![]() | The Problem with Making Predictions - Oil or Climate | The Oil Drum | The Case for Higher Gas Taxes (and Lower Income Taxes) | ![]() |
216 comments on DrumBeat: December 15, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
216 comments on DrumBeat: December 15, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“So one may almost say that the theory of universal suffrage assumes that the Average Citizen is an active, instructed, intelligent ruler of his country. The facts contradict this assumption.”
—James Bryce (1909, 35)
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
As a follow-up to the conversation Saturday about whether deflation is the only outcome to the current financial situation, here“s an article from Bloomberg that touches on the subject:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=azuNjokrEk88&refer=home
As you can see, the "experts" are all over the map on this one. However, with the Fed having flooding the markets with $8.5 trillion of new $$$$, and still counting, I will reiterate that the prognostication that deflation is the only possible outcome is without merit.
Hi Downsouth,
This link should explain what's happening so far. http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/12/humpty-dumpty-on-infl... (Mish doesn't get peak oil but is my favourite finance blogger)
Basically credit is being destroyed at light speed. Meredith Whitney recently mentioned that 2 trillion dollars worth of credit card lines are going to be pulled next year by the banks. That means that 50-100 trillion dollars is disappearing from the financial system in one swoop!
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogdec08/leverage12-08.html (psst he understands peak oil as well, predicts 1000 dollar oil in a few years!)
And that's just one section of the economy.The leverage that HELOC's could afford, rising home prices allowed people to invest 3,000 dollars and make returns of 30,000!
Plus if the government did decide to monetize the debt, they would be slaughtered by bond holders with rising interest rate. Think how bad this depression would be with rising prices and interest rates at 18% or more?
EDIT: Not to mention all the other leveraged plays the financial wizards came up with. There's 1200 trillion dollars worth of derivatives out there, there's even things like compound derivates, leverage on leverage! The crazy CDS casino of which AIG is the blackhole etc etc etc. It just keeps on going. So that there's a lot of bad debt out there would be an understatement. This was the biggest bubble in the history of mankind and we haven't even seen the full effects of it yet.
I think credit cards are going to be a big deal.
On Thursday, new regulations on credit card companies are likely to be adopted. They will make it harder to raise interest rates, ban double-cycle billing, and otherwise close down the cash spigot card issuers are dependent on. The credit card companies have long resisted regulation, but they've given up fighting it, because of the current financial chaos, and because of the Democratic takeover coming next month. They know if they don't accept these new rules, worse could be inflicted by Congress.
I'm in favor of these changes, but they will cause some short-term pain. Credit limits are likely to be lowered, and interest rates raised. With more and more people dependent on credit for every day expenses, this could really hurt.
From, http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/12/banks-supposedly-will-cut-consume...
You have to scroll downa bit, but this a letter received by Yves Smith (the host blogger) from an AMEX customer. And this is obviously from someone whose got a good job and spends a lot of money.
The way to look at this is, how many people are being affected by this? How much combined purchasing power does this remove from the global economy? It affects each and every sector. If Joe Average's credit is curtailed or stopped his purchasing ability to buy cars, computers, big screen tv's etc falls through the floor. That in turn affects the global economy, export growth starts slumping in China, Japan, Korea, Germany etc. Which makes the global economy worse and thus banks will curtail more credit.
In short a vicious self reinforcing cycle. What makes this credit burst so bad is that the global economy is uttery dependent on credit, people hardly buy things with cash and most global players are to the leveraged to the hilt.
What is most frightening is what happens when natural gas companies, oil companies and alternative energy companies are forced to work from cash flows, no access to credit at all? I read that Rockman said his company has been forced to cut their budget from 1.4 bn to 700 million. That's half! And the worst lies ahead. Peak credit will only accelerate the downslope of peak oil.
The consumer simply won't be able to afford much oil and the leveraged producers simply won't be able to survive. It is a possibility but this crisis is getting exponentially worse, but could oil production plummet from 75mn to 60mn or less in one year due to lack of credit?
