wealthy.<br />
<br />
What is normally defined as assets include cash, cash equivalents or something that can be easily converted to cash. These include:<br />
<ul><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgemPrvVd2zVZNjxxcBR_YrS4V9nQg06oPe_s4ex1O0jGaq86jU_jXjdJ3Nq6aVDmBlqani4aQL1VwV1-Y4NOduivYplyCsZfShJ_1OJUrFgkp9M1yY_nhQ9A8wwBucCLcBOlpeqMxTQAel/s1600/cash+money+benjamins+hundreds+lots+pile+piles+bills+dollars.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="132" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgemPrvVd2zVZNjxxcBR_YrS4V9nQg06oPe_s4ex1O0jGaq86jU_jXjdJ3Nq6aVDmBlqani4aQL1VwV1-Y4NOduivYplyCsZfShJ_1OJUrFgkp9M1yY_nhQ9A8wwBucCLcBOlpeqMxTQAel/s200/cash+money+benjamins+hundreds+lots+pile+piles+bills+dollars.jpg" width="200" /></a>
<li>money</li>
<li>real estate</li>
<li>car</li>
<li>boat</li>
<li>stocks</li>
<li>gold</li>
<li>companies</li>
<li>etc.</li>
</ul>
The government uses the above definition of wealth to determine tax rates. The majority of taxation is based on how much <i>money</i> people are making in income.<br />
<br />
However, the above definition of assets is limiting. Assets can be defined as having anything that provides value. Other types of assets are never considered. These include:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVe3K5te_gwhKKLHOdvDLqJmFDJfg6r1wOkkS0m_TZW0tqq-yI-iSysaUNK7F5nKRRkSMSa4bpJ2_78rDvBsNlRH2QTeIGI_4BJmvMpPte7WhlFHu9CKlUN0HBxvZDHxajg-3sLeDGyL9G/s1600/clock.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="198" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVe3K5te_gwhKKLHOdvDLqJmFDJfg6r1wOkkS0m_TZW0tqq-yI-iSysaUNK7F5nKRRkSMSa4bpJ2_78rDvBsNlRH2QTeIGI_4BJmvMpPte7WhlFHu9CKlUN0HBxvZDHxajg-3sLeDGyL9G/s200/clock.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<ul>
<li><span style="color: #e69138;"><b>leisure/spare time</b></span></li>
<li>health</li>
</ul>
A person can be wealthy with time. <span style="color: #e69138;"><b>Time has value.</b></span> This is reflected in "overtime payment". After working 40 hours in a week, the worker will value the 41st hour more than the 1st hour. Therefore, the worker will demand a higher hourly rate for working any hour after 40 hours. Similarly, a person, who has one hour of leisure time per week, will value his/her leisure hour much more highly than a person who has 20 hours of leisure time per week. Conversely, a person who has 30 hours of leisure time is wealthier than a person who has 10 hours of leisure time. This is true for anybody in the world.<br />
<br />
Society and taxation systems do not include time in the calculation of wealth.<br />
<br />
Let us assume that there are only two people in our entire country:<br />
<ul>
<li>Jane works 40 hours a week</li>
<li>Tom works 40 hours a week</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY2573eTaZZx3KXGMDj03y3i_qosoMMNXi_UKuee3HqkWWkD8dpFJCR79D0k2XbTHKefmPV-yntTBWUvmEJaHfxU1B4A-lLxYKKyDLp3_-3BPtBiyHfmNaKJFY9uMt0eZygeCVqCjsXGLC/s1600/woman+working+in+office+0002.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY2573eTaZZx3KXGMDj03y3i_qosoMMNXi_UKuee3HqkWWkD8dpFJCR79D0k2XbTHKefmPV-yntTBWUvmEJaHfxU1B4A-lLxYKKyDLp3_-3BPtBiyHfmNaKJFY9uMt0eZygeCVqCjsXGLC/s200/woman+working+in+office+0002.jpg" width="200" /></a>Let us suppose that Jane decides to increase her work hours to 60 hours a week, by working until 7 PM, getting to the office by 7 AM, or calling/entertaining more prospects to make more sales and commission. If Jane works in a factory, let us suppose that Jane works overtime to make extra money. Effectively, she has sacrificed and converted her leisure time to money.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhE0efGnectPLYRsVRgjG7EFmm4lWOMFZ6jZVC0Ja3NMNG3QbD2lvM1KHVjXpijDSp8OFgU9K98iZkI4jSx_k5zCH6kTIqHUjJZVf9GbTeQy3Fl3AdSWx0MBGqRKzkBJu__IyYmxGMIWeG/s1600/watching_television_1.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="93" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhE0efGnectPLYRsVRgjG7EFmm4lWOMFZ6jZVC0Ja3NMNG3QbD2lvM1KHVjXpijDSp8OFgU9K98iZkI4jSx_k5zCH6kTIqHUjJZVf9GbTeQy3Fl3AdSWx0MBGqRKzkBJu__IyYmxGMIWeG/s200/watching_television_1.gif" width="200" /></a>Tom does not want to work more than 40 hours a week. He rather spend that time watching TV, going to the beach, camping, picnicking, watching sports with his friends, visiting relatives, surfing the internet, going to the bar, watching movies with dates or playing video console games. He gets enjoyment and value from these leisure activities.<br />
<br />
In our taxation system, Jane will be taxed more but Tom will not. The government thinks that Jane is wealthier without having made any sacrifices. Do most people think that working 60 hours a week is not a sacrifice?<br />
<br />
For simplicity, let us assume the following:<br />
<ul>
<li>Each hour in the first 40 hours of the week is worth $10 to both Jane and Tom</li>
<li>Jane and Tom are paid $10 per hour worked in the first 40 hours, or $400.</li>
<li>Let us assume that each hour of leisure time after the first 40 hours worked is worth $15 per hour to both Jane and Tom. Therefore, the next 20 hours is worth $300 to both Jane and Tom. If either of them wants to work these overtime hours, they will be paid $15 per hour.</li>
<li>Let us assume that we have a flat tax system and that any income is taxed at 20%.</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBLBGsiBxNFoKToXqPSchYxHwJfbE27tP72l5DOpacIAr8FAQyri9o1g2y1d0Ga9SJMdmmZHMuRfpqDiAy5vIej-Xj9AlUUDO3Mk1TvTjwVvbWVZRsmBa34jYhmWF2liMphOASOvPpb2za/s1600/chart1-145px.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBLBGsiBxNFoKToXqPSchYxHwJfbE27tP72l5DOpacIAr8FAQyri9o1g2y1d0Ga9SJMdmmZHMuRfpqDiAy5vIej-Xj9AlUUDO3Mk1TvTjwVvbWVZRsmBa34jYhmWF2liMphOASOvPpb2za/s1600/chart1-145px.gif" /></a>How much wealth do Jane and Tom have? If we only count money in determining wealth, then Jane is wealthier:<br />
<ul>
<li>Jane: $560 ($700 - $140 of tax)</li>
<li>Tom: $320 ($400 - $80 of tax)</li>
</ul>
If we include time in determining wealth, then Tom is wealthier:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc4tURCX3RotBIovK-rB7aWS8aRobEDNSRHWKUWUp5lZ-wIcCRlD0CvfNYstVyY_JzaZ3aDGo6z7BYev-EG7UF6QMi-XNGAYVnbzAtkpCrumLtbOe33PJZaSVRmED_a1MW3RELbnAT44K7/s1600/chart2-145px.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc4tURCX3RotBIovK-rB7aWS8aRobEDNSRHWKUWUp5lZ-wIcCRlD0CvfNYstVyY_JzaZ3aDGo6z7BYev-EG7UF6QMi-XNGAYVnbzAtkpCrumLtbOe33PJZaSVRmED_a1MW3RELbnAT44K7/s1600/chart2-145px.gif" /></a></div>
<ul>
<li>Jane: $560</li>
<li>Tom: $620 ($320 of take home income + $300 of leisure time)</li>
</ul>
However, the above is using a flat tax system, which most countries do not use. They use a progressive tax system. Let us assume that the average tax rate is 40% for income above $400. Therefore, here are the wealth of Jane and Tom:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxK14IJhS2cQMQHpn1ivbwDutfPO56oKluhMpPkg20VZ-L6atwyo9VKKEzrClm7ujY6ZFVfS12dot93JhKTeVqiU4FqYj3XgA4yCWNHau3mM9KigZ2HnDD931c8gYayhWwo5unIv_z9zKL/s1600/chart3-200px.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxK14IJhS2cQMQHpn1ivbwDutfPO56oKluhMpPkg20VZ-L6atwyo9VKKEzrClm7ujY6ZFVfS12dot93JhKTeVqiU4FqYj3XgA4yCWNHau3mM9KigZ2HnDD931c8gYayhWwo5unIv_z9zKL/s1600/chart3-200px.gif" /></a></div>
<ul>
<li>Jane: $420 ($700 - $280 of tax)</li>
<li>Tom: $320 ($400 - $80 of tax)</li>
</ul>
If we include time in determining wealth, then Tom is much wealthier:<br />
<ul>
<li>Jane: $420</li>
<li>Tom: $620</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKml2JIvnLNyriD8d9rZloMp12s_yX0ASBXIiGqnZTdsyNuY5QrSrhKh1cFp3NOwvJpWht0gqcpyw9of0ylmSXhJKrq_Dl4VaRYI5ZNnAlAfFXyGbh7ij9D_y-gYQ_fP-bBjHBjHyccMB3/s1600/chart4-200px.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKml2JIvnLNyriD8d9rZloMp12s_yX0ASBXIiGqnZTdsyNuY5QrSrhKh1cFp3NOwvJpWht0gqcpyw9of0ylmSXhJKrq_Dl4VaRYI5ZNnAlAfFXyGbh7ij9D_y-gYQ_fP-bBjHBjHyccMB3/s1600/chart4-200px.gif" /></a><br />
When you add in time in calculating wealth, then those who you think are poor, are wealthy.<br />
<br />
The situation gets even more distorted. Governments take money from higher income earners and spend it on lower income earners. If Jane and Tom are the only two people in our country, then this means that part of the money taxed from Jane will be spent on Tom.<br />
<br />
For simplicity, let us assume the following:<br />
<ul><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoJZx2D9g8Yl45eeWFjaDoDs7qPV2IY6RJwDepMjrRTfc5ad_TrCX0CwXoBkUxKElAqroQrwAFOOdtzqNZCyDrOq6-qIPMdZgSD_wzYOAV3xeazhcEYKx1cOFcvSJyF3MlZfe4X6OBApha/s1600/chart5-200px.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoJZx2D9g8Yl45eeWFjaDoDs7qPV2IY6RJwDepMjrRTfc5ad_TrCX0CwXoBkUxKElAqroQrwAFOOdtzqNZCyDrOq6-qIPMdZgSD_wzYOAV3xeazhcEYKx1cOFcvSJyF3MlZfe4X6OBApha/s1600/chart5-200px.gif" /></a>
<li>The government will take half of the $280 of income tax that Jane paid, and spend it on Tom.</li>
</ul>
Therefore, Tom is wealthier whether we include time or not in our wealth calculations. Here are Jane's and Tom's wealth when time is not included:<br />
<ul>
<li>Jane: $420</li>
<li>Tom: $460 ($320 + $140 of government spending)</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWHWgpec7t7XOeqNeG-wQEANsGYx-maKpO8RWnqkMGV7Eh7AQlDcCXROuUNOftJVy9z9VjDkx8bANYCB1ZEzMBz0WtamrYsDBYg-KlXaQFMgkxtXyY0UpF-42icjwTcRxTIU-QFJ1RPczz/s1600/chart6-200px.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWHWgpec7t7XOeqNeG-wQEANsGYx-maKpO8RWnqkMGV7Eh7AQlDcCXROuUNOftJVy9z9VjDkx8bANYCB1ZEzMBz0WtamrYsDBYg-KlXaQFMgkxtXyY0UpF-42icjwTcRxTIU-QFJ1RPczz/s1600/chart6-200px.gif" /></a>If we include time and government's distribution of wealth, then Tom is significantly wealthier:<br />
<ul>
<li>Jane: $420</li>
<li>Tom: $760 ($320 of take home income + $300 of leisure time + $140 of government spending)</li>
</ul>
Is this fair? Should we not include time in determining wealth?<br />
<br />
Does our taxation system motivate or deter people from working harder?<br />
<br />
If time was treated as an asset as well, then Tom's time should be taxed and part of that should be given to Jane. Even though most people want a full-time job, there are some people that value leisure time so much, that they prefer to work less than 40 hours a week. Should their time to be taxed and given to Jane?<br />
<br />
Some may argue that very wealthy people, such as billionaires, should be taxed more. We agree. However, billionaires are still rare. We are referring to the majority of workers and according to the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html" target="_blank">New York Times</a>, <b>90% of households</b> make less than $140,000 per year. Therefore, 90% of individuals make significantly less than $140,000 per year. 90% of individuals are like Jane and Tom. Are we treating Jane and Tom fairly?<br />
<br />
Entrepreneurs are the main source of (money related) wealth creation for any country in the world. The average entrepreneur makes much bigger sacrifices, such as working more than 60 hours a week, spending his/her savings, making no income, taking huge risks such as borrowing money from his/her house or credit cards, risking his/her friends' and family's money, etc. According to this <a href="http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/" target="_blank">blog</a> about start-ups:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"I slept at work again last night; two and a half hours curled up in a quilt underneath my desk" </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"I have no life. I never see any of my non-work friends, and I’m wasting away my one and only youth. I ought to be out doing fun things and active things, the kind of things I won’t be able to do when my mind and body finally decay. But instead I’m stuck inside under fluorescent lights, pushing bits around inside a computer in ways that are only interesting to other nerds. I glanced at a movie listing and there are movies out that I haven’t even heard of. How did that happen? That freaks me out."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"This job is destroying my body. This can’t be worth it."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE9Hdw7c5_GtgtbxlHDwmH0WwdJZonUU17ZRQPIbn3KCtrXqCgZFO7a9xBH6h4pL6r0z-W_dzC8R4_HeuftlJVXP47aM0RlfStGbYXRnKDBw3J1Dp8u9orgA6WODVpND7Z-pppCJ4GyW4f/s1600/sick-person-in-bed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE9Hdw7c5_GtgtbxlHDwmH0WwdJZonUU17ZRQPIbn3KCtrXqCgZFO7a9xBH6h4pL6r0z-W_dzC8R4_HeuftlJVXP47aM0RlfStGbYXRnKDBw3J1Dp8u9orgA6WODVpND7Z-pppCJ4GyW4f/s200/sick-person-in-bed.jpg" width="200" /></a>"It’s a saturday night, and I’m in my cubicle" </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"I’m so f_cking burnt. Existence is suffering."</blockquote>
Not only do entrepreneurs sacrifice leisure time, they also sacrifice <span style="color: #e69138;"><b>health</b></span> according to this <a href="http://blog.asmartbear.com/sacrifice-your-health-for-your-startup.html" target="_blank">blog</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Maximizing your chance for success means sacrificing health and family."</blockquote>
When these entrepreneurs fail, which the far majority do, they become much poorer compared to somebody who had a regular 9-5 job. Nobody hears about them or from them. When a tiny few entrepreneurs succeed, they become CEOs, building big companies and hiring thousands of people. They become famous and rich due to their equity in their companies. The rest of the population tend to think that it is unfair that these CEOs have so much money. Society feels that we should have a progressive tax system to tax them at a higher percentage rate. If we should do this, should we have taxed Tom's leisure time and health to give to these entrepreneurs?<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-4427991147186526692012-06-07T21:01:00.000-04:002015-05-25T13:43:12.263-04:00Printing Money = Stealing from You<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
When governments spend too much money and get into a debt crisis, there are two ways to solve it:<br />
<ol>
<li>Run surpluses by reducing spending, increasing taxes or growing the economy to generate more tax revenue. Stimulus spending is the method usually attempted to grow the economy. However, this method is near impossible to do when the country has a debt crisis and has no money.</li>
