Category: economy

EDIT: There are few who care about the environment, there also hopes to be few who profit from it. I was thinking about quoting the source of the article below but then I felt I would get immediately disqualified because of it. But there’s one thing that stands out in all of this for me. You can Google it if you want. Here’s my take: Oil is unpopular, it’s limited, it’s a pollutant; yet, it fuels commerce, produce, and transports medicines, workers, and supplies over large distances. No one wants to waste the time and energy (pun intended) to fund and research cheap alternative fuel sources. Why would big oil want that? It would put them out of business. Why are the environmentalist organizations not keen on suggesting cheap alternative energy? Because they don’t want fuels to go away just yet either! So let’s make up “carbon credits” and just let the rich countries get “taxed” so they can continue burning fuels and let the underdeveloped countries have a chance to use that money. Most importantly, let”s use the UN to rally these countries together and let us handle the cashflow! What a racket! But then again, it is our fault for not being responsible enough on our own to be better stewards of what’s been given to us. Instead, we’re gonna let man’s “worst enemy to the planet” be judge, jury, and sadly, the executioner.

The Multibillion Dollar Carbon Trading System The carbon trading system is a multibillion money-making bonanza for the financial establishment. The stakes are extremely high and the various lobby groups on behalf of Wall Street have already positioned themselves.

According to a recent report, “the carbon market could become double the size of the vast oil market, according to the new breed of City players who trade greenhouse gas emissions through the EU’s emissions trading scheme.

The speed of that growth will depend on whether the Copenhagen summit gives a go-ahead for a low-carbon economy, but Ager says whatever happens schemes such as the ETS will expand around the globe.” (Terry Macalister, Carbon trading could be worth twice that of oil in next decade, The Guardian, 28 November 2009)

The large financial conglomerates, involved in derivative trade, including JP Morgan Chase, Bank America Merrill Lynch, Barclay’s, Citi Bank, Nomura, Société Générale, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are actively involved in carbon trading.( FACTBOX: Investment banks in carbon trading | Reuters, 14 September 2009)

The legitimacy of the carbon trading system rests on the legitimacy of the Global Warming Consensus, which views CO2 emissions as the single threat to the environment. And for Wall Street the carbon trading system is a convenient and secure money-making safety-net, allowing for the transfer of billions of dollars into the pockets of a handful of conglomerates.

“Every major financial house in New York and London has set up carbon trading operations. Very big numbers are dancing in their heads, and they need them to replace the “wealth” that evaporated in the housing bust. Louis Redshaw, head of environmental markets at Barclays Capital, told the New York Times, “Carbon will be the world’s biggest market over all.” Barclays thinks the current $60 billion carbon market could grow to $1 trillion within a decade. Four years ago Redshaw, a former electricity trader, couldn’t get anyone to talk to him about carbon.” (Mark Braly, The Multibillion Dollar Carbon Trading,, 5 March 2008)


“Well, the “Hope and Change” halloween did not go over as well as I hoped. As I would reach into the candy bags to take candy from the kids to give to other kids that did not have equal access to candy, the kids got upset! Over and over and over. I reassured them that I understood and gave them pocket Constitutions!”

The New York Mets say the name Citi Field will remain on their new ballpark and believe the struggling bank will survive its current economic crisis following a government bailout.
At $400 million over 20 years, could the taxpayer not have insisted that the funds be allocated elsewhere in a more responsible manner? I guess there is no point in arguing with someone who feels justified otherwise, right?

read more | digg story

Because he’s a crackpot? A nutjob? A patriot? Not shiny and polished as our current president-elect? A true upholder of the Constitution? Since when does serving 10 terms in office, delivering babies, and having a lock on why the economy is in the crapper somethinng to be frowned upon that’s not worthy of assigning him the task of fixing the current state of affairs with this great nation? After all, that’s why so many American’s voted for BO. First order of business is to fix the economy, right? That is what all of you wanted, right?

Why does the media love to get sound bites and interviews with him? Why did so many people contribute so much money is so little time to help this man’s presidential campaign? Why were they silenced after he wasn’t nominated? Why did Ron Paul refuse to run as an independent? The answers are out there if you know where to look.

In the meantime, CNN is featuring RP again on his views and thoughts about our economy and state of the G.O.P. Why is he the only one with the clarity to not only explain the problems of this country but to offer the paths towards reaching solutions? Talk about a massive FACEPALM!

(taken from CNN)

During the debates in the Republican Presidential primary, even though I am a 10-term sitting Representative Member of Congress, I was challenged more than once on my Republican credentials. The fact that I was repeatedly asked how I could be a Republican when I was talking a different language than the other candidates answers the question of how the Republican Party can slip so far so fast.

My rhetorical answer at the time was simple: Why should one be excluded from the Republican Party for believing and always voting for:

• Limited government power

• A balanced budget

• Personal liberty

• Strict adherence to the Constitution

• Sound money

• A strong defense while avoiding all undeclared wars

• No nation-building and no policing the world

How can a party that still pretends to be the party of limited government distance itself outright from these views and expect to maintain credibility? Since the credibility of the Republican Party has now been lost, how can it regain credibility without embracing these views, or at least showing respect for them?

I concluded my answer by simply stating the Republican Party had lost its way and must reassess its values. And that is what needs to be done in a hurry.

I never thought I would see this again in my lifetime. I guess we’ll enjoy it while it lasts. The car wash is located at 7000 North Point Parkway, Alpharetta GA.

read more | digg story

Well, at least it was a good idea to buy Apple!

Well, at least it was a good idea to buy Apple and RIM!