It's hugely deflationary and the potential is devestating. :-(
Strange that they would do that to someone who has been such a good customer.
Maybe he works in the financial industry or something.
That's the weirdest thing: they're cutting back people's credit based not on their payment history, but on what industry they work in, where they live, and what stores they shop at.
Not to sound contrite, but then they pay in cash.
This is not a bad thing, folks... Actually, this is VERY good in the long run. Here's why:
Let's say I go out and buy $1000 in Christmas gifts and put it on a credit card, and it has 20% interest that I pay off the rest of the year. Ignoring compound interest, I ultimately end up paying $1200 for the Christmas gifts. In other words, another $200 of income is taken from me and given to the credit card company.
If, on the other hand I pay cash for the gifts for $1000, I will not have to pay $200 in interest. I can use that extra $200 for other consumption or (heaven forbid) SAVING.
This is very good news. This gives people a chance to get off the credit card hell that they put themselves in. The alternative to credit cards are check cards... I use one. I never have to worry about a credit card bill... EVER. (I do have a credit card for emergencies, with a $500 limit, but that's always paid off). I am financially much better off not having to loan out my money from a credit card company.
I understand interest. I said I was in favor of more limitations on credit.
However, it seems odd from the credit card issuer's POV. They make money off each transaction, whether you run a balance or not, so it seems strange they would cut off one of their best customers that way.
I don't know if that is so strange Leanan.
I think you explained the reasoning quite clearly one post up - the credit card companies are cutting credit lines based on "the industry the card holder works in, where they shop, what they buy...etc"
Maybe the CC companies are screening the population of card (bag)holders based on their sources of income and buying habits for a good reason.
That reason being, source of income and buying habits likely determine which card(bag) holders will become extinct next.
Makes perfect sense.
If your models predict that 50% of the finance or insurance positions in city X are going tits up... you withdraw exposure to those card holders.
If you know the card holder shops at Department Store Z and your latest D&B suggests that Z is going down the tubes, you withdraw exposure. You don't want your receivables (transaction fees) tied up in court.
Multi-variate segmentation is very powerful.
"50% of the finance or insurance positions in city X are going tits up... you withdraw exposure to those card holders"
Yup. Or if the card holder is in the auto industry, shipping industry... lots of occupations will be losing creditworthyness.
Part of the new regulations that just went into effect include more data sharing between various cc companies - and who knows what else. Perhaps this newly married customer who charges $90k per year is a wee bit too risky for some other reason.
cfm in Gray, ME
Geckolizard, I agree that this would be wise. The problem is going to be the way it happens. For example, credit card companies will often lower limits to existing balances - that means a single charge will put people over limit, and send their interest rates up to 30% on their existing balances - which they won't be able to pay. This is likely to drive people into bankruptcy, into foreclosure.
The other issue is that when people are laid off, lose insurance, etc.., they usually do run up their credit cards - it isn't a good thing, but it does serve to mitigate some of the suffering - they can hang on for some months, they are still eating, they can still keep their interview clothes clean and their kids warm. Take away credit lines, and that fallback position is completely gone - period.
Add to that that those who lose them are likely to experience credit quality declines - which as more and more people move out of owned homes and into rental markets, mean that it gets harder to find an apartment. No credit means travel is harder - those looking for jobs in other areas end up sleeping in their cars, rather than a motel. And, all industries that rely on credit take the hit - instead of gradually declining sales, we see a sudden, full stop.
Don't get me wrong - I agree with you we need less credit, and wiser use of what we have. I don't carry a balance. But the truth is that some people do need large credit balances - small business owners, for example, or someone trying (if anyone still is) to build a house. This is going to really be another blow to the economy - just as we should be spending less, but the problem is that all of us spending less at once is an issue.
Sharon
Very interesting counterpoint. Thanks!
FWIW...the new regulations wouldn't let them raise interest rates on existing balances, unless they were more than 30 days late.
