Time for the Tea Party to put forward Ron Paul as Speaker of the House.

You do not need to be a sitting Congressman to be elected Speaker.

Paul would balance the budget by cutting spending by $1 trillion in fiscal year 2014 and not increase the debt ceiling or taxes.

The Republican Party would stand for something.

Sure beats John Boehner, read my lips, no new taxes. Really?

F*ck the Fiscal Cliff…

NO COMPROMISE on Fiscal Cliff!!!!

Ron Paul: “My Proposal is Cut $1 Trillion First Year & Balance Budget in 3″

Ron Paul: Bring the Troops Home & Balance the Budget

Ron Paul Plan to Balance Budget and End Government Overspending

Reality Check: Ron Paul’s Budget Plan

Ron Paul vs Paul Ryan’s Budget Cuts

Ron Paul: Zero Chance for Big Bargain on Fiscal Cliff.

Mark Levin: Get the Hell Off the Stage Boehner, You’re a SCREW UP!

MICHAEL SAVAGE – WE NEED A NATIONALIST PARTY NOW! – 12/26/12

Michael Savage: Is The Tea Party Relevant Anymore?

Michael Savage on Boehner, RNC “THROW EM’ OUT!” 8/28/2012

Defeat John Boehner

GOP, Boehner Loses Control Of The TeaParty Monster

Congressman Justin Amash Kicked Off The House Budget Committee By Speaker

Speaker of the House John Boehner Booed By Ron Paul Supporters Over Rule Change

1988: When Bush Said Read My Lips

Background Articles and Videos

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

$16 Trillion U.S. DEBT – A Visual Perspective

What Are the Dangers of Too Much Debt?

Does Government Have a Revenue or Spending Problem?

Funding Government by the Minute

Will Higher Tax Rates Balance the Budget?

Will Taxing the Rich Fix the Deficit?

What Can We Cut to Balance the Budget

Does Stimulus Spending Work?

The table below summarizes the failed 10 year record of both political parties in controlling government spending that have produced massive fiscal-year deficits and an ever increasing national debt.

Neither the Democratic Party led by President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi nor the Republican Party led by House Speaker Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, are capable of balancing the budget of the U.S. government.

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE STAR - TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS) ACCOUNTING DATE: 11/12 PERIOD RECEIPTS OUTLAYS DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-) + ____________________________________________________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ PRIOR YEAR OCTOBER 163,072 261,539 98,466 NOVEMBER 152,402 289,704 137,302 DECEMBER 239,963 325,930 85,967 JANUARY 234,319 261,726 27,407 FEBRUARY 103,413 335,090 231,677 MARCH 171,215 369,372 198,157 APRIL 318,807 259,690 -59,117 MAY 180,713 305,348 124,636 JUNE 260,177 319,919 59,741 JULY 184,585 254,190 69,604 AUGUST 178,860 369,393 190,533 SEPTEMBER 261,566 186,386 -75,180 YEAR-TO-DATE 2,449,093 3,538,286 1,089,193 CURRENT YEAR OCTOBER 184,316 304,311 119,995 NOVEMBER 161,730 333,841 172,112 YEAR-TO-DATE 346,045 638,152 292,107 - - - - - - - - 0REPORT ID: STM0P081 USER ID : DATE: 2012-12-10 TIME: 18.47.19 PAGE http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts1112.txt

Ron Paul- Discussing The Fiscal Cliff- John Stossel Show

Woodward: Obama Would Own Recession From Going Over Fiscal Cliff

Peter Schiff: Fed Will Keep Printing Money Until Economy Collapses

Marc Farber: The problem with President Obama & Recession 2013!