<li>Print money.</li>
</ol>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbnir2hu8mPym3z8t_ifY0l7tMxBm8MatXuHHWNCQZ3hajQMBDIceurZxQseU8H75Ql5_FnMhyphenhyphenLanuonDRcCz68zwVtwxzxVerH9nAWLB3P4sV4Gmr-WoQRsQgQ3vN6JUo2GyI58TIPFHO/s1600/printing-money1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbnir2hu8mPym3z8t_ifY0l7tMxBm8MatXuHHWNCQZ3hajQMBDIceurZxQseU8H75Ql5_FnMhyphenhyphenLanuonDRcCz68zwVtwxzxVerH9nAWLB3P4sV4Gmr-WoQRsQgQ3vN6JUo2GyI58TIPFHO/s320/printing-money1.jpg" width="320" /></a>As countries like Greece and France have shown, when their voters replaced pro-austerity politicians with anti-austerity politicians, democracy will not allow countries to run balanced budgets very often or at all, let alone budget surpluses. Therefore, most countries have ran budget deficits for decades.<br />
<br />
When debt levels become too high, unmanageable and become a crisis, countries eventually resort to printing money. This is what many countries have done, such as African countries and South American countries in the 1990's.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMx4Tbl5geFr4JhPOXSLdDscQeE5bu13uVS_yhNOTh43ngOv4QwQN2A7iiANJ9XaWUZ11uwC0vjHoyOqcP-Vh_HFjc1DE1fD27oL8uJDy7RwyX6gS4Vx-PK9IX-1BcvnKIWgKGkHlBqHp/s1600/1201720014WAgbtz.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="252" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMx4Tbl5geFr4JhPOXSLdDscQeE5bu13uVS_yhNOTh43ngOv4QwQN2A7iiANJ9XaWUZ11uwC0vjHoyOqcP-Vh_HFjc1DE1fD27oL8uJDy7RwyX6gS4Vx-PK9IX-1BcvnKIWgKGkHlBqHp/s320/1201720014WAgbtz.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
What most people do not realize, is that <b><span style="color: #e69138;">printing money, by the government or anybody, is stealing money</span></b>. When the government prints money, it is no different than when a criminal uses a photocopier to counterfeit money.<br />
<br />
As an example, if anybody counterfeits or prints $1 million, did he create $1 million of additional wealth for his country? No. The country's money supply increased by $1 million, but the quantity of goods and services did not increase. Therefore, the prices for the goods and services will increase, which creates inflation. The amount of goods and services that you can buy, decreases. Effectively, the criminal stole $1 million of wealth from you and the population.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8lkWQrVXhW-XH6xIVehfVAPNM5KE2mfbyC5omiYK8wOuRNo34tCpnlObNpwUT6SwTtWQ2arFNTJWSnR_7RhDfTilt0qya-9P9TyBbMMTuF_LOaQz-8uwX6gics2rSLrEdcFgUm_WUzpxA/s1600/4-oranges.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8lkWQrVXhW-XH6xIVehfVAPNM5KE2mfbyC5omiYK8wOuRNo34tCpnlObNpwUT6SwTtWQ2arFNTJWSnR_7RhDfTilt0qya-9P9TyBbMMTuF_LOaQz-8uwX6gics2rSLrEdcFgUm_WUzpxA/s200/4-oranges.png" width="200" /></a></div>
Let us use a simple example to prove this. Let us say that our country has three people: Tom, Dick and farmer Harry. Our country has $4 in total money supply. Tom has $2 and Dick has $2. Farmer Harry can grow four oranges only. Therefore, Tom can pay $2 for two oranges and Dick can pay $2 for two oranges. Instead of this scenario, let us say that Dick counterfeits an additional $4 by printing it, doubling the country's money supply to $8. Tom still has $2, but Dick now has $6. Dick can now afford to buy more oranges. Farmer Harry will now sell three oranges to Dick for $6 and one orange to Tom for $2. The total wealth of the country has not changed. It still has only four oranges. However, by printing money, Dick has stolen wealth from Tom. Tom became poorer. This is essentially what happens when a criminal or the government prints money.<br />
<br />
Some people think that printing money will not only solve debt problems, but also economic problems. If this is the case, then there should not be any poor countries in the world. Every poor country should simply print a lot of money and become rich. Many countries have actually tried this throughout the world and throughout history. All they have done was increase their money supply (not their wealth) and created inflation. Some printed way too much money and created hyper-inflation. This was the case with Zimbabwe when they experienced inflation in the thousands and millions of percent. One $1USD became equivalent to $Z2,621,984,228 (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe" target="_blank">source</a>). One cannot buy very many oranges with a Zimbabwe dollar.<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiN3d6tCRQrMiOPY58UCclXEB26LNziNdLr7zYAhdzaKpce6shyphenhyphenBLqYFX7ztktp8yLS28qyuSWj3jyNepWlOg1H66tHToFJj57jyRHT7cjKSGISi5_SE64IpvjysLmVBJrep2dWUODUDwoi/s1600/Euro-Money-Printed-Toilet-Paper-Dollar-Bill-Tissue-cool.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiN3d6tCRQrMiOPY58UCclXEB26LNziNdLr7zYAhdzaKpce6shyphenhyphenBLqYFX7ztktp8yLS28qyuSWj3jyNepWlOg1H66tHToFJj57jyRHT7cjKSGISi5_SE64IpvjysLmVBJrep2dWUODUDwoi/s200/Euro-Money-Printed-Toilet-Paper-Dollar-Bill-Tissue-cool.jpg" width="142" /></a><br />
Some people say that printing money is a way for the government to tax the population. However, a tax is when the government tells you exactly how much wealth they are going to take from you. When they print money, the government does not tell you that.<br />
<br />
Stealing is defined as taking something from somebody without that person's knowledge or approval.<br />
<br />
John Maynard Keynes stated: “By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.... The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”<br />
<br />
Below is a list of countries (from Wikipedia) that stole huge amounts of wealth from its population, by printing so much money that they caused hyperinflation:<br />
<br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation</a><br />
<blockquote>
"…nearly all hyperinflations have been caused by government budget deficits financed by money creation."</blockquote>
<blockquote>
4.1 Angola<br />4.2 Argentina<br />4.3 Armenia<br />4.4 Austria<br />4.5 Azerbaijan<br />4.6 Belarus<br />4.7 Bolivia<br />4.8 Bosnia and Herzegovina<br />4.9 Brazil<br />4.10 Bulgaria<br />4.11 Chile<br />4.12 China<br />4.13 Estonia<br />4.14 France<br />4.15 Free City of Danzig<br />4.16 Georgia<br />4.17 Germany (Weimar Republic)<br />4.18 Greece<br />4.19 Hungary, 1923–24<br />4.20 Hungary, 1945–46<br />4.21 Kazakhstan<br />4.22 Kyrgyzstan<br />4.23 Serbian Krajina<br />4.24 North Korea<br />4.25 Nicaragua<br />4.26 Peru<br />4.27 Philippines<br />4.28 Poland, 1923–1924<br />4.29 Poland, 1989–1990<br />4.30 Republika Srpska<br />4.31 Soviet Union / Russian Federation<br />4.32 Taiwan<br />4.33 Tajikistan<br />4.34 Turkmenistan<br />4.35 Ukraine<br />4.36 Uzbekistan<br />4.37 Yugoslavia<br />4.38 Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo)<br />4.39 Zimbabwe</blockquote>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFNLBuD0CkNFjjvgf-3fIUm47lJR8uOb_nNVaeebPY4GhM5rBqoRxOL1pLrsyz6bLqmNthpFj3y04gIue3p_oss-9T2DcLfkSrMpIIynA8fDTUk5SqNRJS9GIvJMEXfXm968RhBKSN-xz0/s1600/Bernanke-and-Geithner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFNLBuD0CkNFjjvgf-3fIUm47lJR8uOb_nNVaeebPY4GhM5rBqoRxOL1pLrsyz6bLqmNthpFj3y04gIue3p_oss-9T2DcLfkSrMpIIynA8fDTUk5SqNRJS9GIvJMEXfXm968RhBKSN-xz0/s320/Bernanke-and-Geithner.jpg" width="320" /></a>Some will argue that it is okay for the government to print money during recessionary or depressionary times because the money supply is shrinking (deflation). This is what the U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) has been doing when they printed billions to buy U.S. Treasury bonds. This is known as Quantitative Easing. The Fed is injecting money into the money supply. The U.S. Treasury uses the money they receive from the Fed, to fund the spending and budget deficits. This may be okay if the Fed eventually sells the bonds back to the U.S. Treasury to take the money back out of the money supply. However, the U.S. government has to run surpluses to be able to do this, otherwise they have no money to buy the bonds back from the Fed. As we have seen with most Western governments, democratic voters will not allow budget surpluses to happen. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the government will ever buy the bonds back and therefore, the printed money may never be pulled out of the money supply. If this is the case, then the government essentially has stolen your wealth via inflation.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZgvfKrCsEFhZn77SpaNHjLVHR9z6MY5fHKIgnB-NZCtUGSq3HPMi1w8G4zHWpNLet55praNMNDDlGHWQYSBuuGjBeRuffJa9FCcmJTDOVKOpInPayEdRDALgOkzdOpsajwP5TYVqS32Mw/s1600/s-EUROPEAN-CENTRAL-BANK-large300.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="146" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZgvfKrCsEFhZn77SpaNHjLVHR9z6MY5fHKIgnB-NZCtUGSq3HPMi1w8G4zHWpNLet55praNMNDDlGHWQYSBuuGjBeRuffJa9FCcmJTDOVKOpInPayEdRDALgOkzdOpsajwP5TYVqS32Mw/s200/s-EUROPEAN-CENTRAL-BANK-large300.jpg" width="200" /></a>This is what will eventually happen in Europe. Pro-austerity politicians are getting fired. Therefore, they are not going to be running budget surpluses anytime soon. The debt crisis can only get worse if their debts continue to increase. Eventually, the crisis will become so severe that the European Central Bank (ECB) will have to print money and lots of it. This money will be given to the European governments or banks. The media will refer to this as "capitalizing the banks", "providing liquidity" or "lending money to the banks or governments". When the borrowers (governments and banks) have no way of paying back anybody who lends to them, this is more like the ECB is printing money to give to them as gifts, not as loans. Hence, the ECB will be stealing money from the European population.<br />
<br />
This is not the only way the government steals money. They are stealing trillions from children as well.<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">Stealing from Children</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/10/europes-stealing-from-children-goes.html" target="_blank">Europe's "Stealing from Children" goes into Overdrive</a><br />
<blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">Socialism vs Capitalism</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economy</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">Fake Wealth</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a></blockquote>
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-22761121231489221832011-12-14T08:40:00.001-05:002011-12-14T12:22:35.079-05:00Sustainable Economics 101<h3 class="post-title entry-title">
</h3>
<div class="post-header">
</div>
Markets, which are fair and free, eliminate unsustainable products and
services. The problem for the world's economy is that the world's
markets are far from fair and free.<br />
<br />
Just as evolution's natural selection eliminates unsustainable
biological traits, economies need to purge themselves of uneconomical
activities. At present, economic policies and subsidies reward failures
and punish successes. They limit the natural free flow of capital that
would go to profitable products and services. Economies need to
eliminate these policies and subsidies and allow economic natural
selections to occur.<br />
<br />
Economies also must be balanced and policed. Regulations and oversight
that deter predatory competition and greed need to be enhanced and
aggressively enforced. If governments worldwide co-operate and
implement these measures and other measures that address the world's
social and political disparities and environmental limits, a balanced
sustainable prosperous worldwide economy could come to fruition.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the past 30 years have seen developed, democratic
economies relying more and more on deficit spending and credit creation
to offset economic losses to new emerging economies. They have
subsidized their economic growth by <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing from future generations</a>. They have mortgaged their children!<br />
<br />
The economic crisis cannot be solved with more bailouts, subsidies and quantitative easing. Real change is needed.<br />
<br />DAPOPPERhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15039331282906497862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-19639478516436389652011-12-12T12:18:00.005-05:002013-03-07T12:21:45.755-05:00China... Bubble of all bubblesChina's economic growth has been unprecedented. Many economists forecast
that within 1 decade, their GDP will eclipse the GDP of the United
States. But these forecasters overlook the Chinese
policies that created the biggest economic bubble in history and the
likelihood that this bubble will either deflate slowly or burst. Regardless of the degree of bursting, as a consequence, many global economies will inevitably collapse.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9dFYU0wy9ADI9wolRetvAfT8FaTKGOn1S5lKIQEkRTTB1BbY4W8dyGbmUQ3KjtczOIwBe1lsd05r0suhOkTZULrqRZ9mPThRvRtBb8GWl087Xh0UjDtxBUiA1YXCqkmPQx_o246D6OWrn/s1600/china2.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9dFYU0wy9ADI9wolRetvAfT8FaTKGOn1S5lKIQEkRTTB1BbY4W8dyGbmUQ3KjtczOIwBe1lsd05r0suhOkTZULrqRZ9mPThRvRtBb8GWl087Xh0UjDtxBUiA1YXCqkmPQx_o246D6OWrn/s1600/china2.jpg" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQ0izbSelIR-CT2culMvNBBHgEJdcgg5GlcT_sLadd_W3fxMQgQpY7nNkFkJk8K3jQurjYVPz9fiLFJrpbdKl6az_AzK_JuUye8kdvZoW4f9zy4zxOzksFHFqCN1K97Ym1mY1meklpsNV2/s1600/china1.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQ0izbSelIR-CT2culMvNBBHgEJdcgg5GlcT_sLadd_W3fxMQgQpY7nNkFkJk8K3jQurjYVPz9fiLFJrpbdKl6az_AzK_JuUye8kdvZoW4f9zy4zxOzksFHFqCN1K97Ym1mY1meklpsNV2/s1600/china1.jpg" /></a>The biggest component of their economic bubble is construction and
building, principally Real Estate. It's crashing would play out worse
than the 1989 Real Estate crash in Japan. Before their bubble was
started, Japan's economy was robust and balanced. When their Real
Estate bubble started growing, a significant percentage of their
population were able to buy into the early stages of their Real Estate
bubble and economically prosper. In China, a much smaller percentage of
their population, the connected and early adopters of Chinese economic
reforms, benefited and prospered from the rise of Chinese Real Estate.