And therein lies the answer to why the banks and credit card Capones cut credit to ''good'' customers. They simply can no longer afford to have so many people have so much outstanding credit, even if they pay it back at the end of the month. The numbers get too large. It's not just that one guy, there's millions of people like him. If 10 million people at one given company have $7000 outstanding basically continously, the company has to find financing and insurance for $70 billion at any given time, all the time. They simply don't have the collateral, and they can't take (re: pay for) the risk.
This is, among other things, what the term "credit crunch" means. It's not about the client paying back or not, though the risk factor increases hugely, and so does the insurance, whatever form it may take. It now comes down to the cold hard numbers in the morning: what do you have, what are you owed, and what are the chances you'll get that back?
Come January, this will be true for business throughout the economy, and the consequences will be disastrous. Everything runs on credit, nobody owns enough to do without. This has always been a great system for banks until now, they have worked hard to establish it. Imagine, every penny spent carries an interest rate owed to you, including all the money the government issues.
The new regulations will make credit availability worse, until credit is there only for who doesn't need it, and of course that has already been discounted in all sorts of rates. I say good riddance, because although people are used to credit, making loan shark operations an essential part of your economy is a process that cannot possibly end well. That said, expect the largest credit card companies to apply for bank holding company status when push come to shove. I think Amex already has?!
The end of credit will be a hard lesson, though. Think Clint Eastwood. Pay first, talk later. Lines of credit, letters of credit, they are disappearing so fast it's scary, and they are the sole lubricant of our economies.
I saw a scary story on the BBC. Apparently the Commora (Italian Mafia) credit business is doing great. When people can't get credit from legitimate sources, they turn to those who aren't so picky. And the mob isn't so concerned about the credit risk, they have effective ways of preventing defaults.
And probably lower interest rates, too.
And fashionable Art-Deco redesigned kneecaps too.
Credit card interest rates are obscene. Anyone who actually does not pay off their cards every month is not very financially smart.
On the other hand, I have one card that rebates 3% on all gas, dining out, office suppy stores and hardware stores. I have another that rebates 2% on everything else. Well, that is a no brainer as long as you pay off the balance every month.
What if you lose your job and your credit at the same time like a lot of other people?
How would you buy food with no credit? Pay medical bills, car expenses, utilities.
Credit is a buffer, and without it, a lot of people will become homeless.
Even stocks, homes and savings are losing value.....
We may be living in tent cities soon!
I have money saved away. I'd have to be unemployed for about 3 years before I run out. So, I'm golden... But, I am unlike the 90+% of the population... Yeah, too many people have lived hand-to-mouth for too long (even going so far as to leverage themselves to the moon) and this is causing a lot of issues...
When I was much younger, but still not young, I remember that after I first got my job at a very big oil co, I applied for a credit card. No! Had to be there a year. Couldn't get a mortgage, had to change banks -- no credit history. By the time my kids were teenagers, and didn't have a pot to pee in, except mine, they were getting credit card offers every week.
I go thru the roof when every 5 years or so something slips up and a payment is late and I have to pay a penalty. I hate credit cards and don't use them for credit -- I use them simply as a way of not carrying around a lot of cash. And when I first got one, it was because you needed it to rent a car. I didn't have one then.
Credit cards don't solve the problem of losing jobs. They make it worse, even though one resorts to them if there's no choice.
The solution to losing jobs is, individually, savings, and societally to guarantee a job to everyone willing to work. What can't and shouldn't be guaranteed is high standard of living -- but the basics should be. The idea that the billionaires have worked for their money is becoming laughable. There needs to be steep progressive taxation, estates too, so that there is a net for people. Millions of people don't hit the bread lines because there's a sudden epidemic of laziness. The bailout money is totally misdirected.
I share your aversion with credit cards and have never had one in 40 years of
working. Why not get a number of debit cards to avoid carrying around cash?
You only spend what you have saved and there are no service fees, at least here in
Asia.
