The U.S. Economy: Stand by for more worse news

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Brian Foley, Nov 28, 2010.

  1. Ivan Seeking Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    957
    Billy T, is it your position that government officials like Geitner and Bernanke, and Obama for that matter, don't know what you know, or is this some kind of conspiracy in which our imminent demise is simply denied?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Probably true that most homes actively marketed now are homes the bank took ownership of (by foreclosure or more often by negotiation with non paying mortgagee as that costs the bank less and owner´s credit is not damaged so both prefer it. It is called a "short sale", I think, as bank agrees to cancel the debt short of full payment of the mortgage.)

    But I don´t believe you are correct in saying there are 10 buyers for every seller, even if we only count the sellers that are banks. (Less that true total of sellers). Any selling bank would cut a deal with any buyer willing to pay off the mortgage balance in a "New York minute."

    Only way that there are 10 (or even 1,000,000) buyers for every seller, is if anyone willing to pay a dollar for the house is counted as a "buyer." Those 10 (or 10,000) are not buyers but "bottom fishers" - By definition there is one buyer for each seller, just like there is for stock trades etc.

    You don´t seem to want to count as "sellers" those who would sell with 150% profit on what they paid. Why do you want to count as buyers those who want to buy with 50% discount from the current market value? Again: for every buyer there is a seller (and conversely) - You can not count as "buyers" those want to get house for less than owner is willing to sell it for. No deal was done - Number of buyers MUST be exactly the same as the number of sellers. Those dreaming about get high price for their home and those dreaming about getting nice house for low price are "dreamers" not sellers or buyers.

    I will admit that one often falsely speaks (especially with stocks) of "sellers out numbering the buyers" when stock prices are falling. Thus, when home prices are falling if one wants to speak inaccurately, you should now say "sellers out number the buyers."

    Thus it is totally ridiculous to make the claim you did that there are 10 buyers for every seller in the US home market, which has falling prices every month as has been the case for several years. Saying exactly the opposite is excusible, but still false.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Answer to (1) is they surely know (measured in bits of information) 100,000 times more than I do. My talent, and why I am a multi-milionair haveing zero inhertance and only a salary (never owned a store, etc.) is I can often accurately foresee important changes coming long before most do. It can be costly to act on them too soon, as I have learned the hard way. You must wait until as least a few others are predicting quite similar events.

    For examle, I foresaw the fall of the dollar coming more than 40 years ago, and bought shares of "Giant Yellow Knife," a Canadian gold miner, but most did not foresee the dollar collapse even 20 years ago, so after tying up my money, lossing interest for two decades, I then got out with only a small loss. I was much better later after this lesson. For examle, only a few were thinking 15 years ago that China and Brazil were the future and after establishing my positions in Brazilian company´s US listed ADRs, I began to post telling other at Sciforums that buying Brazilian ADRs was a smart move. (And it was about half a million dollar smart move for my ~ $50,000 of buying with dollars, in part becuase the Brazilain Real has doubled in value compared to the dollar, so even if the stocks did nothing, I would have doubled my money in dollars. But of course as many begain to realize they needed to diversify out of dollars the stock were driven up in Real prices.)

    Also you must recognize that those you name mainly want to avoid the ship of state sinking on their watch, even if delaying disaster makes it worse when it happens. I posted that I thought Obama was too smart to run for a second term, and was wrong. I still think he is very smart, but his ego is big too and giving up POTUS is too hard to do, even if deep inside he knows he may not be able to delay the collapse of the dollar for all of his second term.

    I will be voting for Romney, as I put too much effort into the civil rights movement to be part of having a black man as POTUS, when worst ever depression in US & EU is coming in less than five years.

    (2) Not a "conspiracy." Probably not even denial - just big egos and excessive self confidence. I.e. a belief that somehow we will "muddle thru" to a better day.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2012
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    Hello Billy T.

    A while back, on another thread and forum, we were in discussion regarding capitalism and global economics discussing inequities and likewise making similar predictions.

    The question kept coming up, of why we are not working toward a better model to better distribute the goods and services to all.

    The answer given by the most experienced member at that time was that we simply do not HAVE a better model available at this time.

    As you have stated that you are self made successful within the existing paradigm, I am interested in your thoughts in this regard, even though they may be biased in favor of the existing system because of your success.
     
  8. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Main reason we do not have a better system is the present one is near optimum (short term at least) for those in control (Corporations & the "1%ers").