Even though the rising values of Chinese Real Estate were not
predicated by a credit bubble, the rate of speculation quickly drove up
prices way beyond what the majority of the growing middle class could
afford. Combined with the systemic corruption of local government
officials, a Chinese Real Estate crash could be socially explosive. <br />
<br />
It may be that Beijing has lost control of their economy and is
implementing measures to delay and deal with the coming crash and social
unrest. It may also be that other countries are implementing measures
to delay and deal with the coming crash and social unrest their
countries.<br />
<br />DAPOPPERhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15039331282906497862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-25695644734389133202011-12-06T00:01:00.025-05:002011-12-14T12:21:01.344-05:00Sustainable Economics Manifesto<span style="font-style: italic;">Objective: Establish a worldwide, fair and free sustainable economic model that rewards innovation, success and hard work and reduces social and economic disparities.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Core Systemic Issues / <span style="color: #330099;">Solutions, Possible Methods & Ramifications</span></span><br />
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody>
<tr> <td valign="top"><br />
<ul>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span">Increasing amounts of consumer credit<br />create asset bubbles, unsustainable demand and production inefficiencies. When credit is added, new products and services appear and/or the prices of products and services go up because there are more dollars chasing each product or service. When credit is serviced, capital is diverted from the economy. If the diversion of capital exceeds new capital inflows, then prices go down and/or products and services disappear. Predominately, most consumer credit is for consumption purposes. The resulting consumer debt is a tax on future economic activity.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><span style="color: #330099;">The central banks of the world must gradually increase interest rates. Asset prices will generally go down and products and services will disappear. This will trigger recessions that may last a couple of years in most developed countries. If interest rates are not gradually raised, deeper recessions or depressions lasting much longer will occur.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span">Government subsidies including bailouts and tax incentives for any product or service create pricing bubbles, disenfranchise unsubsidized enterprises and sectors and hinder productive capital investments. For example, the housing sector benefits from government tax incentives.<br /><span style="color: #330099;">Government must eliminate all types of subsidies. This will trigger failures of some financial institutions, manufacturers, builders, farmers and other private enterprises that benefit directly or indirectly from any government subsidies. Some failures will re-structure and re-emerge as profitable operations and others will have their assets bought by solvent private enterprises.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span">Government deficit spending subsidizes wasteful spending, entitlements and the wages and benefits of public sector workers that are substantially higher than the wages and benefits of private sector workers. (<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/unions.html" target="_blank">Read more</a>)<br /><span style="color: #330099;">Enacting balance budget amendments will force prioritized reduced funding for only necessary services and programs. Public sector labor unions have to be disbanded and the wages and benefits for all government employees have to be reduced to private sector levels.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span">Labor Unions are Labor Monopolies. Monopolies can inflate their prices because they have no competition.<br /> (<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/unions.html" target="_blank">Read more</a>)<br /><span style="color: #330099;">Disband all labor unions and strictly enforce enhanced labor laws. This will enable previously unionized employers to more quickly innovate and adapt to their evolving markets, resulting in improved productivity. Wage and benefit contracts could be adjusted yearly based on the companies overall profit and inflation. Additionally, companies could offer profit sharing to their employees. Any disputes between employees and employers would go to arbitration. There would be no strikes or work to rule slowdowns.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span">Income disparity. The gap between society's richest and poorest is increasing. In the 1950s, the bottom 90% of Americans had 68% of the nation’s wealth. In 2009, the top 10% of Americans had 50% of the nation’s wealth. The top 0.1% of Americans had an astounding 10% of the nation’s wealth. The gap is increasing predominantly at the top because of the rise in earnings of celebrities attained from lucrative endorsement & performance contracts and the rise of earnings of the owners, founders and executives of financial institutions and publicly traded companies attained from stocks, salaries and bonuses.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><span style="color: #330099;">Taxation and/or enacting regulations that reduce earnings of the top income earners. For instance, a regulation that requires the executive compensation package of a public company be approved by a majority of individual shareholders. Another regulation could require yearly bonuses be paid based on the performance of the previous 5 years. This would discount or eliminate bonuses accrued in good years if any bad performance years occurred. Ideally, if distribution of wealth was similar to the 1950's, there would be substantially less poverty.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<br /></td> <td valign="top" width="330"><br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBbRMjb-HBBLL8jxQwL5ZtA6TxBPNWZP1B_myJRQA-GTfoDkjZ9BOaDuJFLqNCPhSiD_PpLUw4aNpe7H6GUbKbhrtmX64EWi8LLpcbFQBRVBsDipfr1OARziLQIl0hPfICktgo82k4G95p/s1600/us_debt_100.png"><br /><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683060239600948610" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBbRMjb-HBBLL8jxQwL5ZtA6TxBPNWZP1B_myJRQA-GTfoDkjZ9BOaDuJFLqNCPhSiD_PpLUw4aNpe7H6GUbKbhrtmX64EWi8LLpcbFQBRVBsDipfr1OARziLQIl0hPfICktgo82k4G95p/s320/us_debt_100.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9MqKT05fdTYbFBjc58BjBkVOMnRDVUXNDfmfmkMyeKYplRD-AXH_a_hPQbWZteAGXh5rdnc4HO_6kf9FYafOJvUOJgEn21QGIzR7EGRFitWaREzrLDNGMelguTmdnAE6xlDf5RYlnnjSW/s1600/canada-real-estate.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683065602208560034" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9MqKT05fdTYbFBjc58BjBkVOMnRDVUXNDfmfmkMyeKYplRD-AXH_a_hPQbWZteAGXh5rdnc4HO_6kf9FYafOJvUOJgEn21QGIzR7EGRFitWaREzrLDNGMelguTmdnAE6xlDf5RYlnnjSW/s320/canada-real-estate.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRhzvBC8RGZ1VzVOXFEWBWstMhk0PzLboFHlI_mOqs9ZBKjYsbcP5htmDzOhWuNi4JgBVXfdjgDM99B3Q_FR3hfTHR1kF3KTR7DcUtc1JVGuUFbX2g-609zWJwmlEhmasPW_LDD077X9E1/s1600/US+housing+bubble.gif"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683071256083161090" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRhzvBC8RGZ1VzVOXFEWBWstMhk0PzLboFHlI_mOqs9ZBKjYsbcP5htmDzOhWuNi4JgBVXfdjgDM99B3Q_FR3hfTHR1kF3KTR7DcUtc1JVGuUFbX2g-609zWJwmlEhmasPW_LDD077X9E1/s320/US+housing+bubble.gif" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioqJJBwp6crZlmZlLfCU5cLeqOrdzGTIUxpVItn-tT72j_RZYCeVylKoBgCeoyVHzFkQLRVVyqtlqCGszuqobJgxQuVXwX_RC1_L2LX1FMsEVvjMjKmRiDvuu-_IKkUtjUOef7N2NDe8zS/s1600/FedSpend.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683068152884343554" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioqJJBwp6crZlmZlLfCU5cLeqOrdzGTIUxpVItn-tT72j_RZYCeVylKoBgCeoyVHzFkQLRVVyqtlqCGszuqobJgxQuVXwX_RC1_L2LX1FMsEVvjMjKmRiDvuu-_IKkUtjUOef7N2NDe8zS/s320/FedSpend.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0ZzOTItVUMra7U4o8B_nhUYzR8OAFm-Ud9zwIpwVv1NQstUlfWlY0jHfOXYl1b2-B8BGD2BlnMIJ1R3acSyyEPuZYHCxunx1Kfssmasy5fN_7Dw8e14sQgUSKWg7POBh4HR5YHtCBj3Ek/s1600/us_debt_200.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683060826749792322" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0ZzOTItVUMra7U4o8B_nhUYzR8OAFm-Ud9zwIpwVv1NQstUlfWlY0jHfOXYl1b2-B8BGD2BlnMIJ1R3acSyyEPuZYHCxunx1Kfssmasy5fN_7Dw8e14sQgUSKWg7POBh4HR5YHtCBj3Ek/s320/us_debt_200.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAkpF11kyNmd-t3SXk0HT261_hP_diuCVZUTNrPanDvXkAd_Yhu5fqTwc6lXVdWkw2rmNR8IYeXQR54WQcGGm4KMc2St3maUjoNRRJqiEnNRgxsePGuCRr29ab1UNIVAkVWi8FHrrEOP7U/s1600/statelocal_3819_image0011.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683052137267490898" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAkpF11kyNmd-t3SXk0HT261_hP_diuCVZUTNrPanDvXkAd_Yhu5fqTwc6lXVdWkw2rmNR8IYeXQR54WQcGGm4KMc2St3maUjoNRRJqiEnNRgxsePGuCRr29ab1UNIVAkVWi8FHrrEOP7U/s320/statelocal_3819_image0011.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsLYSyVmWu8_-4V2VeVrDqDhM0qt-Y7jYvhPM89rh085b0ME3NOm1TY__aowrw9-Pq-GDtQULiOj9LmxVASrBOlrvhi5sgNMrTC1hs-U70ycDsGH2Kkkb-cOBnOqcU-j7vHE2nG-_y9yrU/s1600/chart_rise_of_super_rich.top_.gif"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683074092613096994" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsLYSyVmWu8_-4V2VeVrDqDhM0qt-Y7jYvhPM89rh085b0ME3NOm1TY__aowrw9-Pq-GDtQULiOj9LmxVASrBOlrvhi5sgNMrTC1hs-U70ycDsGH2Kkkb-cOBnOqcU-j7vHE2nG-_y9yrU/s320/chart_rise_of_super_rich.top_.gif" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBeHM86CFgbO7LrfuxTplP02gwIOLARq2Yg3cPD0R0kvryh5qfhItt-7AiIytj6Xvi86PVeJxF7PGJ0J_AlRL22Jx8SEnHFNaRwx1eFzc5OlhSFzPKrsitV8oQ2J4nSEBa-buaAZvN7IRB/s1600/homepage_graphic_large.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683052457320097042" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBeHM86CFgbO7LrfuxTplP02gwIOLARq2Yg3cPD0R0kvryh5qfhItt-7AiIytj6Xvi86PVeJxF7PGJ0J_AlRL22Jx8SEnHFNaRwx1eFzc5OlhSFzPKrsitV8oQ2J4nSEBa-buaAZvN7IRB/s320/homepage_graphic_large.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; width: 320px;" /></a></span><br />
<br /></td> </tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
This manifesto is incomplete. Please post your recommendations, comments and criticisms.DAPOPPERhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15039331282906497862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-56465383444599630752011-11-30T16:26:00.001-05:002011-12-21T20:44:05.145-05:00Europe's Solution to Debt Crisis is to StealThis article is a sequel to:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/10/europes-stealing-from-children-goes.html" target="_blank">Europe's "Stealing from Children" goes into Overdrive</a></blockquote>
<div class="p1">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Politicians and economists say that the European Central Bank (ECB) must be the lender of last resort to solve the European debt crisis. According to this <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/247766/20111111/nouriel-roubinis-solutions-for-europe-essentially-weak-countries-must-leave-so-they-can-debase-curre.htm" target="_blank">article</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"[Nouriel Roubini] argued the only way to avoid a breakup of the euro zone would be for the ECB to become a lender of last resort, for a fall in the euro's value in line with the dollar and for fiscal stimulus for the "core" euro zone and austerity in the periphery to take place."</blockquote>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrHnJfkfKkehOTdTDAWB1LYF65DuYK9O1eFIn87aNsC8EvJ4CFxiLlos-ZgAIDl0OS5uQflpKcaCPcMFC4_Ua8qnEkuHrPIwZGfKnsshPhLFtc1DaxQpBvj2Up0DCxtlkPBfsuufygdHe8/s1600/euro-printing-press+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="144" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrHnJfkfKkehOTdTDAWB1LYF65DuYK9O1eFIn87aNsC8EvJ4CFxiLlos-ZgAIDl0OS5uQflpKcaCPcMFC4_Ua8qnEkuHrPIwZGfKnsshPhLFtc1DaxQpBvj2Up0DCxtlkPBfsuufygdHe8/s200/euro-printing-press+%25281%2529.jpg" width="200" /></a>The way the ECB lends money is by buying the European government bonds, that nobody else wants to buy. How does a central bank lend money to anybody? Where do they get their money from? By printing it.<br />
<br />
Politicians and economists are pushing Germany to allow the ECB to print money. According to this <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/economics-blog/2011/nov/29/is-merkel-ready-ecb-printing-presses-on" target="_blank">article</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Is Merkel ready to switch the ECB printing presses on?...to print trillions of euros in an attempt to save the single currency"</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="p1">
This is probably a way to prevent defaults.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMx4Tbl5geFr4JhPOXSLdDscQeE5bu13uVS_yhNOTh43ngOv4QwQN2A7iiANJ9XaWUZ11uwC0vjHoyOqcP-Vh_HFjc1DE1fD27oL8uJDy7RwyX6gS4Vx-PK9IX-1BcvnKIWgKGkHlBqHp/s1600/1201720014WAgbtz.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="158" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMx4Tbl5geFr4JhPOXSLdDscQeE5bu13uVS_yhNOTh43ngOv4QwQN2A7iiANJ9XaWUZ11uwC0vjHoyOqcP-Vh_HFjc1DE1fD27oL8uJDy7RwyX6gS4Vx-PK9IX-1BcvnKIWgKGkHlBqHp/s200/1201720014WAgbtz.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
However, whenever anybody prints or creates money out of thin air, it creates inflation. Inflation devalues the money you are holding and makes you poorer. As an example, if a criminal uses a photocopier to counterfeit a $1 million, did he create $1 million of additional wealth for his country? No. The country's money supply increased by $1 million, but the quantity of goods and services did not increase. Therefore, the prices for the goods and services will increase, which creates inflation. The amount of goods and services that you can buy, decreases. Effectively, the criminal stole $1 million of wealth from you and the population.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Some people say that printing money is a way for the government to tax the population. However, a tax is when the government tells you exactly how much wealth they are going to take from you. When they print money, the government does not tell you that.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0o4_Cqy1H8JQzQ57jW8E5tPdFAXbToTccNOiPSPH_fjajuBkIX75V4pqVhyphenhyphenhTzWpnq5kEHGxwyRFuA9aHUpYRBtZIkGDPizdP0QwsMOp0mawFrFOwXVu0pniNX9RzdjBQG_35wDJ90xzy/s1600/ben-bernanke.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0o4_Cqy1H8JQzQ57jW8E5tPdFAXbToTccNOiPSPH_fjajuBkIX75V4pqVhyphenhyphenhTzWpnq5kEHGxwyRFuA9aHUpYRBtZIkGDPizdP0QwsMOp0mawFrFOwXVu0pniNX9RzdjBQG_35wDJ90xzy/s200/ben-bernanke.jpeg" width="134" /></a>When the U.S. Federal Reserve conducted Quantitative Easing 1 and Quantitative Easing 2, they did not tell you that they will take wealth from you. They told the public that they will boost the economy. However, there is no evidence of that. In fact, GDP growth dropped after QE2. There is a lot of evidence that it created inflation and enlarged the U.S. debt, essentially enabling the government to take wealth from the population and spend it.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
In addition to <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing from children</a> through deficits and debts, printing money is simply another way the government steals wealth. However, if and when the ECB starts printing money, the European politicians will tell you that they found a "solution" by getting the ECB to buy bonds. They will not tell you that the "solution" is to steal wealth from you and give it to the European governments and banks.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVq3AKhBLLMrWPxmoSNcKmEePVhxIfUhMSV0Bd4oP4kx72XFPvnQTnJG0MqA0EgnX5NgvkIfkGcEKQpR7nTxDhK9aPidsP4GoRTCnoMtJmnjjqDpeBsSBsPIspZBshwlMEWVRtQ1zPrEpp/s1600/4417746396_3077af715b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVq3AKhBLLMrWPxmoSNcKmEePVhxIfUhMSV0Bd4oP4kx72XFPvnQTnJG0MqA0EgnX5NgvkIfkGcEKQpR7nTxDhK9aPidsP4GoRTCnoMtJmnjjqDpeBsSBsPIspZBshwlMEWVRtQ1zPrEpp/s200/4417746396_3077af715b.jpg" width="148" /></a></div>
In fact, the ECB has already been printing money to buy government bonds (<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/25/markets-bonds-euro-idUSL5E7MP10920111125" target="_blank">source</a>), because there is insufficient demand from other lenders. According to this <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/sakari-suoninen/page/11/" target="_blank">article</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"...ECB had been quietly buying bonds anyway."</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="p1">
According to this <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/10/news/international/ecb_italy_bond_buying/index.htm" target="_blank">article</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"...analysts say the ECB may quietly increase its purchases of Italian bonds..."</blockquote>
The free-market, where the sane people are, are not willing to lend to the European governments or banks at a low interest rate. This is because they expect that there is a probability that the borrowers may not repay the loan. In fact, lenders are losing 50% on the money they lent to Greece. These European borrowers are essentially "subprime", low-income, risky borrowers. In the U.S., lenders lost a lot of money to subprime borrowers. Therefore, there is a probability that the borrowers will not repay every Euro to the ECB.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEii1tbHaKbknXOQDwyT9ldJsUkOFk3m_z-nGtAfVOXxWESH149EkHjtJEl7mXFk611q5rtZCOn5xgS6ofEdCcUzWaTS26pQbjntQ4kIdFlWAA_J3ZyCVjP_p3xN6y93wWfHxQRNdv_V7cQp/s1600/euro-dollar-moneybags.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="181" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEii1tbHaKbknXOQDwyT9ldJsUkOFk3m_z-nGtAfVOXxWESH149EkHjtJEl7mXFk611q5rtZCOn5xgS6ofEdCcUzWaTS26pQbjntQ4kIdFlWAA_J3ZyCVjP_p3xN6y93wWfHxQRNdv_V7cQp/s320/euro-dollar-moneybags.jpg" width="320" /></a>According to this <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/45492184" target="_blank">article</a> on November 30th, 2011, central banks of the U.S., Canada, England, Japan and Switzerland, through the printing of U.S. dollars, will lend to the ECB, who in turn will lend to their "subprime" borrowers (European banks) at a lower interest rate than what the borrowers can get on the open market. Your central banks are now stealing wealth from you and getting into the subprime lending business.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
You are helping profligate Europeans borrow like crazy, enjoy 6 weeks of vacation per year and not pay back their debts.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<div class="p1">
Hence, you are forced into the subprime lending business. You are now part of the European "solution".</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Free-market <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">capitalism</a> is a myth. The governments created <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">housing bubbles</a> and debt problems in Europe, U.S., Canada, Australia, China, etc. Now, they are either kicking the can down the road or forcing you to pay for it.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Whenever the government screws around with the economy with <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">socialist policies</a>, they always bring prosperity to a pocket of the population in the short term. Without fail, they always make the country poorer in the long run. This record is unbroken in earth's history.<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/10/europes-stealing-from-children-goes.html" target="_blank">Europe's "Stealing from Children" goes into Overdrive</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">Stealing from Children</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">Socialism vs Capitalism</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economy</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">Fake Wealth</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a></blockquote>
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-80101302033085761242011-11-27T11:37:00.001-05:002013-01-30T15:51:13.903-05:00Housing: After the Bubble Bursts<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgk_pDzpEefYUmQ268fb1VJGXqn7FnLlEfifDxpTDQGhWK33jaSPQHee9OeqV4OOerpc9keQG2l8NAAqb5An5tXD2YZaF-JNZg5w4tSKTKk08T0JQq5JynQk-MXwyKiaUGW3TNGmlHcT3H-/s1600/How_the_bubble_burst_LG.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="228" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgk_pDzpEefYUmQ268fb1VJGXqn7FnLlEfifDxpTDQGhWK33jaSPQHee9OeqV4OOerpc9keQG2l8NAAqb5An5tXD2YZaF-JNZg5w4tSKTKk08T0JQq5JynQk-MXwyKiaUGW3TNGmlHcT3H-/s320/How_the_bubble_burst_LG.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