Hm, I had to think about why I (we, my wife and I) don't use our debit card. I keep a minimal amount in my bank (debit card), and the rest someplace else. By using a credit card, we don't worry about overdrawing, and just make sure to pay on time, and add more to the account if needed. In other words, we do utilize the few weeks of free credit, free as long as we don't slip up.
I think they are doing it based on "Models", and we know how well those work?...
I also believe that social mood plays a prevalent role in how we feel and behave.
This 31 page PDF document was written in Dec 2007. Explains the kondratieff long cycle. Predicts the current fiasco pretty well. We are in the midst of a severe deflationary winter. These cycles tend to persist for some time - A generation or more from historical records and observances.
http://www.thelongwaveanalyst.ca/pdf/07_12_04_News.pdf
It's probably based on a change in his payment pattern/average payment amount.
I've had no change in my American Express credit line, and I've had no changes in my trading credit lines or personal credit lines.
Also, those "deflationary winters" and similar cycles don't hold up to back tests.
All that needs to happen to stop deflation in the prices of goods and services is for the rest of OPEC to follow through on the cuts Saudi Arabia has already announced.
If you have a job that requires a lot of travel, and I suspect that is why he charged so much on his amex card, a $3200 limit could easily be reached early in the month. Think of how many people this could affect in the world. It would require using several credit cards just to get through the month.
I travel a fair amount overseas, anything less than a 10k limit is useless since some of my trips may last a month. Try getting a reasonably safe hotel in Tel Aviv for less than $350 a night. It adds up pretty quick. I refuse to do business with AMex due to previous negative experience and use my personal Mastercard instead of a corporate card.
USAA for us vets charges 6% interest currently.
AMEX is a real PITA to their merchants too. I know!
They cannot go bankrupt fast enough for me.
Pete
I think they may simply be applying tried and trusted actuarial principles, which are based on probabilities. Payment history is of course one important determinant, but clearly it is not the only one. Debtors may have identical payment histories but that does not mean that they have the same probability of default. All variables count -- where you live, your marital status, your ethnicity -- and possibly whether your dog is a Yorkshire Terrier or a Rotweiler!
Amex credit is based on RECENT amount spent. if you spent 5k a month 2 years ago but recently was only 100$ per month, they are going to limit your purchases. And vice versa.
I wonder if AmEx thinks of this person as a good customer. This person runs up a high balance and then pays it off every month. This leaves Amex with the need to get $7,500 (or whatever) a month to lend to a customer from whom they collect only an annual fee (what, $60-$100?) and never collect any interest. They probably think of this as a lousy customer, not a good one. They use credit cards merely as transaction instruments, not for access to credit. I'm not doing the calculation, but wouldn't a person who has a $3,500 credit limit, maxes it out, and pays the minimum every month be a much better customer from a profit perspective? Also, the total exposure is only $3,500 when that customer goes under, whereas someone with a $50,000 limit causes that much exposure when they go under.
I'm imagining a huge return to the cash economy. People realize it's easier to budget when you see bills and coins slipping through your fingers. There's only a month difference between the consumer who banks the $7,500 and pays cash all the following month and the guy who spends $7,500 using a credit card and pays it at the end of the month in full.
Of course, that transition month will be a real pain.
Very good points, that's why people who pay off their credit bills every month are known in the industry as deadbeats. The profit comes from the clients who don't and can't pay. Al Capone built an empire on the principle.
My guess is that this American Express customer is using one of their "cash back" cards. Their no annual feel Blue Cash card pays back up to 5% on some purchases. Over $75k this can add up to a lot vs. the useless junk the "points" get you on their other cards.
Years ago I dumped my AMEX green card for their Blue Cash card because I got cash instead of other incentives, and no annual fee. Best of my knowledge the traditional AMEX (green, gold, platinum, black) still have no preset spending limit - but must be paid in full each month.
So in this scenario I bet the decision to cut this guys spending limit was purely financial.
WHAT CREDIT CRISIS?
Overall lending by US banks is at a record high and has increased during the credit crisis.