    There is no guarantee that a different economic model would be better, but I think that the one China has used for 30 years of ~10% annual growth would be. I am not saying it would reduce the concentration of wealth but at least it is EXPANDING, not SHRINKING the middle class. BTW, last month, for the first time in Chinese history, more than half of the Chinese now live in cities. - This is, by far, the fastest urbanization and greatest up grade of material living standards for the most people in human history!

    China, from a strickily economic POV, has a much better system than the US has. They use long range planning for assuring their material needs will be met even 25 years into the future. Signing decades long, paid up front, future delivery contracts for, energy, minerals, lumber, etc. (In part because they know the dollar will collapse and want to spend as many dollars as they can before it does. They can give the dollar a shove down (if needed) anytime they want to - I.e. when they think their long term saving EVERY YEAR with US & EU not able to economically compete for these items they need, will more than compensate for the ONE TME loss they take on the dollars still unspent in their reserves. There are other things they want to do, and are rapidly doing, first. Especially focus their economy more towards the domestic market and their exports to other than US and EU, which will be broke without loans from China.)

    The CCP learned from the USSR´s mistake - does not try to Centrally Plan the market place. They trust the "invisible hand" of Adam Smith, more than the US does! But occasionally that means the milk kills a few babies, etc. Sounds cruel - but so what - China has too many babies - needs to limit them one to a family with some exceptions (if your only son dies, you will not be fined for getting pregnant again.). But China did execute two men who intentionally put compound, they knew was toxic, into the milk to trick milk control testing (as it shows up in the testing machine as a protein in their watered down milk.)

    Probably much of China´s better system is due the leadership selection process. No popularity contests with TV controlled thoughtless sheep voters controlled by billions of dollars of slick ads paid for by “Super Pacs” and the rich buying access to the white house / congress etc. But top ranks of CCP come only after decades of great management at lower levels. For more detail see :http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2890696&postcount=7

    This results in interesting fact that every top member of the CCP was educated in hard sciences and engineering, except one who is a geologist. Not a lawyer in the bunch!

    In the US 100% of the top ranks of the administration are all lawyers and more than 90% of the Congress is. Before Tea Party put some non-lawyers in, it was approximately 95% lawyers in Congress. Most are mainly interested in projects that will get them re-elected. Fund a dam that will first generate power 17 years later like the world´s largest (Three Gorges Dam) – forget that – It is not even in my district! Only a very tiny fraction of US budget has first pay off deferred more than a decade. Some things like NIH and very basic research at universities do get taxpayer support but even then getting funds for “maybe a distant return” is hard, unless justified as training graduate students.

    SUMMARY: Yes there is a demonstrated better economic system but it lacks, at present, many liberties we think important.
    I am definitely not biased for continuation of the status quo.* It is leading to disaster as the middle class shrinks and their buying power will not support an efficient mass production system (at least when no one will lend to them for buying) – For many, most of their corporate profits already come for foreign sales and the fraction of the total profits earned by US sales is shrinking.
    My main thought is that to get ahead, you need to have a low personal discount rate. I.e. be willing to work hard do with little expenditures now for greater opportunities and options in the future. In my era, getting a great education was the best sure investment you could make. Not sure it is now. (Perhaps practice long hours every day until you can put a basketball thru the hoop 90% of the time from 3 point distances etc. is now, but that does little real good for the country compare to just being a good teacher.)

    *For more on why I´m anti-system, read at least the blue part of my comment in post below. Better yet read entire post for the four other things that badly need to change if US is to survivie as we know it now for our children::
    Full 5 points at: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2897524&postcount=85

    While loooking for the link telling more of Chinese leadership selection process, I found this link on how China will challenge the dollar when ready (see link in it about role of "gold backed RMB bonds.")
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2012
  9. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    Thank you, Billy T, for a very thorough reply to my questions. Perhaps interesting that my grandfather was a member of a group of freethinkers who recognized that the greatest challenge to the Western economy would come from China in the post war era.

    For my part, I have always believed in tangible assets and skill sets that can enable one to be able to provide for as many of one's basic needs as possible. Fiat currency only has the value we may assign to it and from what you have shared, that value is getting more questionable on a daily basis.

    You have provided much food for thought and I appreciate your thoughtful response.
     
  10. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    You are welcome. The pleasure was mine. I love to teach, explain, expond, etc. especially when I have something quite different to say from almost every one else, which is well documented by facts.
     