This article is a sequel to these:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html" target="_blank">Bubbles - Extreme Maker and Breaker of Wealth </a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/real-estate-ponzi-scheme.html" target="_blank">Real Estate - Ponzi Scheme?</a></blockquote>
Housing is a large percentage of the GDP. Therefore, housing bubbles fuel the economy. When real estate was booming in the U.S., Spain, Ireland and Japan, their economies were booming. People in the U.S. were living in big, expensive homes, driving multiple cars and installing new swimming pools and kitchens. Similarly, the economies in Spain and Ireland were flying high. People were living the good life and "partying like it's 1999".<br />
<br />
However, bubbles are temporary and create temporary fake wealth. <br />
<br />
What does a country look like after its housing bubble has peaked or collapsed? What happens to its people?<br />
<br />
Some bubbles are still raging on, as in Canada, Australia and China. Some have started to correct, such as in the U.K. We will look at what happened to the U.S., Spain, Ireland and Japan, which have largely but not necessarily fully collapsed.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTmdIrMhyIGyRRR7_kIoMq9qstgl-2hyphenhyphenNn3I8CQKqXE6koFcfI6QpD65B0zanQTGQHSLdlCsXfY9Kx2LyeT8W1qiShf3neb56H_hd7NIdyOrJrAf7iIOBnFYHkaaI0amk-L91n8PTVBIfX/s1600/us_flag_small.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTmdIrMhyIGyRRR7_kIoMq9qstgl-2hyphenhyphenNn3I8CQKqXE6koFcfI6QpD65B0zanQTGQHSLdlCsXfY9Kx2LyeT8W1qiShf3neb56H_hd7NIdyOrJrAf7iIOBnFYHkaaI0amk-L91n8PTVBIfX/s1600/us_flag_small.gif" /></a>With their bubble collapsed, the U.S. became much poorer, with high unemployment, anemic economic growth and <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/09/us-poverty-hits-record-levels.html" target="_blank">poverty levels hitting record levels</a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhufTu2R_Fk2cK7W_zl6Nd92GP5RHAManKb7k2JvoQLQBq7bdwQRPzo71D_yhK4eWwXImRoguCnyOcRjDGIGtOVn74eqETqakGK41_vKiubrxu6K42Amchxdc7c6DzutWPkdKh26v0UNoMt/s1600/canadian-flag-small.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhufTu2R_Fk2cK7W_zl6Nd92GP5RHAManKb7k2JvoQLQBq7bdwQRPzo71D_yhK4eWwXImRoguCnyOcRjDGIGtOVn74eqETqakGK41_vKiubrxu6K42Amchxdc7c6DzutWPkdKh26v0UNoMt/s1600/canadian-flag-small.png" /></a>Many Canadians believe that when this housing bubble bursts, they will have a soft landing, unlike the American's. They say that the outcome for Canada will not end in a disaster like it did for the U.S. economy, because Canada did not have AAA rated CDOs (Collateralized Debt Obligations), NINJA loans, etc.<br />
<br />
True, Canada did not have these, but neither did Spain, Ireland or Japan. Nevertheless, Spain and Ireland are now worse off than the U.S. Here is a comparison:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" border="1" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse;">
<tbody>
<tr><td>Metric</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
U.S.</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
Spain</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
Ireland</div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Drop in Prices</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
34% as of Dec/11<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(</span><a href="http://www.american.com/archive/2012/april/how-much-have-house-prices-really-fallen/" style="font-size: small;" target="_blank">source</a><span style="font-size: x-small;">)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
41% as of April/11<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(</span><a href="http://www.catalannewsagency.com/news/business/spanish-property-prices-dropped-417-between-2006-and-2011" style="font-size: small;" target="_blank">source</a><span style="font-size: x-small;">)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
35% as of 2010Q2<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_property_bubble" style="font-size: small;" target="_blank">source</a><span style="font-size: x-small;">)</span></div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Duration of the Great Recession in quarters <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small; text-align: center;">(</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession" style="font-size: small; text-align: center;" target="_blank">source</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small; text-align: center;">)</span></td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
6</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
7</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
13</div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Total GDP loss during Great Recession <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small; text-align: center;">(</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession" style="font-size: small; text-align: center;" target="_blank">source</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small; text-align: center;">)</span></td><td align="center" nowrap="nowrap">-4.14%</td><td align="center" nowrap="nowrap">-4.89%</td><td align="center" nowrap="nowrap">-12.2%</td></tr>
<tr><td>Unemployment</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
9%</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
21.5%</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/spains-unemployment-rate-rises-2377036.html" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
14.4%</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/2011/lreg_oct2011.pdf" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Youth Unemployment <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/07/youth-unemployment" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
15%</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
44%</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
28%</div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Last quarter GDP growth rate</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
2%</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
0%</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.tradingeconomics.com/spain/gdp-growth" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
1.6%</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ireland/gdp-growth" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Public Debt as % of GDP <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_public_debt" target="_blank">IMF</a>)</span></td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
94.4%</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
60.1%</div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
94.9%</div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td>Empty Homes<br />
<br />
Yes, even a densely populated place like Europe can have lots of empty homes, thanks to the collapse of a bubble.</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
11.4%<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/28/real_estate/us_housing_vacancy_rates/index.htm" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
13%<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://business.financialpost.com/2011/11/18/this-is-what-a-deflated-housing-bubble-looks-like/" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td><td><div style="text-align: center;">
17.4%<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(<a href="http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/property-report-claims-17-of-houses-empty-113708.html" target="_blank">source</a>)</span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXf_L4C0jnwA4xJL5xmoTmD4D61IqC0d_c-SOeZ3Pb8WLuYYbprxiBoN0BMeA_M2Y2_-CGLEr0v7TrCAT2kyyWvCuZy6ji5G2AfmYO-NA7KVTduXgorYAlHGckxdSLWPl4tGslkcXQFQ8m/s1600/small_flag_of_ireland.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXf_L4C0jnwA4xJL5xmoTmD4D61IqC0d_c-SOeZ3Pb8WLuYYbprxiBoN0BMeA_M2Y2_-CGLEr0v7TrCAT2kyyWvCuZy6ji5G2AfmYO-NA7KVTduXgorYAlHGckxdSLWPl4tGslkcXQFQ8m/s1600/small_flag_of_ireland.gif" /></a>The collapse of the Irish housing bubble created a banking crisis, prompting their government to bail out the banks. Due to this, the government became so heavily indebted, they needed a bail out from the Euro Zone countries, exacerbating the European debt crisis. Ireland's economy is so bad many are emigrating to countries such as Canada.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiX9vJS4my1nmNcA_r25uMQ8uLleapiwcZUpOQtgDv3scRXsMJqi5EG_ppEmrnCtH-YVcGszzQlMYKApgzgifjBvvt7-a0mKVEzfOnPSN799ghdOnC84ZAIwCci1J648-rlVVufmQiFHwS2/s1600/small_Spanish+flag.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiX9vJS4my1nmNcA_r25uMQ8uLleapiwcZUpOQtgDv3scRXsMJqi5EG_ppEmrnCtH-YVcGszzQlMYKApgzgifjBvvt7-a0mKVEzfOnPSN799ghdOnC84ZAIwCci1J648-rlVVufmQiFHwS2/s1600/small_Spanish+flag.jpg" /></a>As you probably know, both Spain and Ireland are part of the <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/10/piigs-need-to-be-changed-to-piigsuc.html" target="_blank">PIIGS</a> countries.<br />
<br />
Canada's and Australia's bubbles and household debt levels surpassed the peak of the U.S. bubble and household debt levels. (See household debt to income ratio chart in: "<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html" target="_blank">Bubbles - Extreme Maker and Breaker of Wealth</a>") According to "<a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21540231" target="_blank">The Economist</a> magazine, House of horrors, part 2:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"home prices are overvalued by about 25% or more in Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, New Zealand, Britain, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden (see table). Indeed, in the first four of those countries housing looks more overvalued than it was in America at the peak of its bubble."</blockquote>
This implies that it is possible that Canadian and Australian <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">economies are more fake</a> than their American counterpart in 2007. If their bubbles collapse, it is possible that Canada and Australia will become as bad as the U.S. or worse.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKexQ28ONOC5LbWdQzrzrxphyivfudhyJzLtnAO2bJguAcnnpmgXzaMlezHVcaXCsR5Kz6DfAmvpJvFw6_UlpbqjoJaQCkBF08neD7P8wCtfNAmxoI7P6-1X8PvoiSIL1I15G7pw9vNNJ_/s1600/Japan-flag-small.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKexQ28ONOC5LbWdQzrzrxphyivfudhyJzLtnAO2bJguAcnnpmgXzaMlezHVcaXCsR5Kz6DfAmvpJvFw6_UlpbqjoJaQCkBF08neD7P8wCtfNAmxoI7P6-1X8PvoiSIL1I15G7pw9vNNJ_/s1600/Japan-flag-small.gif" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4qiIq9AcPgPIM8ZT5SgrjWFTbGd0dmmdcrk57QXdf591M5epsNb6GFRJNWg6imzDvy7WowThQC-2O7bnV4Q3LKK0z4jap5YKMWkU9LqWDopUMBKN7F32P7a-j6gl11X5fxO4G31FRuhfP/s1600/japanchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4qiIq9AcPgPIM8ZT5SgrjWFTbGd0dmmdcrk57QXdf591M5epsNb6GFRJNWg6imzDvy7WowThQC-2O7bnV4Q3LKK0z4jap5YKMWkU9LqWDopUMBKN7F32P7a-j6gl11X5fxO4G31FRuhfP/s1600/japanchart.jpg" /></a>Unlike Europe and the U.S., Japan's housing bubble peaked in 1991. The collapse lasted for more than a decade. Ever since, the economy has stagnated and their public debt has ballooned. Now at 220% (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_public_debt" target="_blank">IMF</a>), Japan has the highest debt as a % of GDP in the world. One can argue that Japan would have fallen in a 20 year depression if their government did not balloon their deficits and debt in order to spend and support the economy.<br />
<br />
Since the beginning of 1990 until November 25, 2011, the Japanese stock market (<a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EN225&t=my&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=" target="_blank">Nikkei 225</a>) has declined by approximately 79% (<a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=%5EN225+Historical+Prices" target="_blank">source</a>). Yes, you read that correctly. Minus 79%. "Buying and holding" Japanese stocks for 20 years would have made you very poor.<br />
<br />
As explained in "<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>", housing bubbles are mostly created by government. This is true for the U.S., Canada and China. (Chinese government officials are in cohorts with real estate developers as they take bribes from the developers and are getting rich in the process. <a href="http://www.fatcat.com.au/news/home/Millionaire+Mindset/366_0.html" target="_blank">Source</a>. There are 64 million empty homes in China, many of which are owned by officials.)<br />
<br />
Unlike other bubbles, such as the Dot Com stocks of the 1990's, a housing bubble takes many years to peak. This means that it is mainly the older generation, such as the Baby Boomers, who bought at cheap or reasonable prices and enjoyed the price appreciation. It is mainly the younger generation who paid the bubble prices. This creates huge injustices. <br />
<br />
<b>TWO SCENARIOS</b><br />
<br />
There are two possible scenarios after a bubble hits a peak:<br />
<ol>
<li>Flat line or soft landing: In this scenario, the younger generation spends the majority of their lives, paying the majority of their income towards their house. In essence, they will be much poorer than the previous generation. The older generation, if they sell near the peak of the bubble, will be much wealthier at the expense of the younger generation. This simply exacerbates the massive <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing from children</a> that is already going on through inter-generational transfer of deficits and debts. Also, some of this stolen money was directly used to fuel the bubble. Read "<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>". Note that no major bubble in history has every plateaued after hitting the peak.</li>
<li>Collapse or hard landing: The older generation may lose their capital gains. However, the young homeowners will be crushed and will face financial ruin. Ask the tens of millions of Americans who are underwater with negative net-worth.</li>
</ol>
Therefore, even if the bubble does not collapse, it creates huge injustices for the younger generation. If it collapses, it creates an even larger injustice for the younger generation. Also, a collapse can potentially ruin the country as well.<br />
<br />
Every bubble creates win-lose situations. Read below for an explanation of a win-win-win situation.<br />
<br />
<b>SPECULATION vs PURE INVESTMENT</b><br />
<br />
Investing in a house is not a pure investment. It is speculation. A pure investment is putting money into a business that creates products or services that generate profit by realizing economies of scale during the production of the products or services (read <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/capitalism.html" target="_blank">Capitalism</a> for explanation of how economies of scale creates wealth). A house does not create products or services, therefore it can never realize economies of scale.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwRCCNBsWu6dS-ZJEI6JbQBzSoYrL8f3Imde5ZNvCgjt1PbHXhaU0RKaU_nNc43EtUHOs_pds7cN_FL6smTPSJFTG5OFS57FG-g0Lyi5Au7G48E_p8WO8MEP7rWcQh-ICI_aWCYvvvatIT/s1600/apple.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwRCCNBsWu6dS-ZJEI6JbQBzSoYrL8f3Imde5ZNvCgjt1PbHXhaU0RKaU_nNc43EtUHOs_pds7cN_FL6smTPSJFTG5OFS57FG-g0Lyi5Au7G48E_p8WO8MEP7rWcQh-ICI_aWCYvvvatIT/s200/apple.jpg" width="171" /></a></div>
A good example of a pure investment is Apple. Apple creates wealth for every stakeholder: investors, employees, suppliers and customers. It creates billions of dollars of wealth for society through economies of scale. It creates wealth for its customers by providing entertainment value, enabling them to save time and be more productive. Each year, Apple creates products with more features, more capabilities and better design for the same price.<br />
<br />
Each year, homebuilders and speculators sell homes with the same features, same capacity but of poorer quality for a higher price. (The quality of new homes in Florida are generally poorer than homes built a few decades ago. Some are so poor there is visible water damage on the outside after a few years. Some builders cut costs to the bone by installing Chinese drywall, which is now eroding electrical wirings and pipes.)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirOfZ4mezAEYSfvx4INZ2ES-wv08HJfQMtbNK95InonK6q-5Y0SkYfplvPpRzXb2DDVmJ5rNNgnPyj85vKF8x4ewu2MgZGJEfPxs2YNJ0ZsAykoGm7mTT6VeahKVnICTviVSU4Nru58rvi/s1600/fliphouse.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirOfZ4mezAEYSfvx4INZ2ES-wv08HJfQMtbNK95InonK6q-5Y0SkYfplvPpRzXb2DDVmJ5rNNgnPyj85vKF8x4ewu2MgZGJEfPxs2YNJ0ZsAykoGm7mTT6VeahKVnICTviVSU4Nru58rvi/s200/fliphouse.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
Apple does not tell its customers, "buy our products because you can make money by flipping it to the next <a href="http://www.greaterfool.ca/" target="_blank">greater fool</a> for a higher price". Real estate agents do.<br />
<br />
Apple can increase the wealth of Americans by selling their products to millions of people around of world. Homebuilders and speculators cannot do this.<br />
<br />
Housing, a speculative fixed asset, cannot create long-term, sustainable wealth for a country. Only businesses can. By putting a significant portion of a country's capital and time into housing, you end up with a misallocation of capital. The capital is wasted because it is not put to work to create long term wealth. This is why every country that has experienced a housing bubble has gone one step forward and two steps backwards. A country's capital should be invested in businesses and fostering entrepreneurs. We need more innovators like <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/10/steve-jobs-of-apple.html" target="_blank">Steve Jobs</a>, not more Joe Flippers.<br />
<br />
<b>GET LESS FOR MORE OR MORE FOR LESS?</b><br />
<br />
As explained above, we get prosperity when we are able to buy more for less. Computers have advanced with more capacity every year and prices have stayed the same or dropped. Cars have more features and functions and the price have stayed the same. TVs have become bigger every year and prices have dropped. Smart phones come out with new bells and whistles every year and prices have stayed the same or dropped. Because of this, your standard of living and wealth have increased.<br />
<br />
Now try to imagine if all of the goods that you buy go up in price every year like housing. You continually get less for more money. After a few years, you will be very poor.<br />
<br />
<b>INTER-GENERATIONAL INJUSTICE</b><br />
<br />
The main beneficiary of housing bubbles, which lasts many years, is the previous generation. The younger generation becomes poorer. It is a massive transfer of wealth from the young to the old.<br />
<br />
Some people argue that the older generation will pass their wealth to the younger generation through inheritance anyways. They may be right about this. But why make the younger generation go through the stress of having 482% household debt to income ratio and negative equity? (<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html" target="_blank">read more</a>)<br />
<br />
Also, not every young couple is going to get much inheritance. What if they had parents that have the same philosophy as Warren Buffet, who is giving away most of his wealth to charity? What if the parents splurged the wealth on themselves? What if the young couple has lots of siblings? Then there won't be enough inheritance.<br />
<br />
Even if the young couple gets the inheritance, they'll likely be waiting a couple of decades before the folks kick the bucket. During that time, the young couple is much poorer than the parents were, stressed out with high debts and payments, and enduring a lower standard of living.<br />
<br />
Some people argue that the older generation are not going to cash in at the peak of the bubble because they still need a place to live. The ones who can sell at the peak are the speculators who bought multiple homes, and there are lots of those. The speculators who captured most of the capital gains from the bubble are the older ones who bought many years ago.<br />
<br />
<b>DANGERS OF BUBBLES</b><br />
<br />
Bubbles are extremely dangerous as they create temporary fake wealth. After they collapse, the country's true wealth surfaces, as can be seen in the U.S. and Europe. The Great Depression was the result of the collapse of a bubble. The Great Recession of 2009 was the result of the collapse of housing bubbles in the U.S. and Europe.<br />