Interbank lending is at record highs and has increased during the credit crisis.
Consumer credit is at record highs and has increased during the credit crisis.
Commercial paper markets are operating within their historical norms.
Lending by banks to businesses is at record highs and has been growing rapidly.
Municipal bond markets are operating within their historical norms.
Deposits at banks have shown a substantial increase since the start of the credit crisis
http://www.celent.com/PressReleases/20081210/WhatCreditCrisis.asp
HELPP!! Ilargi, come to our rescue!
Is this a parallel universe, or what? http://www.celent.com/PressReleases/20081210/WhatCreditCrisis.asp
Nothing parallel. Of course lending is up, nobody owns anything anymore. To wit, the graphs straight from the St.Louis Fed that show Borrowed Reserves -red line- (they go through the roof since about February(?!)), and the Non Borrowed ones -blue line-, that fall through the floor of the basement. This one is Oct. 11.
These are the numbers that depict what banks have outstanding at the Federal Reserve. It's all borrowed!!!
click to enlarge
What Celent didn't consider, http://seekingalpha.com/article/110447-what-celent-didn-t-consider
The article goes on
The cost of credit is well above normal, look at the TED spread, Junk Bonds, Commercial Paper markets that can't function without FED intervention, A2P2 spreads are at records(This is the spread between high and low quality 30 day nonfinancial commercial paper). Big companies also tapped all their credit lines and parked the cash into bank accounts in case their lines are shut off.
3 month Treasury yields are close to zero, most of the TARP money ended up back with the FED.
I would also point out that celent is simply trying to sell a report and news that says everything is fine, move along, sells.
Great work VK - I don't know how you have the time. I certainly hope you are not TOO unemployed. I would offer a nice bowl of soup but it would probably be cold by the time it got there.
Standing offer of free bowl to any TODERS
Cheers!
I have a lot of time at present as I just finished my university degree at the end of last month. So on a break of sorts. I love reading and learning and TOD is a great place to read and learn along with the blogosphere :-) Happy to interact, debate and learn.
Has anyone thought of doing away with credit cards? Those of us older than boomers know full well that people can actually live without credit cards. If you want to keep the convienience, only issue debit cards, no credit. You have to have the money in the bank before you can spend it ... my, what a novel idea.
We use credit card on internet purchases because of the liability limits but for almost everything else I use a debit card.
We are certainly not rich by any stretch but we are thrifty. Could the rest of the people do the same? Of course, but most would cry a lot during the transition.
I refuse to use a debit card. It simply does not provide the protection a credit card does. If a credit card is stolen and used fraudently, it's the bank's money that's lost. If a debit card is stolen, it's your own money that's lost.
Sure, they might give it back to you eventually...but your bank account could be frozen for weeks or months while they figure it out.
With a credit card, you're simply issued a new account, and the old one is no longer your problem.
And don't pay at the pump with a debit card.
You don't travel as part of your job do you? See above. If I didn't travel, I would still want a credit card for Internet purchases. I don't want some hacker stealing the mortgage or grocery money because these things take time to sort out. I also refuse to give anyone access to my bank account like health clubs, but some require it or a credit card. They are a very useful buffer between what you can live without and what you can't.
"Has anyone thought of doing away with credit cards?"
Yes. I know a number of families that did this voluntarily. And you are right, there was "cry(ing) a lot during the transition."
And I would not be surprised to see virtually everyone doing without credit cards within a few years - inspite of their advantages - whether they like it or not. And like you say, there will be a lot of crying.
Yes. I got rid of mine. The only reason I got a CC in the first place was because one was required for taking a vehicle into Mexico. It was handy for ordering online, I discovered, and so long as I paid off the monthly balance it didn't cost anything to use it. For many years I paid off the balance at the end of each month. But then I financed a trip to Brasil with my CC, and used it to pay for some unexpected auto repairs soon after I returned, and found myself forced to carry a balance for awhile. It really burned my ass to pay interest, so when I paid off the balance, I destroyed the card. I don't miss it. Neither do I like the idea of there being an electronic trail of my purchases and whereabouts. "Neither a borrower nor a lender be" is very sound advice.