  11. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    I find it very interesting that people will apply a great deal of time and energy in the debate of the historically irreducible questions and the ponder of cosmology, philosophy and theology yet not apply that same discipline to their own basic needs.

    The old parable of the grasshopper and the ant is playing out yet again with the grasshopper enjoying the largesse of summer while the ant toils in preparation for the lean season looming.

    I have been reading your take on global economics since coming to this forum, though I don't comment often as my experience is related to personal and local scales of economics.

    I observe numerous things that should be reason for concern for many but I observe that our species seems more prone to 'group think' and 'living for the moment' than critical thinking and long term planning.

    I quite agree that leadership (at all levels of government) should be on demonstrated capability rather than a popularity contest.
     
  12. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    I came across the following article and I thought that it was a natural followup for my preceding post.

     
  13. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    The first I know of to warn of that was Napoleon: He said someting like: "China is a sleeping dragon - be careful not to wake her."

    Interestingly this is the year of the dragon - only about a week old now. Lots of time still for the dragon to show her power. I am almost sure the dragon will demand (and get) the RMB made part of the IMF´s SDR during this dragon year becuase the IMF has only about half the funds it says it needs to save the Euro.

    An RMB as part of the SDR will make the SDR much more popular with central banks as currently all parts of the SDR are declining in purchasing power, but the RMB is rising in buying power.

    BTW I just saw your 10 points of post 269. I am very much a follower of them. All but 2 & 8 were strongly shown in the summer I stoppped my Ph.D. research to integrate the restaurants of Baltimore after other leaders had failed in the two prior summers. I knew, as I have said in prior posts, I had the determination, the skills, the ruthlessness, the coordination* and planning ability to make great economic pain for the restaruants (on a good Sunday cost them more than $25,000 dollars in lost business). I was very pragmantic - no appeal to "justice", "morality" etc. just economic pain did the trick.

    As far as 2 & 8 are concerned, I do have a credit card but it is used only a few times during my annual vists to grand children, daughters, in July each year. I put enough down on house I bought to get lowest possible interest rate, and then paid off mortgage in about five years as it was the best safe investment possible at the time. I never had any school debts, as I was a "full needs" scholar as under grad at Cornell and worked both there and in grad school as teaching assistant and still even in grad school for some meals washing dishes. I have an iron stomach and can eat once for the whole day.

    Except for those five years and a purchase money morgage on 16 acres I bought along side of I-95 just inside Howard County , I have had no debts. I surveyed and sold off five home lots and then sold the remainder. Each lot sold for price greater than the mortgage. I granted a purchase money mortgage to one of the buyers some years later, and he is still paying $1700 per month with no problems for me - deposites directly into my APL Federal. Credit Union account.

    ----------
    * I have given details in other posts but just note here that I had to deliver (with cars of girls of Gaucher College mainly) the first wave of sit ins people to up to 25 restuarants at the same time. During the two prior failed summer efforts, the Restaurant Association had developed a "telephone allert fan out system" which got front doors locked in only a couple of minutes after the first sit in arrived at any restaurant.

    Furthermore the two whites who first went in, separately and sat at different tables as if strangers to each other and ordered about five minutes before the blacks ran in to join them, could never be sent back to that same resturant again - huge amout of record keeping, precision timing etc. but when I screwed up, they told me they had been to that resturant before.

    At Normandy, Ike had it easy - at least all of his troops had watches - few of mine did, only the whites with rare exceptions.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2012
  14. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    China can be either a very good economic partner, as it has been by lending America over 2 TRILLION dollars, saving America from borrowing more money from itself which is highly illegal. Working with another equally great power can be rewarding or it can be dangerous. It seems that American companies really are cozy with China by allowing China to do their manufacturing then sending the products back into America making even more profits and destroying the middle class workers of America.
     
  15. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    I'm sure they would, but the mortgage balances on such houses greatly exceed the market value. There are zero buyers at that price. To be clear: there are 10 buyers for every seller willing to sell near market price. Of course there are no buyers for those who want to sell for a big mark-up over market value - but those aren't really "sellers" in any meaningful sense. "Dreamers" would be a more accurate term.

    For every entity willing to sell a decent house at market value, there are many buyers willing to pay that much. This is because loans are cheap and prices are low. Normally, the market would equalize that by driving up the prices of houses - but buyers prefer to wait rather than bid higher, because they know the market is soft. So the situation of buyers outnumbering sellers persists, for the time being. If prices are seen to begin to recover, then buyers will not have such an incentive, and the market will "clear" in short order.