<br />
Governments should do everything they can to prevent or suppress bubbles. Instead, the U.S., Canadian and Australian governments did everything they can to create and fuel their Housing Bubbles (see <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>). The possible explanations for their actions and policies are: gross incompetence, corruption, greed or recklessness. None of these explanations are acceptable.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7Cw-POjdfKGKYUL-BWE6rZyEIx_gJbIlyzV7PQ9lQuVOu53q3WUS1MG4k5WuLoW2rGoAu9kpMU51rovIsDk78FzmSWbJCOd9bae0hBoUQrrifgrjnrunfNa0vPBjAI3mlBxr7VlGoHzpP/s1600/chris-dodd-d.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="196" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7Cw-POjdfKGKYUL-BWE6rZyEIx_gJbIlyzV7PQ9lQuVOu53q3WUS1MG4k5WuLoW2rGoAu9kpMU51rovIsDk78FzmSWbJCOd9bae0hBoUQrrifgrjnrunfNa0vPBjAI3mlBxr7VlGoHzpP/s200/chris-dodd-d.jpg" width="200" /></a><b>THROW THE BUMS OUT</b><br />
<br />
You should fire every politician who helped create a bubble. You can start by firing our self-serving politicians (and don't kid yourself, they're buying votes) U.S. Senator Chris Dodd, Senator Charles Schumer, Representative Barney Frank, Canadian MP Mike Flaherty, Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard.<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html" target="_blank">Bubbles - Extreme Maker and Breaker of Wealth </a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/real-estate-ponzi-scheme.html" target="_blank">Real Estate - Ponzi Scheme?</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/10/ban-all-mortgages.html" target="_blank">Ban All Mortgages?</a></blockquote>
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-8621435154350115932011-11-06T15:14:00.002-05:002013-02-25T21:19:54.998-05:00Bubbles - Extreme Maker and Breaker of Wealth<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9FAqbdQMS4EFkp4HbJ_YKjxqsO9vfkBejptRFT6a-V1T-074NdGi_KqwxWiYGD4R77oIWw55e78wgL1YIFc1GbBKFxTDqWRtua43EOQPHPz1ECfD2gO7yNWeElV3gnqyr4g9dkVFEXoeF/s1600/image001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9FAqbdQMS4EFkp4HbJ_YKjxqsO9vfkBejptRFT6a-V1T-074NdGi_KqwxWiYGD4R77oIWw55e78wgL1YIFc1GbBKFxTDqWRtua43EOQPHPz1ECfD2gO7yNWeElV3gnqyr4g9dkVFEXoeF/s1600/image001.jpg" /></a></div>
There are many myths in society:<br />
<ul>
<li>World is flat</li>
<li>Mermaids exist</li>
<li>House prices go up forever</li>
</ul>
Because people believed that house prices go up forever, real estate bubbles were fuelled in the U.S., Spain, Ireland, UK, France, Dubai and Japan. All of which have since collapsed.<br />
<br />
Real estate bubbles in China, Canada and Australia have yet to collapse. Real estate is just one of many bubbles. Multiple bubbles have occurred in your lifetime. They have happened throughout history and will happen into the foreseeable future.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHrrL1itTR0o-lP4WOlcCwfKDg9xvNOCcz-VRMJ1lzycWN2jrhF5Ule3vx1g8MArqMgCZWJ288b95mQuvNDMdLPmV6GG1hfexQ-I1UncJO09HP9-HXpteyDS4_CLamPiJxmrd01_ya9uKB/s1600/tulips.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHrrL1itTR0o-lP4WOlcCwfKDg9xvNOCcz-VRMJ1lzycWN2jrhF5Ule3vx1g8MArqMgCZWJ288b95mQuvNDMdLPmV6GG1hfexQ-I1UncJO09HP9-HXpteyDS4_CLamPiJxmrd01_ya9uKB/s1600/tulips.jpg" /></a>One of the first recorded bubbles was the Tulip bubble in the Netherlands. In 1635, 40 bulbs were sold for the equivalent of 1,028,000 Euros (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania" target="_blank">source</a>). In the past decade alone, there have been several bubbles:<br />
<ul>
<li>Dot Com</li>
<li>Oil</li>
<li>Commodities</li>
<li>Housing</li>
<li>Dubai</li>
<li>Stocks such as Netflix, LinkedIn, Salesforce.com and Groupon</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGCQLANl2xZ_7kHmzZPpF9Hqq_6c7bcwfP-_8wQioiePfJgHQFCdwl52ZGO9O2hluOXrVp-VTcwHUKuUweCCpfY12v4Z9jMLB5stoMfe0w6H5uKnjEP0Wq__o0EzC6Q4BMvv7mjsgOmiod/s1600/isaccnewton.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGCQLANl2xZ_7kHmzZPpF9Hqq_6c7bcwfP-_8wQioiePfJgHQFCdwl52ZGO9O2hluOXrVp-VTcwHUKuUweCCpfY12v4Z9jMLB5stoMfe0w6H5uKnjEP0Wq__o0EzC6Q4BMvv7mjsgOmiod/s1600/isaccnewton.jpg" /></a>There is a common phenomenon with bubbles. When people are in a bubble, they usually deny it, do not recognize it or explain it as the result of non-bubble factors. Even the smartest people may not recognize it and fall prey. One of the most brilliant minds in history did exactly this: Sir Isaac Newton lost the equivalent of 3 million current day pounds, to the South Sea Company bubble in the 18th century (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Sea_Company" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
Even though most of us have lived through multiple bubbles, we still fail to recognize the next bubble when we get into it. After being warned during the Dot Com bubble by a few investment professionals and after recognizing it as a bubble after the fact, we find other reasons to explain a subsequent bubble: the exploding price of oil. Jeff Rubin, CIBC’s Chief Economist, appeared on CNBC and BNN many times in 2008 to espouse $200 oil and justified it with:<br />
<ul>
<li>Peak production</li>
<li>Growing demand from China and India</li>
<li>Etc.</li>
</ul>
Only a few gave "bubble" as a possible cause of the $147 per barrel price. After the collapse of this bubble, 60 Minutes explained how the biggest oil companies were Wall Street speculators, not Exxon or Chevron, who hoarded the oil to maximize profits from the bubble (<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4713382n" target="_blank">see episode</a> , <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/08/60minutes/main4707770.shtml?tag=currentVideoInfo;videoMetaInfo" target="_blank">read transcript</a>).<br />
<br />
The memory is so short that only 5 years after the Dot Com bubble collapsed, most Americans believed that house prices will always go up.<br />
<br />
<b>EXTREME LEVERAGE</b><br />
<br />
Bubbles are so powerful that it can affect one's wealth more so than one's salary. Examples include John McAfee, the founder of McAfee anti-virus software, whose net-worth dropped from $100 million to $4 million, due to the collapse of the recent real estate bubble.<br />
<br />
The bubble effect, which is already very powerful by itself, is multiplied many times by leverage in housing. When you can buy a home with 5% down, you have more leverage than what most companies dream of having. To explain how leverage works, let us say that you invest $10,000 in gold and it increases by $1,000. You made 10% return.<br />
<br />
However, let us say you use your $10,000 as a 5% down payment to buy a $200,000 house instead. The house price increases by 10% to $220,000. You made $20,000 return, or 200% return, on your $10,000 investment. Of course, the reverse is just as extreme. When the house price drops, you can lose all or more than all of your equity.<br />
<br />
Yale University economist Robert Shiller compiled historical home prices dating back to 1890. His chart below reflects how the housing bubble has caused Americans’ net-worth to explode and collapse, to the extent not possible from regular salary. Yet, few schools have a course on bubbles.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJe9AGMA38a6Egfpzq6Eu2SnfxrdI0aCfxP14a4NteQPUm5Cd6K6KtQWPob2ESOHadxnZGUuwdEhAXrCtr_kgqBMeUFVQlJjYTzDWJY9KQTkvgtl-p-d-F6SEjtCvTrY18xJRQ5CrObIOH/s1600/homepricechart.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJe9AGMA38a6Egfpzq6Eu2SnfxrdI0aCfxP14a4NteQPUm5Cd6K6KtQWPob2ESOHadxnZGUuwdEhAXrCtr_kgqBMeUFVQlJjYTzDWJY9KQTkvgtl-p-d-F6SEjtCvTrY18xJRQ5CrObIOH/s1600/homepricechart.png" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<b>EXTREME MARKET MANIPULATION</b><br />
<br />
Bubbles are usually created and collapsed by the same two emotions that drive the stock market, commodities markets or any market:<br />
<ul>
<li>Greed</li>
<li>Fear</li>
</ul>
When prices go up, people see and hear about others making money. Their greed emotion kicks in. They want a piece of the action, so they jump onto the bandwagon. The higher the price goes, the more greed there is and the more people that want to jump on.<br />
<br />
However, it is questionable if greed initiated the U.S. and Canadian housing bubbles. Read "<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>" to understand how government socialist policies massively manipulated the housing market to create the U.S. and Canadian housing bubbles.<br />
<br />
Household income has grown at a very modest pace, if any at all. Therefore, the fuel for the U.S. and Canadian housing bubbles was not income growth. It was bigger and bigger mortgages and debts, that the government encouraged consumers to take on.<br />
<br />
At one time, mortgages normally had 25 year amortization and 25% down payment. In the past decade or so, this was relaxed to 40 years and down payments was allowed to come down to 0%. If the current mortgage rates rise, which they eventually will, this will make mortgages even more difficult to pay off.<br />
<br />
Relaxing mortgage rules enables more people to borrow and buy, which fuels the demand curve, which pushes prices higher. Is there a limit to this relaxation of mortgage rules? Can we continue extending amortizations past 40 years? Can we reduce down payments to negative %? Using simple math, we know that there is a limit. This source of bigger mortgages have been reversed in the U.S. and decelerated in Canada.<br />
<br />
Housing is usually a person’s largest expenditure. It has a significant effect on the GDP. In addition to government’s borrowing and spending, the more the government can get people to borrow and spend on housing, the more the GDP grows. According to this August 27, 2006 <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/weekinreview/27leonhardt.html" target="_blank">New York Times article</a>, "...real estate sector has accounted for 44 percent of jobs created since 2000 and employs more than one in 10 American workers..."<br />
<br />
However, household debt as a percentage of income has more than doubled in the past 30 years (see chart below). This is also part of what billionaire investor George Soros’ calls the “super-bubble” (<a href="http://www.georgesoros.com/interviews-speeches/entry/anatomy_of_a_crisis_-_the_living_history_of_the_last_30_years_economic_theo/" target="_blank">source</a>). The significant incline in the past 15 years coincide with the American housing bubble. George Soros expected this credit bubble to collapse in the late 1990’s. To his surprise, it kept growing for another ten years. Therefore, bubbles can grow for many years, even decades.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpx3iTIJ_Jk91Dh0UwgNdm3QlIokWRLqrUTO18u3c-ILCB4MH99swVT4AV7iRzwKVnyXipYstkRjq7zs7B4tacn9a4pUyN7ckKerZXV97_FuPxwDZ-T31rRhl2BVdxTcgFqQbNVKeG5z2T/s1600/creditbubble.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpx3iTIJ_Jk91Dh0UwgNdm3QlIokWRLqrUTO18u3c-ILCB4MH99swVT4AV7iRzwKVnyXipYstkRjq7zs7B4tacn9a4pUyN7ckKerZXV97_FuPxwDZ-T31rRhl2BVdxTcgFqQbNVKeG5z2T/s1600/creditbubble.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Note from the above chart that Americans' household debt to income ratio peaked at approx. 124% in 2007-2008, coinciding with the peak of their housing bubble and <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">fake economy</a>. After the bubble burst, they have deleveraged down to approximately 105%.<br />
<br />
Canadians' household debt to income ratio continued soaring to 150% in February 2011 (according to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/02/17/vanier-institute-household-debt.html" target="_blank">CBC</a>). Hence:<br />
<ul>
<li>Homes in Florida now cost $30 to $100 per square foot.</li>
<li>Homes in Canada now cost $200 to $700 per square foot.</li>
</ul>
Is this a case of "monkey see, monkey do"?<br />
<br />
Most of the market manipulation through relaxation of mortgage rules in Canada has happened in the past decade or so. However, is this sustainable? The U.S. has shown that is not.<br />
<br />
In free markets, price tends to find equilibrium, which is where supply and demand curves intersect. Now that the price has dropped, the U.S. government is fighting this equilibrium every way they can. But, it is impossible to manipulate and artificially inflate the demand forever, without getting somebody to pay for it. To do this, the government is getting tax-payers and the next generation to pay.<br />
<br />
<b>EXTREMELY SIMPLE MATH</b><br />
<br />
If household income increases at the same rate as house prices, this is sustainable forever. However, in a housing bubble, the price goes up faster than household income. This can happen for several years, but the laws of simple math show that it is impossible for this to continue forever. Using simple numbers to make the point, let us say that a household currently spends 50% of income to service the debt on housing, and 50% on everything else such as food, clothing, etc. When house prices increase faster than income, the percentage of income spent on housing will increase to 60%, 70% and so on. Mathematically, it is impossible to surpass 100%. However, the threshold is far lower than 100% as people still need to eat and clothe.<br />
<br />
When prices cause debt-servicing to surpass this threshold, there will be fewer purchasers. When this happens, prices may stop increasing. When this happens, the speculators start behaving like speculators on the stock market. The shrewd speculators start locking in profits by taking money off the table. When they sell, price starts to go down. When this happens, more speculators lock in profits. When they do this, price goes down more. When this happens, the fear emotion kicks in causing the masses to sell, driving the price down even more. Note that in most markets, when it falls, it usually falls twice as fast as it rises.<br />
<br />
Eventually, there might be panic which causes prices to drop so much that home-owners become underwater (which means that the price is lower than the mortgage). According to this <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/45209336" target="_blank">article</a>, half of Americans are underwater. According to this <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/35426944" target="_blank">article</a>, 25% of American home-owners who can afford to pay, are walking away from their mortgages because they are underwater.<br />
<br />
<b>THE CANADIAN HOUSING BUBBLES</b><br />
<br />
This brings us to the Canadian housing bubbles. <br />
<br />
In 1989, people with many years of real estate investing experience, stated that real estate:<br />
<ul>
<li>is the safest investment you can make</li>
<li>prices have never gone down in history</li>
<li>you have to get into real estate now, or else you'll never get in</li>
</ul>
Yet, house prices have dropped before and after 1989. In this decade, real estate agents and others are re-creating the “buy now or never buy” mentality, according to <a href="http://www.greaterfool.ca/2011/04/29/run-sarah/" target="_blank">Garth Turner</a>.<br />
<br />
You might hear or read these reasons, especially from real estate agents or the CREA, why bubble prices will not come down:<br />
<ul>
<li>immigration</li>
<li>foreign investors</li>
<li>it's under-priced here compared to other world-class cities</li>
<li>they aren't making any more land</li>
<li>this time, most buyers are not speculators</li>
</ul>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzl9gzCzQGAe21ssCAPD6I73Bif2ozI9f1klirkhBVSGkAZaAxoBJdvWnb9b7FUg5UctVy6FBiINRx98T8utQUF6f0lp1dY-IOha42RnLY67kiGK-WhZBqFr4QX80CBQAKbUnvB_JBS0JI/s1600/mcleans.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzl9gzCzQGAe21ssCAPD6I73Bif2ozI9f1klirkhBVSGkAZaAxoBJdvWnb9b7FUg5UctVy6FBiINRx98T8utQUF6f0lp1dY-IOha42RnLY67kiGK-WhZBqFr4QX80CBQAKbUnvB_JBS0JI/s1600/mcleans.png" /></a></div>
Each of the above points are debatable.<br />
<br />
There was immigration in the U.S. and foreign investors in Dubai. Yet, their bubbles eventually collapsed.<br />
<br />
According to MacLean's magazine, Canadian real estate is not under-priced compared to other world-class cities. Vancouver has the most expensive housing market in the world (<a href="http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/02/awash-in-a-sea-of-debt/" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
Japan has less land per person than most countries in the world. It has less than half the land of Ontario and approximately ten times more people. Yet, their real estate bubble burst in 1989 and has never gone back to the peak. (Chart below is from March 2008.) Therefore, land is not be a valid argument for Canada’s high prices.<br />
<br />
According to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, condominium speculators are highly active in Toronto and Vancouver (<a href="http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100216/speculators_flaherty_100216/" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4qiIq9AcPgPIM8ZT5SgrjWFTbGd0dmmdcrk57QXdf591M5epsNb6GFRJNWg6imzDvy7WowThQC-2O7bnV4Q3LKK0z4jap5YKMWkU9LqWDopUMBKN7F32P7a-j6gl11X5fxO4G31FRuhfP/s1600/japanchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4qiIq9AcPgPIM8ZT5SgrjWFTbGd0dmmdcrk57QXdf591M5epsNb6GFRJNWg6imzDvy7WowThQC-2O7bnV4Q3LKK0z4jap5YKMWkU9LqWDopUMBKN7F32P7a-j6gl11X5fxO4G31FRuhfP/s1600/japanchart.jpg" /></a></div>
One can argue that, in Canada, condos may have been bought on speculation, but very few houses were bought on speculation. However, this was also true in the U.S. Just as in the U.S., Canadian house buyers are stretched to the limit.<br />
<br />
One can argue that, in Canada, most mortgages have fixed rates, not variable rates, and therefore most home-owners will be insulated from rising interest rates. However, new home-buyers are not insulated. Even if current home-owners do not sell, if there is a drop in buyers, prices will drop. If prices drop, this might trigger speculators to lock in profits and start the domino effect.<br />
<br />
<b>EXTREME DEBT</b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20091210/boc_debt_091210/" target="_blank">CTV</a> reported: “The level of household debt in Canada is rising, and has become "a key source of vulnerability" for the country's economy, the Central Bank has warned.”<br />
<br />
According to McLean’s magazine (<a href="http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/02/awash-in-a-sea-of-debt/" target="_blank">source</a>):<br />
<ul>
<li>‘“As the rest of the world saves, Canadians are getting dangerously deep in debt.”</li>
<li>“…this is about a lot more than just people paying too much for homes. In the same way house prices have defied the moribund economy, Canadian families, already saddled with record levels of debt, have continued to pile on mortgage and consumer loans at a blistering pace. In the last 10 years the amount of consumer and mortgage debt hanging over our heads more than doubled to $1.4 trillion, with $100 billion of that taken on in the last year alone.”</li>
<li>“Even before the recession began, Canadians were up to our eyeballs in debt. Since then, we’ve slipped below the surface. Over the last two decades, mortgage debt in Canada has nearly quadrupled to almost $1 trillion.”</li>
<li>“…look at how much debt households are carrying relative to their personal disposable income. The results are shockingly American in scale…”</li>
<li>“Over the past two difficult years of the economy, the total residential mortgage debt load in Canada ballooned 18 per cent.”</li>
<li>“When a household’s debt-to-service ratio… breaks past the 40 per cent mark, it’s considered to be “financially vulnerable” to financial shock. What the [central] bank found … was that if rates rose to [3.2 to 4.5 per cent], 9.6 per cent of households would find themselves in that danger zone… 4.5 per cent would still leave mortgage rates low by historical standards.”</li>
<li>“Over the past two years, the [Credit Counselling Society of B.C.], which helps consumers resolve their debt woes, has seen more people coming in for help carrying more consumer debt—that is, non-mortgage debt—than ever before. “Five years ago it was common to see debt loads of $40,000, but this year we’ve seen people with $256,000,” says…a counsellor. $150,000 is very normal now.””</li>
<li>“In all of 2008, more than 115,000 Canadians were insolvent. By September of last year, we’d already blown past that number and when the final tally for 2009 is in, the number of Canadians who went broke could easily exceed 160,000. And that’s with interest rates at nearly zero.”</li>