CNBC Global Recession Is Coming – Marc Faber

Will Taxing the Rich Deepen the Recession? – The “Fiscal Cliff” is a Scam

Fiscal Cliff An Artificial Crisis

Show News: Hume Boehner has a weak hand in fiscal cliff talks

Peter Schiff: Ben Bernanke throws the dollar over the Currency Cliff

Press Conference with FOMC Chairman Ben S. Bernanke

Federal Reserve Balance Sheet Illustrated

Fed Ties Interest Rates to Unemployment Rate

Fed links interest and unemployment rates 

Ben Bernanke throws the dollar over the Currency Cliff

CNBC Marc Faber ‘Reduce Government by Fifty Percent Minimum’

Jim Rickards: the Fed is Racing to Create Inflation Before the US Economy Implodes

Stephanie Kelton on Modern Monetary Theory’s Goals for Full Employment and

Competitive Currency Devaluation 

The GOLD standard, the DOLLAR standard & a New GLOBAL CURRENCY Order

The Truth about Gas Prices And Why It Is Like It Is! Shocking Truth Revealed

Peter Schiff on RT America – Financial Crisis

Jim Rickards Discusses **$4,000** Gold on CNBC

Fed Will Keep Printing Until The Dollar Collapses~ Jim Rickards

Jim Rogers – Fiat Currency aka Fake Money aka Worthless

Bernanke: We Cannot Offset Full Impact of Cliff

The Exit Strategy

Quantitative Easing Explained

Overdose: The Next Financial Crisis

Background Articles and Videos

Glenn Beck – Devaluing The Dollar

The Fed and the Power Elite | Murray N. Rothbard

01 – The Economic Crisis (The Fall of America and the Western World) 

05 – The Power Elite Pt.1, with Alex Jones (The Fall of America and the Western

06 – The Power Elite Pt.2, with David Icke (The Fall of America and the Western

Federal Reserve Launches QE4!

Bernanke Will Flood U.S. With Dollars In QE4. Now, He Needs Uncle Sam’s Help

Abram Brown, Forbes Staff

“…Consider the millions of pounds of paper that the Federal Reserve will need to afford its easy monetary policy, which today further earned its latest epithet: quantitative easing infinity. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke pledged to buy $85 billion a month in Treasurys and mortgage-backed securities starting in Jan., and will continue the program until unemployment falls to 6.5%.

Call it QE3.5 or QE4 or whatever. It’s all the same thing: a concerted effort to heal the economy and add some life to this lackluster recovery.  Bernanke and the other central bank policymakers on the Federal Open Markets Committee will keep the printing press rolling for years to come. The Fed estimates that the jobless rate won’t hit the new benchmark for 2.5 years. Other economists expect the country will fall to that level before then, but even optimistic forecasts say it will likely take two years.

Bernanke can do little more to accomplish his goals. “Today’s moves indicate that the accommodation switch has been turned on, and the data have to tell the Fed when to stop,” says Barclays economist Michael Gapen. “There is little left for the Fed to do at this point, in terms of altering its policy. While these is ongoing uncertainty about the stance of fiscal policy, the FOMC has gone to great lengths in a short time to alter its policy framework completely.” Indeed, easing has already lowered interest rates to rock-bottom; the 10-Year T-bill yields a miniscule 1.81% (not far from the record lows, near 1.4%, that we saw this year). Despite this, great mounds—more than $500 billion by some estimates—of investable and spendable dollars sit unused, unproductive.

This is not to say that a fist-full-of-dollars monetary policy can’t buoy the markets, at least a small amount. Stocks rallied this afternoon, following the Fed’s announcement. The Dow Jones industrial average climbed 0.6% to 13,322.74. The S&P 500 gained 0.4%. And the Nasdaq composite went up 0.1%.

Consumer staples stocks performed the best. Ford added 0.4%. Luluemon Athletic increased 1.3%.

Financials also led the market higher. Wells Fargo rose 1.2%. Citigroup gained 1.6%, as Bank of America ticked up 0.8%.