This isn’t news to me but in case you just came crawling out from under your latest Gossip Girl, the buzz is finally spreading further out. Talk about your perfect storm. What’s the one thing that makes the world go around? And if we grab them by the purse strings, we’ll get what we want!

So 9/11 scared you into believing we had to fight a war with no end in sight.

Cervical cancer scared you in believing that you need to have a vaccine shot for your pre-teenage girl.

And now the current state of the financial markets are scaring you into believing that we need a central world bank. It’s gone far enough, people! (Why didn’t we take Ron Paul to the White House?!)

Rolling Stone contributing editor Tim Dickenson covers National Affairs and Politics. He released a video summarizing each point because he felt the media was betting the wrong candidate (what’s he reading?! I see just the opposite). View the video first then come back here.

#5. John McCain is a Washington outsider.

I think this is a double-edged sword. How can you be an effective politician if you don’t know how the inside works? The same can be said about Palin, who’s truly an outsider but has no concept of the inside. In essence, the only way McCain can be an outsider again is by having someone like Palin advise him on her perspective of Washington affairs. Makes sense now doesn’t it? Also makes sense why Palin’s had such limited press coverage. Considering that ALL major broadcast news is slanted to certain degrees, would it not be obvious that they would try to mold Palin’s thinking? Knowing she’s a blank slate? But I digress, McCain’s making an effort to show that he’s on the outside. He’s acknowledging that after all these years in Washington, “this pen is old” and a new pen needs to be introduced.

#4. McCain was a “top gun” pilot.

Yes, the word “Maverick” has been used relentlessly but Dickenson uses it again to describe that McCain isn’t the “Top Gun” maverick that he enjoys being called. He starts referring to his academic standing at Annapolis (Naval Academy), graduating 5th from the bottom of a class of 900 students (for the record, Jimmy Carter is the only Naval Acedmy graduate who became president – his rank was 59 out of 820, draw your own conclusions), his antics as a naval pilot (drinking, playing poker, craps, dog track, etc.) and crashing planes deeming him more of a fly boy than a top gun. I laughed when I heard him say all of this with a straight face. Rolling Stone Magazine is telling me that McCain is against the grain, rebellious, outspoken, and marches to the beat of his own drum? OMG, tell me this is not happening! Kinda reminds me of a great Hollywood flick with John Candy.

#3. McCain was the central hero of P.O.W. camps.

Who said he was the central hero? My history books spoke of many tortured P.O.W.’s. I have a brain and know this. Who are you talking to that’s gullible enough to believe this? Of course, by summarizing the facts as it is clearly being done by Dickenson only reaffirms McCain’s allegiance to country first. Where most soldiers went home to live quiet lives after the war, McCain decided to make an impact in politics. This myth is a little far fetched to me.

#2. John McCain is a straight-talking reformer.

I thought Dickenson would spend some time talking about this more than any other of the points. Of course, I had to dig this information because the mainstream media hasn’t elaborated on this point. Is there a reason why? Click here and here to read about The Reformers Institute. What I personally make of this is McCain once again tries to innovate and infuse reform but ends up abandoning the RI because there are too many other influences that would allow this to run squeaky clean. Guilty by association. Sounds like another Keating 5 to me.

#1. John McCain always puts “country first”.

Sounds like most of the failures that have occurred in John McCain’s life has been when he puts his personal interests first. His first marriage, drug abuse past, his attempt to suspend his campaign and work on bailout bill for Wall Street. His attempts to put “country first” fail due to lack of cooperation from team players or just not enough background checks by himself or his supporters. Will he able able to wield enough influence to cause the reform he’s promising? Will his supporters jump ship on him again when he desperately needs them in the critical hour? He can’t even count on the current party’s administration to back him up because everyone’s trying to distance themselves from Bush. On the other hand, is Obama’s playing on the fears of this country to his advantage by selling the same old politics, different day talk? This country is guilty and gunshy of allowing politicians take advatange of our fears.

Someone tell me otherwise. It’s easy to get caught up in defending a candidate but it’s downright annoying to watch journalists take sides and not just endorse candidates but start discrediting the opponent. Again, we know that all these candidates have had a checkered past. That’s been more than obvious. Discuss who’s more qualified, who can follow through, and who can be held accountable. It used to be a parent’s desire to see their child grow up and be President of the US but nowadays, it’s better to be an athlete or entertainer – no accountability to anyone but yourself!

I'm getting $700 billion but I have to give up my Golden Parachute!?

This was one of my biggest concerns regarding the bailout of Wall Street! Not only would they be getting a “Get Out of Jail Free” card for spending money like it was some Monopoly tournament, but by giving them $700 billion dollars, they would be able to continue paying for their lavish high finance lifestyle. Not to mention, the execs would be able to maintain their Golden Parachute. Well guess what? Somewhere in that 450+ page bailout plan, amidst the Puerto Rican Rum, race car driving, and the Exxon Valdez, there were additional references, er… conditions that will curb executive pay at banks that participate in the bailout plan – including limiting stock-related pay and banning ‘golden parachutes’ for executives. You can’t have your cake and spend it, too. You want my money to help you? We’ve got some conditions. Don’t like it? Then you’re on your own.

Is my government teaching “tough love”? Did they actually listen to the outraged voices of Main Street? Is Wall Street deciding that it might be better to be responsible for their own actions or will “boys be boys” and decide there’s got to be a better way to keep as much cash in their pockets? This is encouraging. This trend of accountability must continue beginning at the top through to every American. My fingers are crossed.

Read more