</ul>
There is debate in the media about Canada's housing and debt bubble:<br />
<ul>
<li>Globe and Mail, April 27, 2010: “Report warns of housing bubble threat”</li>
<li>Toronto Star, April 2, 2010 : “…debt-to-income ratio…hit a record high"</li>
<li>McLean’s, February 2, 2010 : “Awash in a sea of debt”</li>
</ul>
<div>
According to the Canadian government (<a href="http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=84" target="_blank">source</a>), the far majority of household debt is in mortgages:<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8ZuS9oUy92UdWBHcMGC-nJ6i-7I1ZQRTFmlltT9f6aEW-ZxPITwepQHUlA9hUNflWUghbyASSFKetxUazbDMexAwwBgqpca-XQnmG3Ii4syLRSOUmG0nSA-DPjvF8AtPxCR8-N8UsF9EO/s1600/mortgage-vs-credit-debt.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8ZuS9oUy92UdWBHcMGC-nJ6i-7I1ZQRTFmlltT9f6aEW-ZxPITwepQHUlA9hUNflWUghbyASSFKetxUazbDMexAwwBgqpca-XQnmG3Ii4syLRSOUmG0nSA-DPjvF8AtPxCR8-N8UsF9EO/s1600/mortgage-vs-credit-debt.png" /></a></div>
The chief executives of the big six Canadian banks pushed government to tighten mortgage rules (<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/big-six-banks-urge-ottawa-to-tighten-mortgage-rules/article1458585/" target="_blank">source</a>). Why did they, when they make a huge bulk of their profits from mortgages? Is it possible that they are concerned about a housing bubble? Why would a collapse of the housing bubble be bad for the banks? The same reason it was bad for American banks. In extreme cases, borrowers declare bankruptcy, default and walk away from their mortgages. Banks are left holding the bag trying to sell homes that are worth less than the mortgage.<br />
<br />
If the Canadian banks are concerned about lending money to borrowers who might default, then why don't they simply be more discriminate in who they lend to? If they do this, they are concerned that they will lose those customers to a competitor for the long term. They want the government to tighten mortgage rules for every bank. This way, the bank does not lose market share to other banks.<br />
<br />
We believe that Canada's housing bubble surpassed the peak of the U.S. housing bubble in 2010 when Canada's household debt to income ratio surpassed the peak of the U.S. ratio in 2010. As mentioned above, Canada's ratio has continued soaring to 150%, past the American peak of 124%. However, this is misleading. For young couples who have to pay bubble prices, this ratio is much higher. In the example below, it is 482%.<br />
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/personal-finance/financial-facelift/when-dreams-need-a-renovation/article2241692/" target="_blank">Example of 29 and 30 year old Canadian teachers</a></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Gross Household Income: $136,000 (<a href="http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil21a-eng.htm" target="_blank"><span class="s2">average Canadian household</span></a> makes approx. $80,000) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Net (disposable) Household Income: $98,520 ($8,210 x 12) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: lime;"><b>Assets: </b><br />House: $426,000 (Bought in 2010. House prices are higher now.)<br />Cash: $1,300<br />TFSA: $300<br />RRSP: $1,800<br />Total: $429,400 </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: red;"><b>Debts: </b><br />Mortgage: $410,380<br />Line of Credit: $64,130<br />Total: $474,510 </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: red;"><b>Negative Net-worth:</b> -$45,110 </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Household Debt to Disposable Income Ratio: 482% </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Mortgage amortization is 35 years. If they have a $410,360 mortgage, that means that their down payment was 3.7 percent. This is Canada's version of the American subprime mortgage. This couple has 96.3% leverage. Many companies, with positive net worth and significant profits, try but cannot get leveraged anywhere near this. If house prices come down, this couple will be crushed into financial ruin. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As public sector workers, they get a pension at age 55, which the majority of Canadians do not. This means that the majority of Canadians are even worst off.</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="p1">
The worst part of this bubble is that it was created and fuelled by the government by <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing money from children</a> and non-homeowners and throwing it at housing, as explained in "<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>". If the bubble collapses, this stealing will go into overdrive, because CMHC will lose money due to mortgage defaults. This loss will be taken by all taxpayers and children. This is what happened in the U.S. with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.<br />
<br />
This criminal, reckless, irresponsible mismanagement by the government is what makes people prosper in the short run, but makes the country poorer in the long run.<br />
<br />
With 96.3% leverage, real estate is exorbitantly more volatile than the stock market. If your stock goes to zero, you lose 100% of your investment. If that couple's house goes to zero, that couple goes "underwater" and loses 2,727% of their investment. (You are right that houses are not going to go to zero. Neither do most stocks. However, if the house price goes down by 3.7%, the couple loses 100% of their investment. Also, house prices can go very low. Houses in Cleveland are now selling for $28,000.)<br />
<br />
Yet, the government (through CMHC) will force taxpayers and children to insure risky mortgages for bubble priced homes. But they won't insure loans to buy stocks or Florida real estate selling for $40,000.<br />
<br />
If you were an insurer, would you be willing to insure those teachers' mortgage? No insurance company would ever touch a business with that kind of balance sheet and income statement.</div>
<br />
<b>TIMING</b><br />
<br />
We know that it is impossible for house prices to continue rising faster than household income forever. What is not certain is the exact time that price stops rising.<br />
<br />
We know that there is a probability that speculators will lock in profits by selling, when they see prices flatten. What is not certain is when they will do this after prices flatten.<br />
<br />
We know that the U.S. government wants to keep interest rates near zero. We do not know when interest rates will change, so home prices can continue rising. However, we know that there is a good probability that nominal interest rates will eventually rise, since it cannot go below zero. Also, what the government wants and what it gets are not necessarily the same thing. Because Canada does not want an expensive Canadian dollar vis-a-vis the U.S. dollar (to help Canadian exporters), the Canadian interest rates are low because the U.S. rates are low. (High interest rates pulls up the country's currency.) The U.S. has been on a spending and borrowing binge. To borrow, they have to auction a good portion of their T-bills and T-bonds to foreigners, such as Japan and China, the two largest holders of U.S. debt. If Japan and China feel gorged on U.S. debt and does not want to buy anymore, especially at such low interest rates, the U.S. may have to offer higher rates to attract buyers. When this happens, U.S. interest rates go up and then Canadian interest rates go up. We know that rising interest rates may cause home prices to drop.<br />
<br />
If Canada goes into another recession, this may cause prices to drop. In the last recession, the continued rise in Canada's housing bubble helped support its <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">fake economy</a>. If the bubble does not hold in the next recession, this could exacerbate the recession, which could in turn push house prices down further.<br />
<br />
Astute speculators know that there is limited upside potential in real estate and significant downside potential. They are monitoring real estate very closely and will try to time the market by cashing out when they think it has peaked.<br />
<br />
It will be very interesting to see how the Canadian housing bubble plays out. Hopefully, millions of Canadians will not be driven to financial ruin as in the U.S. Since it takes many years for bubbles form, it is mainly the older generation that benefits. Even if the bubble does not collapse, it is a huge injustice as it is a massive transfer of wealth from the younger generation to the old, making most young home-buyers much poorer.<br />
<br />
Every bubble creates winners and losers.<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/real-estate-ponzi-scheme.html">Real Estate - Ponzi Scheme?</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/housing-after-bubble-bursts.html">Housing: After the Bubble Bursts</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/10/ban-all-mortgages.html" target="_blank">Ban All Mortgages?</a></blockquote>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-68749608684329413052011-10-14T17:49:00.000-04:002011-12-08T09:50:28.456-05:00Europe's "Stealing from Children" goes into OverdriveAs explained in the <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economy</a> article, most Western countries around the world have been over-borrowing and over-spending since the mid-1960's, spending mostly on <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">socialist programs</a>, to create <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">fake wealth</a> and fuel fake economies. The U.S. and Canada have been doing this since the mid 1960's. Europe is not much different. The result is ever increasing debts.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyQx-io-MPYgGzju2vyUglz5EHBDWv390e6f06KWUdH4c4PMnd7iwJSI49i3P1zVD-8a9uuEHc52uaVuk8jcMWLwMGdF0TVrG268v7DWB_L38Y4n795WFhCEHYwDR5K2bpMiMdqyEauWp3/s1600/wiki-thief.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="172" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyQx-io-MPYgGzju2vyUglz5EHBDWv390e6f06KWUdH4c4PMnd7iwJSI49i3P1zVD-8a9uuEHc52uaVuk8jcMWLwMGdF0TVrG268v7DWB_L38Y4n795WFhCEHYwDR5K2bpMiMdqyEauWp3/s200/wiki-thief.jpg" width="200" /></a>However, the generation that borrowed and spent, will not be paying back the debt. It will be the next generation. Effectively, we are <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing money from children</a>.<br />
<br />
When the American <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">fake economy</a> came down in 2008-2009, they stole even more from children to support it. They did this through dozens of programs that drove up their deficit and debt. Some of these programs are:<br />
<ul>
<li>Stimulus</li>
<li>TARP (Toxic Asset Repurchase Program)</li>
<li>Cash for Caulkers (for a list of housing programs, read <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>)</li>
<li>Cash for Clunkers</li>
<li>Extension of Bush tax cuts</li>
<li>Etc.</li>
</ul>
With super-sized debts, Europeans are now hitting a limit on getting more suckers to lend money. Therefore, they have to slow down or reduce their borrowing and spending. This is causing their economies to come back down, closer to a level where they are living within their means and where they enjoy a standard of living that they earned and deserve. Even though the economies are coming down, their economies are still fake because they still have huge debts.<br />
<br />
The slowing European economies are causing deficits to persist, which continue ballooning their debts. Now, the lenders are fearful that these governments will not repay the debt. Many of the lenders are banks.<br />
<br />
In a normal functioning free-market capitalist society, when a business is incompetent and makes bad decisions, the business should suffer the consequences. If a business is a failure, it should declare bankruptcy and go away. The banks made bad decisions by lending money to high-risk borrowers. Incompetent banks should declare bankruptcy and go away.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnysR0mNxKzQP9EcXxrzm6EbNdVFhNSP1mqjvtTCGFqTyH4fHUKpqvFblALj0dh8kKUoH1y1n15DK3nsp-zisaVSkvnzhg0r71vhkjndLD6FKtpc2MEWZCNn1U6t5Z8cQiI43cSdSMo7RE/s1600/GlenCoveMansion.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnysR0mNxKzQP9EcXxrzm6EbNdVFhNSP1mqjvtTCGFqTyH4fHUKpqvFblALj0dh8kKUoH1y1n15DK3nsp-zisaVSkvnzhg0r71vhkjndLD6FKtpc2MEWZCNn1U6t5Z8cQiI43cSdSMo7RE/s200/GlenCoveMansion.jpg" width="200" /></a>Let us say that I have a relative who makes $30K/year and he borrowed a million dollars to buy a big house and a fancy car. If I lent more money to him and I lose that money, should you bail me out or should I suffer the consequences? If I was a banker, I would be considered incompetent. I should be fired. The proper solution is this: my relative needs to lower his fake wealth and fake standard of living by paying down his debt, working harder to make more income, selling his assets or all of the above.<br />
<br />
However, we have not had normal functioning, free-market capitalism for many decades. Europe is especially socialistic, that believes in saving everybody. Europe does not want to see my relative lower his standard of living and suffer. The suffering is passed to others, mainly to their children.<br />
<br />
The banks are a special case as well, since they are the hub of the economy and provide credit. Businesses need credit to operate and the economy cannot expand without credit. However, we've had a <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2010/03/credit-bubble.html" target="_blank">credit bubble</a> since the early 1980's. Nevertheless, politicians don't want the credit to shrink because the <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">fake economies</a> will shrink. If the economies shrink, unemployment will go up and therefore, politicians may have no choice but to maintain the bubble credit levels.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitfCOEll9nb4kWZ4gexvVtZqgZQbDkdcVDpiNM6p5HGjSD8pvrCHdNmkzOSercYTVbihIm5NW795LphzB1_s6ACYnjnfKQyXo_j9MoUkaqrF2rL59er4Sd6cHV5wk7zcWEeIGYuXAx_6Sx/s1600/EuroZone.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitfCOEll9nb4kWZ4gexvVtZqgZQbDkdcVDpiNM6p5HGjSD8pvrCHdNmkzOSercYTVbihIm5NW795LphzB1_s6ACYnjnfKQyXo_j9MoUkaqrF2rL59er4Sd6cHV5wk7zcWEeIGYuXAx_6Sx/s200/EuroZone.jpg" width="200" /></a>What will the European politicians do? They will steal even more from children to support their economies. How? By setting up their EFSF (European Financial Stability Facility) and its replacement, the ESM (European Stability Mechanism). The EFSF will borrow €440 billion (by selling bonds) and then give that money to their incompetent banks and incompetent countries who borrowed and spent too much. In fact, there is a push to lever up the EFSF to a whopping €1.5 to €2 trillion.<br />
<br />
Essentially, this is what is happening:<br />
<ul>
<li>Countries borrowed too much from the banks and investors</li>
<li>Banks and countries need to be bailed out</li>
<li>Other countries, especially Germany and France who already have large debts, will borrow more to give to the incompetent countries and banks</li>
</ul>
Can we say "moral hazard" to the extreme? America had "moral hazard" by bailing out car companies, banks and insurance companies. Europe wants to bail out whole countries. Using the personal example from above, what Europe is doing is giving more money to my pathetic relative with the <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">fake wealth</a> who cannot live within his means, and to me, who is incompetent for lending more money to my relative.<br />
<br />
So, Europe is trying to solve a debt crisis by going into bigger debt. What got the Europeans into trouble was that they borrowed too much. Now, they want to step up the borrowing another notch.<br />
<br />
This may or may not work. Nobody knows yet. However, we do know that these are long term debts which means that their <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing money from children</a> will go into overdrive.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIop0UgQWA4IUZukwr9JMwKnJQmlvRwkPrLUxw63JBTbAn17fH9RT78kBI6vAoSttIMwopWnxyKpSih-KZtAfYmvxivMovcCnIBhfdTAS4mtUTA0A8QiirOx-Fuy75cf0AMFhrFiLufmMn/s1600/imf_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIop0UgQWA4IUZukwr9JMwKnJQmlvRwkPrLUxw63JBTbAn17fH9RT78kBI6vAoSttIMwopWnxyKpSih-KZtAfYmvxivMovcCnIBhfdTAS4mtUTA0A8QiirOx-Fuy75cf0AMFhrFiLufmMn/s200/imf_.jpg" width="195" /></a></div>
The IMF is funded by the U.S., Canada, Australia and other countries. These countries are already stealing from their own children. There is push for IMF to contribute billions of dollars to the European bailout, which means that Europe can potentially steal from children globally, including your children.<br />
<br />
If we had <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/democracy-is-myth.html" target="_blank">true democracy</a>, where the children got to vote on these policies, will they let these policies pass? When the children become adults and their debt-ridden economy needs to be bailed out, where will they get the money?<br />
<br />
Before we agree to give away any more good money after bad, somebody needs to present a clear analysis and explanation, showing the <i>long term</i>, <i>quantified</i> advantages and disadvantages and cost / savings to the different parties, of the following scenarios:<br />
<ol>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjw4QHbqgUAKBxRVaBvWphPRkRw3GVlFc6eC-x9K1ibrhyyRepxP8WTSgQlUabJXJoPof074xJ_iqrEQzDLMi0dXZ_TGme2Mf432ADX7s3JrABKnZNrhpKmKAy6oeXMrKL6EoF3I8u0A6nz/s1600/greek-riots-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="204" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjw4QHbqgUAKBxRVaBvWphPRkRw3GVlFc6eC-x9K1ibrhyyRepxP8WTSgQlUabJXJoPof074xJ_iqrEQzDLMi0dXZ_TGme2Mf432ADX7s3JrABKnZNrhpKmKAy6oeXMrKL6EoF3I8u0A6nz/s320/greek-riots-2.jpg" width="320" /></a>
<li>Stop giving money to Greece. Let them default or restructure. </li>
<ol>
<li>Let Greece stay in the Euro Zone. What is the cost of this to the current generation and to which countries?</li>
<li>Let Greece exit the Euro Zone and go back to the Drachma. What is the cost of this to the current generation and to which countries?</li>
<li>Let the other European countries save their banks. What is the cost to the current generation and to which countries?</li>
<li>Let the banks fail. What is the cost to the current generation and to which countries?</li>
</ol>
<li>Continue giving money to Greece and watch them continue to waste it. What is the cost of this to the <i>future</i> generations and to which countries?</li>
</ol>
Where is this analysis from the EU, Euro Zone, European Commission, ECB or IMF?<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/europes-solution-to-debt-crisis-is-to.html" target="_blank">Europe's Solution to Debt Crisis is to Steal</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">Stealing from Children</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">Socialism vs Capitalism</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economy</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">Fake Wealth</a><br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-31038027902816719732011-10-05T20:57:00.002-04:002011-10-05T21:28:51.251-04:00Steve Jobs of Apple<span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"></span><br />
<div class="p1">
This world needs a million more Steve Jobs.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Entrepreneurs are the MAIN reason that most countries become wealthier. They innovate and create new products and services that advance the world. They are the creators of jobs. They create wealth, not only for themselves, but for their employees, shareholders, customers, government and therefore everybody else in the country.<br />
<br />
Nobody at Apple is in an <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/unions.html" target="_blank">union</a>, and they make incomes that are far higher than average, not because they demanded higher incomes, but because they earned it by providing value to others in society.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
The reason our doctors make thirty times more than doctors in Cuba, is because our economy is so much wealthier, not because our doctors are thirty times smarter.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
The reason our baseball players make 1,000 times more than baseball players in Cuba, is because our economy is so much wealthier, not because our baseball players are 1,000 times better.<br />