    I have no problem with counting them. It's just that such a seller would have had to have bought a long, long time ago, and so there aren't many of them to be found. And even if you aren't underwater, why sell now when prices are almost guaranteed to increase over the coming 5-10 years? There's only a handful of such people, who bought long enough ago to make a profit, but who need to sell right now rather than wait for more favorable conditions.

    I don't. I'm only counting people who want to transact near market value. There are a lot more buyers willing to buy at market value, then there are sellers willing to sell at market value. This is because buyers are tempted by low prices and cheap loans, while sellers are deterred by the low prices and so prefer to hold out for a seller's market, if they can afford to keep making payments.

    I don't. I'm counting people who would have payed as much, or a bit more than, the houses are selling for, but who don't get a chance because decent houses priced near market rate are selling in a matter of hours, literally. That's how you can tell that the buyers outnumber the sellers - competition between buyers for scarse sellers is really intense. It's just that it doesn't manifest as increased bidding on the price, due to the pathological conditions we are currently in.

    You know perfectly well that "buyers" means "people looking to buy a house for a market value" and likewise with "sellers."

    Exactly - and since housing prices are at a historical low, pretty much all of those "dreamers" on the buyer side are actively in the market, looking to pay what is now a fair market price. And conversely, for the exact same reason, a lot of the "sellers" are simply "dreamers." They wouldn't really consider selling for market price.

    There's nothing inaccurate about that. Nobody uses your oddball definitions of "seller" and "buyer" to mean "somebody who has already sold/bought a house." The word for somebody who has already bought a house, is "homeowner." The word for somebody who has already sold their house is "guy with a bunch of money and no house." "Buyer" and "seller" refer to people actively on the market, looking to buy/sell a house. This is all bog-standard usage, so I'm unsure why you're pursuing this inane semantic dodge.

    I admit that it's counter-intuitive at first glance, but I've already explained to you how this situation came about. You're talking out of your ass here, apparently out of some kind of defensiveness.
     
  16. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Quad consider many “Items X” exist with current owners and the various Item Xs have almost a continuous range of prices and qualities. Some of the current item X owners MUST sell, for a variety reasons (pay for mother´s operation, etc.) at what ever price the market will let them; but almost no one must buy at the current market price and most all do not do so if they expect, based the market trends, that the price of item Xs to continue dropping.

    This difference between “must sell regardless of price” and “would like to become owner at some what lower price” is what in fact drives the market price lower so the “must sell owner” can find a willing buyer by accepting a lower bid than he would like. Then, and only then, there is there both a buyer and seller for that transaction at a lower market price. Before they agree, there are only dreamers hoping to buy or sell.

    This steadily declining market price is exactly what a “Bear Market” for item X consists of. I am nearly sure you agree that in a “bear market” if Item X is a stock, it is common to say: “The sellers out number the buyers.” Or “It is a buyer´s market.”

    Surely you will also agree that residential real estate is in a strong “Bear Market” – Prices have been dropping for three or more years. So why, when item X is a house, do you want to say EXACTLY the OPPOSITE to when item X is a stock?

    I.e. why are you saying: “Buyers out number the sellers 10 to 1” in the residential real estate market?

    Do you have some magic “buyer / seller” discrimination detector you can pull out of your ass and wave over a person to tell if he is a buyer or seller?

    Don´t you need to do as every one else does – look at the market price a trend and when prices are steadily declining for an extended period, most say:

    “The sellers out number the buyers.” Not that: "The buyers out number the sellers 10 to 1.” (of item X).

    What justification do you have for standing the normal buyer / seller numerical relationship statement as indicated by the NON-SUBJECTIVE trend in the market place on its head when item X is a house?

    Is your buyer / seller discriminator out of your ass and waving around to give data exactly the opposite to the quantative, non-subjective, market place´s data? If not that, on what basis do you reverse the common MARKET TREND BASED statements TO PROCLAIM EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE?

    BTW, normally I don´t speak of pulling things out of an ass, but as you did first, I feel free to reply in kind.
     
  17. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    As we are in the midst of a discussion relating to housing and real estate in the current economy, perhaps there are some who would be interested in the housing market in the Yukon Territory?