Fine, everybody seems to understand, that the world is about to enter a deflationary deapth spiral. The world economy including CHINA is going to implode. Fine. There will be revolutions all over the world, the US will fall apart, the end of the world as we know it etc. etc...
I assume (hope), that the so called ELITE is aware of that coming catastrophe. WHERE the f*** are the worlds largest centralbankers, who have spent years in learning to avoid the desaster of the 1930's? Why aren't they able, for example, to declare tomorrow: We, the FED, the ECB and the Japanese central bank have decided to bypass (print) a total of 90 Trillion $ of money, better even 200 Trillion $ or Euros or whatsoever.
Why are they discussing about a 10 Bio. or 12 Bio. rescue package for the auto industry? We are talking about DEFLATION! Just let the FED print this money. There is no need to take money from the taxpayer.
Why is the FED privately owned? This FED needs to be nationalized!
Euro,
Ever considered they don't want to?
Besides that, printing $90 trillion would be the surest way to collapse the entire enchilada.
Yes, now it's clear to me. They don't want to flood the earth with money. They just want to wait until a average house is worth 1 US$. Then they are going to buy it.
I made a fortune going short so far this year. But since November, people like Jim Rogers and Marc Faber cautioned to being short. So I went long. And I lost so far 70% of what I earned being short. Each time I go short I win money, and each time I go long I loose money.
No, they've spent years claiming this. Consider that they may have engineered the Great Depression.
Just like every general knows all about how to fight the last war.
Nationalizing the federal reserve is only part of the solution. Right now the government is paying the Federal Reserve (Fed) to create and maintian our financial system. Furthermore, the gov't (read taxpayers) are paying through the nose for this service. It's not that complicated. The gov't could print it's own money and be done with the Fed. The problem lies with the realization that you need money to bring about any meaningful governmental change. The ones who control the money are vested in keeping the central banking model. After nationalization, we have to move away from compound interest. That is what is driving the growth imperative. It's possible to create a money system that will remain healthy as it expands AND contracts.
Despite having my MBA from Penn State, I've learned more about money and banking from reading Ellen Brown's "Web of Debt." It was surely an eye opener. Our graduate level business schools aren't teaching the reality of the central banking system. Many of you have become aware that the Fed is a private consortium of banks. Kudos to you guys for figuring that out. For the longest time I thought the Fed was part of the government...one in the same...What a sham.
Until we can take control and power away from the central banking model, we'll never see any meaningful lasting change. One startling fact that I learned from reading "Web of Debt" is that there have been attempts to change the central banking system. Ellen Brown points out that every American President that has been asassinated has had one thing in common...They've all wanted to move away from the central banking model. Go try to find that in a High School History book.
Any politician who makes it to office is bought and paid for. They preach the required sermons or they get their funding cut. The MSM is also bought and paid for. This is a useful tool for the powers that be to make a fool of any politician who speaks out against central banking. Ron Paul comes to mind.
Check out Ellen Brown's website: www.webofdebt.com
She's been staying current by writing articles that are published on this site. She basically takes the principles from her book and talks about current events in those terms.
Take care.
TS
In Britain we nationalised the central bank in 1948 and it just enabled politicians to cause inflation. That's why in 1997 it was given operational independence. Also 3 of the 4 American presidents assassinated served before the US central bank even existed.
RE the asassinations of presidents: They all wanted to switch the financial system away from debt based, central banking models with compound interest. The Federal Reserve is just a central bank which implements this system. It's the system that these presidents opposed, not specifically the federal reserve.
TS
you should check out http://emsnews.wordpress.com/ for keen financial analysis.
Would you rather own gold at this juncture or 30 year u.s. Treasury bonds? I happen to find the endless inflation/deflation exercise tedious, but this question seems apt from an individual financial standpoint.