<br />
The reason anybody, including barbers, accountants, bus drivers, lawyers and plumbers, makes the money he/she does, is due to the economy.<br />
<br />
The reason welfare recipients get any money, is due to the economy.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
One reason our economy is so wealthy is because of entrepreneurs.<br />
<br />
In any business, regardless if it is the lemonade or computer business, the two most important functions are:<br />
<ul>
<li>Making the product or service</li>
<li>Selling the product or service</li>
</ul>
Every other function, including HR, Legal, Finance, IT, etc., are support functions.<br />
<br />
In any country, the most important function is wealth creation. Therefore, the most important component of a country is its:<br />
<ul>
<li>Economy</li>
</ul>
Every other function, including all aspects of government, legal firms, accounting firms, etc., are support functions.<br />
<br />
Within the economy, the most important component is the:<br />
<ul>
<li>Entrepreneur</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="p1">
Every other component are in support functions.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Steve Jobs, a god amongst entrepreneurs, died at age 56. We lost a huge wealth creator today.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-21516958580998903602011-10-04T11:55:00.002-04:002011-12-21T19:41:26.107-05:00PIIGS needs to be changed to PIIGSUCEverybody is now familiar with the acronym PIIGS, which stands for Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain.<br />
<br />
According to the IMF (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_public_debt" target="_blank">source</a>), the U.S. has a higher debt to GDP ratio than Spain and close to Ireland. Canada has a higher debt to GDP ratio than Spain.<br />
<br />
Therefore, PIIGS needs to be changed to PIIGSUC, to include the U.S. and Canada.<br />
<br />
These countries have been borrowing, running deficits and debts since the mid 1960's (essentially <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">stealing money from children</a>) to create and fuel <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">fake economies</a> and <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">fake wealth</a>. When the fuel (debt) runs out, the fake economies stop growing.<br />
<br />
The U.S., Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Canada and Germany are part of the G7, because they are supposedly the richest countries. This is a joke because most of them have huge debts, fake economies and fake wealth.<br />
<br />
Most people think that we live in rich countries. We do not. The European and American economies are struggling, even though they are still fuelling their economies with borrowing, spending, deficits and debts. They are becoming poorer because they are hitting a limit on the growth rate of the borrowing. As an example, these countries are trying to slow the growth of the deficits or to reduce them, by implementing austerity. However, as long as there are deficits, that means that they are still increasing their debts.<br />
<br />
We would be very poor, in fact likely go into a depression, if we had to pay back our any of our debts. Hence, we do not. We kick the can to the next generation and let them become even poorer.<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">Fake Wealth</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">Fake Economy</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/11/bubbles-extreme-maker-and-breaker-of.html" target="_blank">Bubbles - Extreme Maker and Breaker of Wealth</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/democracy-cause-of-debt-problems.html" target="_blank">Democracy: Cause of Debt Problems</a></blockquote>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-32403350286754807192011-09-16T12:18:00.001-04:002011-09-16T12:55:33.219-04:00U.S. Poverty Hits Record Levels<br />
<div class="p1">
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a record number of Americans, 46.2 million, are living in poverty.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
This article shows a <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/sep/15/us-poverty-mapped" target="_blank">chart</a> of the states and their poverty level.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
The U.S. (and most debt-ridden countries) created <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/01/fake-economy.html" target="_blank">fake economies</a> and <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2007/04/debt-fake-wealth.html" target="_blank">fake wealth</a> over the past several decades by borrowing, spending and going into debt. Most of this debt is a result of socialist programs, such as "<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">Housing, the most manipulated market in the world</a>", Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.<br />
<br />
As the borrowing, spending and debts slow down or hit a limit, the economies and wealth stop growing or shrink.<br />
<br />
This is what is happening. This is contributing to the rising levels of poverty. The economy is coming back down towards a level that is actually more real and where we spend what we earn and deserve.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
However, we haven't reached that level yet because the economies and standard of living for most countries are still fake and supported by debts. Most Western countries still have huge levels of debt. If they have to pay back any of their debts, they will become poorer and poverty will continue to rise.<br />
<br />
The only way to stop this is to continue doing what we've done for decades. <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html" target="_blank">Steal more money from children</a> to fund today's economy.<br />
<br />
What most people around the world do not realize is that most "rich" countries are not rich. They are actually poor and bankrupt if they had to repay their debts.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-22524085749526648352011-09-06T19:09:00.001-04:002011-09-06T19:12:48.621-04:00Crooked Banks<br />
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">According to <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/youre-guide-to-the-fhfa-bank-lawsuits-2011-9#the-numbers-1" target="_blank">Your Guide To The MASSIVE Lawsuits against 17 banks</a>:</span></div>
<blockquote>
"...lawsuits name over 130 current and former bank executives for signing off on securities documents that FHFA contends were misleading, contained omissions, or even fraudulent"</blockquote>
<div class="p3">
Essentially, the banks stole $196 billion from American children.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
However, this does not include the fraudulent securities sold to foreigners. Wall Street stole $32 billion from Canadians and $60 billion from Germans. (Read: <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2009/02/us-defrauds-billions-from-world.html" target="_blank"><span class="s2">U.S. defrauds billions from the world</span></a>.)</div>
<div class="p3">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/44411593" target="_blank">Ex-Citigroup VP Admits Embezzling Over $22 Million</a></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
When you see mansions in the Hamptons, many of those are paid for with money stolen from you.</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-39654918277069089152011-08-26T09:37:00.001-04:002011-08-26T09:39:43.923-04:00Anecdote of Socialists and CapitalistsThis anecdote helps explains the difference between socialists and capitalists:<br />
<br />
There are a bunch of socialists standing at a street corner, and a bunch of capitalists standing at another corner. A Rolls Royce drives by.<br />
<br />
The socialists say to each other: "Look at that $#@! with the Rolls Royce. Let's take that wealth away from the $#@! and share the wealth amongst the all of us."<br />
<br />
The capitalists say to each other: "Look at that $#@! with the Rolls Royce. Let's figure out a way to make that kind of money for ourselves and buy our own Rolls Royce."<br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-74688800136191918762011-08-24T13:44:00.003-04:002011-08-24T13:56:05.555-04:00Jim Cramer<blockquote><br />
The most dangerous untruths are truths slightly distorted.</blockquote><blockquote><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>- G. C. Lichtenberg</blockquote><div>Ben Graham worked on Wall Street for 44 years, wrote the book “Intelligent Investor” and was Warren Buffet’s teacher, employer and mentor. Here is a commentary from the book:</div><div><blockquote>“Overall, Graham was as tough and cynical an observer as Wall Street has ever seen. In this rare case, however, he was not nearly cynical enough. Wall Street may have higher ethical standards than some businesses (smuggling, prostitution, Congressional lobbying, and journalism come to mind) but the investment world nevertheless has enough liars, cheaters, and thieves to keep Satan's check-in clerks frantically busy for decades to come. The thousands of people who bought stocks in the late 1990s in the belief that Wall Street analysts were providing unbiased and valuable advice have learned, in a painful way, how right Graham is on this point.”</blockquote></div><div>The Oscar winning documentary “<a href="http://www.insidejob.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Inside Job</a>” explains how Wall Street and Washington are rife with fraud, corruption and criminals. It explains that even the supposed un-biased economic professors from Ivy League universities, including Larry Summers, cannot be trusted because Wall Street pays them to write reports. At his acceptance speech, the producer reminded us that three years after our worst financial meltdown “not a single financial executive has gone to jail.”</div><br />
<div>A journalist is supposed to be objective, un-biased and give you the straight goods. Ideally, they are supposed to work for you. However, this is not always the case, according to the documentary “The Corporation”. The reporters are biased or quite often distort their information.</div><br />
<div>For proper compliance, when a person comments about a stock, he should disclose as to whether he owns that stock or a related stock. As an example, if the commentator is giving bearish (or bullish) comments about GM, he should ideally disclose whether he owns Ford as well.</div><br />
<div>How about the journalists who work for Wall Street firms that report negatively about certain stocks?</div><ul><li>Do they own any related stocks?</li>
<li>Are any of their family, friends, associates or hedge fund managers shorting the stock?</li>
<li>Has anybody pressured them to report with a certain bias?</li>
</ul><div>IBM was a leader in corporate sales, especially in the 1970’s and 1980’s. In their sales training, IBM used to teach their sales reps on how to use FUD (Fear, Uncertainty or Doubt). By spreading FUD about competitors, IBM was able to get customers to be scared of buying from a competitor. It was an effective scare technique.</div><div><br />
</div><div>FUD is also quite effective for short sellers.</div><br />
<div>Jim Cramer, who is the co-founder, <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=TST+Major+Holders" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">largest shareholder</a>, <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=TST+Profile" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">editor</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Cramer" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Chairman</a> of TheStreet.com, can get “infuriated” at negative media bias. See this <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0sJa48-9Ok" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">YouTube video</a> of Jim Cramer. He says the negative articles “twist the facts in order to be negative”.</div><div><br />
</div><div>According to <a href="http://corporate.thestreet.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">TheStreet.com:</a></div><blockquote><div>“Since its inception in 1996, TheStreet has distinguished itself from other financial media companies with its journalistic excellence, <b>unbiased</b> approach…”</div></blockquote><div>This is interesting because Jim Cramer has said that every commentator is biased and has an agenda. </div><br />
<div>CNBC had the motto: “In Cramer We Trust”. Can Jim Cramer, Chairman of TheStreet.com, be trusted? Not according to Jon Stewart of the Daily Show (Comedy Central) who <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/12/jim-cramer-on-daily-show-_n_174503.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">hammered Jim Cramer and CNBC</a> during their fight in 2009. You can watch some of the fight <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FP3YyJz3HsU" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">here</a>, showing Jim Cramer’s track record.</div><br />
<div>The <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/12/jim-cramer-on-daily-show-_n_174503.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">full interview of Jim Cramer</a> is a must-see. Jon Stewart exposes Jim Cramer as a perpetuator of shenanigans and a stock manipulator (stock manipulation is illegal), by showing a <a href="http://www.deepcapture.com/jim-cramer-cowly-hints-how-he-broke-the-law-2-mar-2007/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">video</a> of Jim Cramer being interviewed with "TheStreet.com TV" logo. Here are some <a href="http://antisocialmedia.net/antisocial-multimedia/jim-cramer-on-market-manipulation-in-his-own-words/" target="_blank">excerpts</a>:<br />
<blockquote><div>Cramer: A lot of times, when I was short at my hedge fund and I was positioned short, meaning I needed it down, I would create a level of activity beforehand that could drive the futures. It doesn’t take much money.<br />
<br />
Cramer: You can’t create yourself an impression that a stock’s down. But you do it anyway ‘cause the SEC doesn’t understand it. That’s the only sense that I would say this is illegal. But a hedge fund that’s not up a lot really has to do a lot now to save itself.<br />
<br />
Cramer: Yeah. Apple’s very important to spread the rumor that both Verizon and ATT have decided they don’t like the phone. It’s a very easy one to do because it’s also you want to spread the rumor that’s it not gonna be ready for <em>MAC World</em>. This is very easy ‘cause the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim that it’s credible because you spoke to someone at Apple, ‘cause Apple doesn’t –<em><br />
<br />
</em>Interviewer: They’re not gonna comment...<br />
....</div><div><br />
Cramer: It’s just fiction and fiction and fiction. I think it’s important for people to recognize that the way that the market really works is to have that nexus of hit the brokerage houses with a series of orders that can push it down and we get to the press and then get it on <em>CNBC</em>. That’s also very important.</div></blockquote><br />
<div>As in this <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/11/jim-cramer-shorting-stock_n_173824.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">article</a>, Jim Cramer explains how to create lies, spread false rumors/FUD in the media and manipulate markets:</div><blockquote><div>[Jim Cramer] calls it "a fun game, and it's a lucrative game." He suggests all hedge fund managers do the same. "No one else in the world would ever admit that, but I could care. I am not going to say it on TV," he quips in the video.</div><br />
<div>He also calls Wall Street Journal reporters "bozos" and says behaving illegally is okay because the SEC doesn't understand it anyway.</div><div><br />
</div><div>Here are some gems:</div><div><br />
</div><div>-On manipulating the market: "A lot of times when I was short at my hedge fund, and I was positioned short, meaning I needed it down,I would create a level of activity before hand that could drive the futures,"</div><div><br />
</div><div>-On falsely creating the impression a stock is down (what he calls "fomenting"): "You can't foment. That's a violation... But you do it anyway because the SEC doesn't understand it." He adds, "When you have six days and your company may be in doubt because you are down, I think it is really important to foment."</div><div><br />
</div><div>-On the truth: "What's important when you are in that hedge fund mode is to not be doing anything that is remotely truthful, because the truth is so against your view - it is important to create a new truth to develop a fiction," Cramer advises. "You can't take any chances."</div></blockquote>Here is the <a href="http://antisocialmedia.net/antisocial-multimedia/jim-cramer-on-market-manipulation-in-his-own-words/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">full transcript</a>.</div><br />
<div>Jon Stewart laced into Jim Cramer. Stewart said he and Cramer are both snake-oil salesman, only "The Daily Show" is marketed as such. He also said:</div><blockquote><div>“I can’t tell you how angry that makes me. Because what it tells me is that you all know. You all know what’s going on. You can draw a straight line from those shenanigans to the stuff that was being pulled at Bear and at AIG…</div><br />
<div>…You knew what the banks were doing and yet we’re touting it for months and months. The entire network was. Now to pretend that this was some sort of crazy, once in a lifetime tsunami that nobody could’ve seen coming, is disingenuous at best and criminal at worst.”</div></blockquote>Why would anybody trust TheStreet.com where its co-founder, largest-shareholder, editor and Chairman admitted to and explained how to lie, spread rumors and manipulate stocks?<br />
<div><br />
At these <a href="http://www.deepcapture.com/jim-cramer-cowly-hints-how-he-broke-the-law-2-mar-2007/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">videos</a>, Jim Cramer explains how the game works:</div><blockquote><div>"...the bears have to shoot first in order to color the earnings and get you frightened into selling. If you're not frightened, you won't panick. When the quarter comes out, it's absolutely imperative that the bears lie. It's imperative that they plant stories in the media that will then send the stocks down regardless of how great the earnings are. It's a life or death struggle out there, and the truth is the first casualty. Don't believe me? Think I'm being too cynical? Can't believe the system could be so corrupt or stupid that the regulators aren't out to help you, that the SEC is not all over this? Now come on. I've been in this game for decades and trust me, when the bears are out to destroy a stock, for a very brief time, they can do it. This is how it's played. A quarter isn't immediately defined by the numbers. It's defined by whoever manages to convince the press and the street that it was good or bad, but knocking the stock down, by selling or buying and then planting stories. To heck with the numbers. This is what's called painting the tape in the business and the bears will paint the tape bright red, as in SELL! It's what they do...after they do this, after they push the stocks down, after the analysts come in with their number cuts and they react to the same thing. They see the stocks go down and they panic too so then they downgrade. That's the kind of game that we're in."</div></blockquote><div>What if you are a hedge fund manager and you needed to spread rumors and lies to drive down prices? It would seem ideal if you controlled a media firm that can help you spread those rumors and lies.</div><div><br />
This <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/03/05/705113/-Jim-Cramer-Uses-CNBC-to-Manipulate-Stocks" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">blog</a> explains in further detail, Jim Cramer's shady past and how he makes money by using CNBC to help <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4490541725797746038" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">manipulate stocks and drive prices down with naked shorting</a>:</div><blockquote><div>"This is Cramer's big secret. He figured out early that the way to make money betting on stocks was to rig the game - control the news and you control a stock's value. Now he has his own TV show."</div></blockquote><div>Here is another <a href="http://www.deepcapture.com/jim-cramer-is-a-complicated-man/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">blog</a> that explains how Jim Cramer manipulates stocks:<br />