    The following is fairly current, CBC News Posted: Nov 24, 2011

    There are plenty of people who would dearly love to own their own home, with mortgage rates quite low, but the economic uncertainty and the need for significant down payment before one can obtain a mortgage are barriers. That, and a lot of people do not have the income, even with two people working to float a mortgage of $400,000.00 and change.
     
  18. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    There is *nobody* that must sell. You can't pay for an operation - or anything else - by selling a house that is underwater. This is why most of the houses on the market are foreclosures or short sales - but note that the banks don't have to sell, either, and in fact hold significant quantities of foreclosed houses off the market to prevent the total collapse of their prices.

    That would be true if house buyers were operating purely as financial investors. But they are not. The fact that the overall average housing price might well decline further doesn't mean that the house you want to buy will be on the market at that point, or that a particular house on the market today will be a better deal tomorrow. Indeed, the lower the prices go, the fewer houses there will be on the market - so while you might get one for a lower price, it may be very difficult to find one that you really like. Many families are not willing to wait for years when they need a place with room for their new family in a good school district. If you can get a good deal today, it's not necessarily worth it to hold out for another year to try to get a slightly better deal. There's always a risk premium, even if you do expect a decline.

    That's how it works in your normal, non-bubble-recovery conditions, sure. But what drove the prices down in this case was the collapse of a speculative bubble, and what is putting houses onto the market is not that the owners need to sell, but that they get foreclosed upon. The bubble was inflated by putting people into houses they could not actually afford, so now prices are back to where they were before that occurred. There are plenty of people who can afford that, and would like to buy them, but nobody is willing to sell if they can possibly keep making the payments (because they're underwater). So it's only the small portion of the market that is falling into foreclosure that is going up for sale, and those houses tend to be pretty crap. You'll notice that I said "decent" houses in my post that you objected to.

    Yes, that is the typical way that such works. My point is exactly that the current market for houses is atypical. I understand that this is counterintuitive. That's why I've taken such pains to explain exactly what makes the current situation unique. I'd appreciate it if you'd deal with that, and not traffick in these generalities about how things would typically work in a normal situation. The current situation is not normal.

    I say this because my experience shows that although it is a "buyer's market" in the sense of prices being low and rates being favorable, there are almost no good houses for sale and the few that do go on the market receive intense competition from buyers. The overall price is being held down by the huge stock of foreclosures - which tend to be in shitty condition owing to their owners being unable to afford to maintain them for years prior to foreclosure, along with the disinterest of the banks in doing so. It is true that there are many more sellers than buyers of shitty foreclosure houses, and this impacts the overall market trend. That's why I said "decent" houses.

    I've already spent multiple posts explaining why this situation is atypical and works in a counterintuitive way. If you're just going to keep harping on generalities about how a typical market functions, then I have nothing else to say to you.

    I said this was for "decent houses." And I am speaking from direct experience, not waving my hands at generalities while sitting in another hemisphere.

    I do have a bullshit/crank detector that alerts me to when I'm dealing with an argumentative fool who loves the sound of his own voice and drastically overestimates his knowledge and mastery of the subject. It's going off right now, as is typical when it encounters your posts.

    A price trend is just a price trend. It is not always the case that a declining price trend indicates that sellers outnumber buyers. If buyers are not willing to bid up against one another, then they do not create upward pressure on prices even if they outnumber the sellers. And that's exactly what happens when the buyers expect prices to decline or remain flat for a long time. Buyers are typically only willing to bid up if they think that the price will increase even more than that if they wait, or if they absolutely have to buy the thing right now for some other reason.

    Asked and answered. You are being argumentative and obtuse, and more than a little bit disrespectful. If you don't want to deal with what I've told you already well, fine. But that also means you don't get to go around demanding I give you answers that you've already ignored.

    I haven't seen you provide any actual market data on the number of buyers and sellers on the market. You've simply waved your hands at a general tendency and demanded that it must hold true in all situations, everywhere and at all times.

    Now how about you stop SHOUTING at me and cease directing vulgar insults at me? You're an embarassment as a moderator.

    You can take your childish pretense of moral superiority and shove it up your ass. If we're lucky, perhaps it will impede the flow of sohpomoric blather and presumption of authority that flows so ceaselessly from such.
     
  19. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    Surely two gentlemen of knowledge can resolve their communication difficulties on the topic of economics without invoking terms best used in biology?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Time to retire this day.