<blockquote><div>Maier worked for Cramer until 1998, then left and wrote a tell-all book about his years with Cramer: <em>Trading with the Enemy: Seduction and Betrayal on Jim Cramer’s Wall Street.<br />
</em>...</div><div><em>Trading with the Enemy </em>is replete with examples of how analysts release information to favored insiders before a formal report is released. Maier recounts a social evening with a Smith Barney analyst. The analyst tells Maier that the Smith Barney analyst is going to change a “hold” rating on a stock to a “buy,” then adds this:</div></blockquote><blockquote><div>[Smith Barney analyst:] “Listen, Sherlock, just remember one thing. If you’re going to buy it, buy it with us. We get a cut of every trade you do in the stocks we cover."<br />
<br />
[Maier:] Thus there was a quantifiable reason that such information was ‘leaked’ to good clients like Cramer & Company. This senior analyst received a direct kickback from getting Cramer & Company to traffic in stocks his company covered. Joe helped me to make money, and I was expected to return the favor. By the time the stock was upgraded from a hold to a strong buy, Cramer & Company had bought fifty thousand shares. All the trades were placed with Smith Barney. <em>(Trading With the Enemy</em>, page 90.)<br />
...<br />
Note the consistency in this progression from Michael Steinhardt to Karen Backfish to Jim Cramer. Steinhardt had a taste for “The Edge,” that is, knowing what analysts <em>were going to say</em> before the public knew. Then for Karen Backfish and Jim Cramer the Edge became <em>telling analysts what to say</em>. Eventually Cramer’s “edge” became <em>writing the news himself</em> and having it appear in his own columns, or spoon-feeding it to compliant reporters who would regurgitate it on cue.</div></blockquote>What about TheStreet.com? Do people make trades immediately before TheStreet.com releases articles? According to the above blog:<br />
<blockquote><div>"A question the reader might ask at this point is, did these hedge fund managers (Cramer and Rocker) own <em>TheStreet.com</em> because they thought it would be a good investment? Or is there anything in our story thus far that would suggest a benefit a money manager might enjoy in not just knowing what analysts are going to say before they make it public (e.g., Steinhardt’s “Edge”), not just being able to count on CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo to regurgitate tips she is passed, or even, writing one’s own columns in <em>SmartMoney </em>(i.e., Cramer’s techniques in the 1990’s), but in becoming an actual <em>publisher </em>of financial news?"</div></blockquote>This <a href="http://www.deepcapture.com/the-story-of-deep-capture-by-mark-mitchell/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">blog</a> explains how journalists can fail you and describes the shady characters at TheStreet.com:</div><blockquote><div>"...if you have seen a negative story about a public company in recent years, the odds are greater than even that it was written by a friend-of-Cramer.<br />
<br />
...<br />
<br />
Many of Cramer’s friends are former employees of TheStreet.com, a financial news website substantially owned by Cramer. They have included the editor and top columnists for The Wall Street Journal “Money & Investing” section, top business writers for The New York Times, reporters at Fortune magazine and BusinessWeek, the editor of The New York Post business page, the editor of MSN Money, and others. Herb, a CNBC commentator and a star columnist for MarketWatch.com, was among the founding editors of TheStreet.com – “Murderers Row,” they called themselves.<br />
<br />
I have analyzed well over a thousand stories written by this clique of journalists. The vast majority of them were sourced from a small group of short-sellers who are also friends of Cramer. Other popular sources for this group of journalists include convicted felons, mobsters, dubious private investigators, crooked lawyers, hired stock bashers, and gun-toting goons – most of whom are tied to the Cramer constellation of short-sellers.<br />
<br />
...<br />
<br />
in February 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission would like to know whether a financial research shop called Gradient Analytics conspired with short-selling hedge fund managers...to disseminate false information about public companies as part of a scheme to manipulate stock prices. The investigators believe that Jim Cramer and Herb are central to this conspiracy and have issued them both with subpoenas. TheStreet.com got a subpoena, too.<br />
<br />
...<br />
<br />
A guy named Jon Markman was for some time running a hedge fund out of Gradient’s back office. So-called “independent” research shops aren’t supposed to run hedge funds. If Markman was trading in advance of Gradient’s research and Herb’s stories, as the firm’s former employees claim he was, this is yet another jailable offense....Markman is one of Herb’s close friends. He was, along with Herb [Greenberg], a top editor of TheStreet.com."</div></blockquote><br />
<br />
<div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-84885838882579140682011-08-24T11:24:00.002-04:002011-11-23T10:35:08.140-05:00Stock Market ManipulationA stock trader can make money in two ways:<br />
<ul>
<li>Long (trader expects stock price to go up):</li>
<ul>
<li>Buy a stock and sell it later at a higher price.</li>
</ul>
<li>Short (trader expects stock price to go down):</li>
<ul>
<li>Buy put options. Put options go up in value if the stock price goes down.</li>
<li>Borrow a stock, sell it, buy it back later at a cheaper price and then return the stock to the lender.</li>
</ul>
</ul>
News can move the stock price up or down, depending on if the news is positive or negative.<br />
<br />
Manipulation of stocks, which is illegal, happens when traders spread false rumours to move the stock price. A trader may be long a stock and spread false positive news, or may short a stock and spread false negative news.<br />
<br />
In the mid-morning of March 16, 2011, news came out that the EU energy minister had claimed the Japanese nuclear crisis is out of control. This caused the stock market to plunge. Later, the EU energy minister’s spokesperson tried to clarify it by saying that this was not based on anything new or privileged information. It didn’t matter. The damage was done.<br />
<br />
CNBC explains how this was likely stock manipulation. You can watch it <a href="http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000011091" target="_blank">here</a> (it starts 28 minutes and 18 seconds into the recording).<br />
<br />
Here’s the transcript:<br />
<blockquote>
Melissa Lee: “What started as a quiet day on the market, turned into a violent sell off around 11 AM eastern time on the back of the EU Energy Minister’s comments about the Japan nuclear situation, talking about catastrophes happening in a matter of hours. But Dr. J actually saw some unusual activity which raised some eyebrows…” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Jon Najarian: “Yeah, well, in a host of indices and in particular Nasdaq and S&P. The S&P, if you took a look at the March 12 25…puts. They were bought, about 5,000 of them were bought like bang, bang, bang, bang. And then 4 minutes before 11 o’clock, to Melissa’s point, it’s started hitting on Twitter that they re-purposed some of that information, about that EU Energy Minister. Then, next thing you know, both Dow Jones and Reuters put it out, as if it was new news again, which to me was not new news. This was 8 hours old. And the markets went into a free fall. We went down from about 45, 50 points negative in the Dow Jones industrials to over 200 and the fear was lit in everybody’s trading room and the next thing you saw was people basically just run for the hills. And those options that were purchased for about 90 cents, in the case of the S&P March 12 25 puts, went to $7.60. [Jon Najarian snaps his finger]” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Melissa Lee: “Did you see them being sold immediately afterwards?” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Jon Najarian: “No, I did see most of them being sold around $3, and then they re-loaded, basically when, strangely enough, the US energy people came out and started commenting about moving Americans outside of Tokyo and telling them to stay in their homes, if they stay there, and all that sort of thing. I mean, the fear mongering here, folks, is on a level I’ve not seen before. Some of it’s suspicious, like I say because, it’s been repurposed, this information. If you’re just smart and you make a great trade, kudos to you. If you’re somebody who then basically puts out information to create fear to the upside or downside, that seems pretty close to criminal.” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Melissa Lee: “JJ…based on your experience, does this also strike you as odd?” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
JJ: “Yes, I think Jon’s 100% right…”</blockquote>
Manipulation, front-running, insider-trading and quid-pro-quo are rampant on Wall Street, however very few of these crooks are caught and punished.<br />
<br />
Please note that for capitalism to work effectively, there needs to be sufficient rules and rule enforcement. However, enforcement from agencies such as SEC has been impotent. Even when <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/harry-markopolos-financial-fraud.html" target="_blank">Harry Markopolos</a> notified the SEC three times about Bernie Madoff, the SEC did nothing.<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-71976375458180529452011-08-24T10:54:00.002-04:002011-08-24T11:03:35.831-04:00Harry Markopolos - Financial FraudHarry Markopolos detected fraud with Bernie Madoff. There is now a documentary based on this story called "Chasing Madoff".<br />
<br />
Here is an <a href="http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000041001" target="_blank">interview</a> of Markopolos on CNBC exposing other frauds.<br />
<blockquote>Foreign exchange (forex) bank custody fraud: State Street and Bank of New York stole billions of dollars in pension funds around the country. They stole 0.3% of every transaction. It's a 50 state case and it's going to be many billions before it's all over. </blockquote><blockquote>Forex trades $4.7 trillion every day with no government regulation and everything is over the counter...perfect recipe for fraud. </blockquote><blockquote>Foreign exchange can cost 0.03% to the bank. When you're in Europe and you use your credit card, the bank charges you 3% for the currency exchange. The markup is 2.97%. </blockquote><blockquote>Twenty percent of Bank of New York's net income (not revenue) is from foreign exchange over-charges.</blockquote><blockquote>On their contract, they said it was free...all in cost, no charge, best execution, straight through processing, real-time execution. They've back dated the trades up to 20 hours a day. That's not real-time.</blockquote>Therefore, when you use your credit card, check to see how much your bank charges you for foreign exchange.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-13835077626081647902011-08-20T17:19:00.006-04:002011-08-20T18:50:15.689-04:00Europe's Dropping Stock Market and EconomyThe biggest asset in a bank is the money that it lent out. In 2008, these assets were mortgages. When the housing bubble collapsed, American bank stocks collapsed, due the collapse of the value of their assets.<br />
<br />
In 2011, European bank stocks are collapsing, so much so that the market capitalization of Apple Computers is now equal to the market capitalization of the top 32 European banks combined (<a href="http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1042051--apple-worth-about-as-much-as-32-top-euro-zone-banks" target="_blank">source</a>). Some of these bank stocks have dropped approximately 50% year to date. The banks' assets include their loans (via bonds) to European governments. The perceived value of these bonds are dropping because the market does not believe that these governments will be able to fully repay these loans.<br />
<br />
These governments might have difficulty repaying these loans because their debts are too high. Their debts are too high because of the extra high deficits during the past recession and because of the multiple decades of deficits.<br />
<br />
These European governments ran multiple decades of deficits because of their socialist programs and because democracy is a contributor to the debt problem (<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/democracy-cause-of-debt-problems.html" target="_blank">read more</a>).<br />
<br />
Due to the collapse of the European bank stocks, the European stock markets are collapsing. The collapse of the stock market is reducing the "wealth effect". When people feel less wealthy, they spend less and invest less in their businesses. This reduction of wealth and the high government debt levels are contributing to the probability of another recession.<br />
<br />
Due to the drop of the European stock market, other stock markets around the world are dropping, reducing the "wealth effect" for people around the world. The European economy is the largest in the world, larger than the U.S. economy. Many of the largest American and Asian companies trade with Europe. Essentially, the economies around the world are highly integrated. Due to the slowing European economy, the other economies around the world will slow as well.<br />
<br />
If and when European banks go bankrupt, some people may think that capitalism failed. However, the root cause is socialism, which caused multiple decades of deficits (<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">read more</a>). Some people may argue that Germany has socialism and it works. Like most other Western countries, Germany also has fake wealth with their debt to GDP ratio at 74-78% (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_public_debt" target="_blank">source</a>) and are also <a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/stealing-from-children.html">stealing from children</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1380825755651785809.post-7044862012841993122011-08-19T12:52:00.002-04:002015-03-28T13:55:50.058-04:00China: Communist, Dictatorship, Capitalist or Democratic?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkSq5HbMZpxX_sDEro2khnjgSRuJTTjbBF0s49VM02ltxCaczFA7FsKT6mfCuHZEc7KlAjjmRHgn6LyWrV78lr4DFXegkMi-zzsyrTvOiZkn8epCdF2QhCSDLY6uHOtCCmDt25TLc2tqJ7/s1600/china-flag-small.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkSq5HbMZpxX_sDEro2khnjgSRuJTTjbBF0s49VM02ltxCaczFA7FsKT6mfCuHZEc7KlAjjmRHgn6LyWrV78lr4DFXegkMi-zzsyrTvOiZkn8epCdF2QhCSDLY6uHOtCCmDt25TLc2tqJ7/s1600/china-flag-small.gif" /></a></div>
There are still many people, outside of China, who think China is a communist, dictatorship country. This is largely due to brainwashing by the media. As an example, 70% of Americans were brainwashed into believing that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11 (<a href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
China is communist by name only. It is not communist and it does not have a dictatorship.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKN_OyMyrAYEEALN5CDqE1XlDe6C5p9sOnI4wEDABfCszmhOJHXetY750CtXTbJX9Q_Omq82s1wP4tC9xfK3pBEdzzscZeLjLOBIYBHCXkA91YR9OIOnsLZ_Q4JOTqGFXVJ3zbaNeYSMcq/s1600/KarlMarx.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKN_OyMyrAYEEALN5CDqE1XlDe6C5p9sOnI4wEDABfCszmhOJHXetY750CtXTbJX9Q_Omq82s1wP4tC9xfK3pBEdzzscZeLjLOBIYBHCXkA91YR9OIOnsLZ_Q4JOTqGFXVJ3zbaNeYSMcq/s1600/KarlMarx.jpeg" /></a></div>
Karl Marx is the father of communism, who advocated equal wealth for every citizen, through government ownership of businesses and control of the economy. His philosophy drove hundreds of millions into poverty.<br />
<br />
Many people tend to confuse or mix political with economic systems. Communism, like socialism and capitalism, is mainly an economic system, albeit achieved through political means. Democracy, dictatorship, totalitarianism and authoritarianism are mainly political systems.<br />
<br />
People are correct that China may have less political freedom or freedom of speech than other countries. These people argue, mistakenly, that China is communist because it has less political freedom. Political freedom can be mutually exclusive to whether a country is communist or not. As an example, the US prides itself on being free. California had pockets of communes in the 1960's, where communities filled with freedom-loving hippies agreed to share all work, property and wealth equally. They even shared sex partners. These are better examples of communist societies than China. However, few will claim that these Californian communes lacked political freedom or freedom of speech.<br />
<br />
You can mix economic systems with different political systems. As an example, a country can have communism with democracy, or capitalism with dictatorship or socialism with authoritarianism.<br />
<br />
China was capitalistic for most of its 4,000 year history. It veered off into communism for a short while in 1949, when their Communist Party of China won their civil war. They have not changed their party name, but they changed their economic system since then. They started introducing capitalism in 1979 (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping" target="_blank">source</a>). Since then, China phased in more and more capitalistic systems and is now more capitalistic than the West in many ways:<br />
<ul>
<li>Lower taxes</li>
<ul>
<li>income and sales taxes</li>
</ul>
<li>Less socialist programs with very little or no subsidies for:</li>
<ul>
<li>elementary, high schools, universities</li>
<li>healthcare</li>
<li>unemployment insurance</li>
<li>welfare</li>
<li><a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/04/housing-most-manipulated-market-in.html" target="_blank">manipulation of the housing market</a> (Washington had a policy to enable every American to realize the American dream of homeownership. Canada massively manipulated their housing market to create the longest lasting bubble in the Western world.)</li>
</ul>
</ul>
Since China stated "to get rich is glorious", the number of entrepreneurs exploded. Entrepreneurs exist mainly in capitalist societies, less so in socialist societies and essentially none in communist societies. Entrepreneurs start businesses and are the main, or only creators of wealth for any society.<br />
<br />
China had a totalitarian political system under Chairman Mao Zedong. However, they now have an authoritarian political system under their one party rule with democracy at the local levels. Many outsiders are right to be critical of a country with only one political party that controls the media and limits political freedom. The positive side is that their political party is the largest in the world, with 80 million members. Also, it holds elections every 5 years, where the party members vote in a new President (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China" target="_blank">source</a>) to serve a single 5 year term. Therefore, China's leaders can change more often than leaders in the West where Presidents or Prime Ministers can serve multiple terms.<br />
<br />
In countries with dictators, there are no elections and political parties are unlikely to exist. Dictators stay in power indefinitely.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, China's democracy is growing as they are growing the number of levels of elections (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China" target="_blank">source</a>).<br />
<br />
Karl Marx advocated that every citizen have equal wealth. By this definition, no country in history has ever had true communism, not Russia nor China. The leaders of their communist parties, who got into power by advocating communism, grabbed a huge disproportionate amount of the wealth and power. Every citizen on the party hierarchy was wealthier and more powerful than the person below. To have true communism, these leaders and party members should have been as poor as the peasants. Essentially, they were hypocrites. One can argue that they used the idealistic concept of communism to sell to the peasants, in order to gain wealth or power or both. Mao ZeDong did exactly this.<br />
<br />
Therefore, even the billions of Chinese and Russians, not just the West, were brainwashed into thinking that China and Russia were communist countries.<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newworldparty.org/2011/08/socialism-versus-capitalism.html" target="_blank">Socialism vs Capitalism</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0