    I'll check back on the morrow.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2012
  20. Workaholic Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    135
    Another interesting article from Paul Craig Roberts. He often likes to reference John Williams at shadowstats.com.

    Part of the article:
    Full article is at:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/01/economic-101/

    Anyone have an opinion on this article? Is it bullsh*t or truth? Somewhere in between?
     
  21. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    A very interesting article, Workaholic.

    I reside in Canada yet I keep close watch on the U.S. economy because of the business affiliation between our nations. We have not yet been as greatly affected by the present economic downturn, in part due to quite different banking and mortgaging practices, but that may only be delaying impacts yet to come.

    I observe many businesses closing or restructuring in our small northern city of Whitehorse, Yukon, and jobs are considerably fewer than in years past, although there still is work to be had.

    On approved credit, one can buy many brands of vehicle with NO DOWN PAYMENT and 0% FINANCING OVER 6 YEARS. I took advantage of this previously unheard of option when my car was taken out by a hit and run drunk driver in July 2011.

    If all the major players are offering this kind of incentive to move their inventory, then it does rather make the following comments from the article seem very plausible.

     
  22. The Esotericist Getting the message to Garcia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,119
    I suspect there may not be an election. Look for martial law before the next election. Currently, the Federal Government has taken Mexico's side in a court case against Arizona. Likewise, there has been a complete media blackout in a case in Georgia that seeks to open up this whole nutty Obama eligibility for the presidency thing again.

    No matter where one stands on it, there has been no doubt that the files that the administration released on-line to put all doubts to rest were found suspect by graphics experts right before the Osama bin Laden capture distracted the nation. Now, there is a new challenge to those documents. Not just the documents, the the Social Security number as well, along with the suspiciously scant amount of records from his high school and college days. No matter where one stands on this issue, shouting it down only seems to irritate those who want transparency. (And not the shoddy sloppy kind in a computer graphics program.)

    http://www.drudge.com/news/152954/media-blackout-obama-georgia-ballot

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/media_blackout_in_obama_georgia_ballot_eligibility_case.html#ixzz1kwYHBDmC

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Media Blackout in Obama Georgia Ballot Eligibility Case


    Despite the spelling and grammar mistakes on this blog, I found the summary of arguments here fascinating. Not that it matters. The point really, is that power does as power wants to. If the patriots are not willing to arrest the globalists, and haven't been willing to before now in the face of obvious treasonous behavior against the constitution, why will they later?

    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/01/26/court-hearing-on-obama-eligibility-completed-now-what/
    UPDATE: Judge to Rule AGAINST Obama Eligibility in Georgia? Developing…

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    For those who have long contested the validity of Barack Obama’s eligibility to run for President of the United States, the legal hearing in Georgia earlier today was the first true and legitimate forum upon which to prove that case. The question remains though – now what?

    So why would the president be blatantly ignoring these sovereign states legal codes? Why would he be flouting the law as such? With all these problem, both in the market, and at home, why does it matter? Well, I have long that, and the recent passage of the NDAA, and the attempted passage of the SOPA and PIPA have even more made me believe that the elections may be cancelled.

    Of course, they said that with Bush II as well. I suppose some event would probably have to transpire to cause this. It is the postings in this thread that have made me remember this. And a series of things that seem to be coalescing all at once this year. The tensions in the middle east, the economy in Europe tanking, we'll see what the occupy movements are doing toward that end of summer, and what how the military is using this new NDAA power. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if some October surprise was a planned event to give the administration an excuse to declare martial law.

    http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/01/could-a-contempt-of-court-in-georgia-lead-to-an-obama-impeachment/
    Could A Contempt of Court in Georgia Lead to an Obama Impeachment?

    This video is from a VERY astute insider reporting on things I just don't understand very well. lol

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    What I do understand is covert interest groups. He's on the inside and he's talking. His names Jim Sinclair. Billy T would probably be able to break down this video (recording) better than I, but what it serves to illustrate, is how we can all do well to do our own research rather than consume what the MSM feeds us.
    http://www.gata.org/node/2424

    Here's the broadcast, a day old or so. . .
    Breaking News Ellis Martin Report with Jim Sinclair
     
  23. The Esotericist Getting the message to Garcia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,119
    From that sound of that recording? I wouldn't be surprised if it started going before summers end. QE3 is in the offing.

    http://thegldnrule.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/2012-the-fall-of-the-us-dollar-hegemony/
     

Share This Page