Now, Bernanke needs cooperation from elsewhere in Washington, D.C. Monetary policy must run parallel to fiscal policy for the economy to truly pick up. Brinkmanship over the fiscal cliff—and whether any more fiscal stimuli will come—damages both business and consumer spending. Without that, the economy will remain stuck in neutral. Spending is the key economic driver in the United States, accounting for roughly 70% of all growth. No one can spend until firmly establishing the size of future paychecks.

There’s a problem with Bernanke’s ultra-accommodating posture, though. (More than one, of course, depending on where you land in Keynesian debates.) It might very well be encouraging the game of chicken that currently captivates our nation’s pols. “Maybe the people in Washington who are tussling over the fiscal cliff feel a little more comfortable in tussling because the Fed is giving us very easy money,” says Pierre Ellis, Decision Economics’ senior managing director. Significantly, with the Fed expanding its balance sheet, to keep all of us feeling more comfortable, and theoretically investing and spending, too, it may limit some effectiveness of any fiscal cliff agreement. Hope that Washington accounts for the burden that will come from the payments on all this debt when interest rates do start to rise again. …”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2012/12/12/ben-bernanke-has-started-the-printing-press-now-he-needs-uncle-sams-help/

Wiedemer to Moneynews: More Fed Easing Is ‘Insurance Policy’ Against Market Collapse

“Whalen is smart. He’s one of the few worthy of your time. Others: Marc Faber, Hugh Hendry, Doug Dachille, David Rosenberg, Howard Davidowitz, James Grant, Peter Schiff, Niall Ferguson, Doug Casey, Jim Rogers.”

Chris Whalen Drops the F-Bomb on Wall Street while sounding the Bankruptcy Alarm

Whalen: Libor Is A Collusive Price Set By Collusive Banks

Whalen: Go Back To The Future To Fight Fraud With Equity Receivers

Value Investing Conference 2010 – Part 4

Inflated: How Money and Debt Built the American Dream | Christopher Whalen

‘Inflated: How Money and Debt Built the American Dream’

Chris Whalen: “The Fed let the real economy go to hell”

Web Extra Chris Whalen: Is JP Morgan blowing hot air with clawbacks? Plus, Natural Gas forecasts

CHRIS WHALEN: “PAPER ASSETS ARE HEADED TO ZERO” 7-6-2010

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 1/7

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 2/7

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 3/7

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 4/7

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 5/7

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 6/7

Christopher Whalen, A New Deal For The American Economy 7/7

]]> http://raymondpronk.wordpress.com/2012/12/09/let-obama-own-the-tax-increases-and-wrecking-the-economy-leading-to-great-depression-videos/ Mon, 10 Dec 2012 01:51:32 +0000 Raymond Thomas Pronk http://raymondpronk.wordpress.com/2012/12/09/let-obama-own-the-tax-increases-and-wrecking-the-economy-leading-to-great-depression-videos/ Rand Paul: We Should Let Dems Raise Taxes And Then Let Them Own It – CNBC’s Kudlow Report

SEN. RAND PAUL: I have yet another thought on how we can fix this. Why don’t we let the Democrats pass whatever they want? If they are the party of higher taxes, all the Republicans vote present and let the Democrats raise taxes as high as they want to raise them, let Democrats in the Senate raise taxes, let the president sign it and then make them own the tax increase. And when the economy stalls, when the economy sputters, when people lose their jobs, they know which party to blame, the party of high taxes. Let’s don’t be the party of just almost as high taxes.

LARRY KUDLOW, CNBC: Some people have called that the doomsday scenario. Others have said, ‘Look, it’s a strategic retreat on the Republicans’ behalf.’ WWould you vote present for that in the Senate if that came up?

RAND PAUL: Yes, I don’t think we have to in the Senate. In the House, they have to because the Democrats don’t have the majority. In the Senate, I’m happy not to filibuster it, and I will announce tonight on your show that I will work with Harry Reid to let him pass his big old tax hike with a simple majority if that’s what Harry Reid wants, because then they will become the party of high taxes and they can own it.

Obama Runs Rings pt4 + Rand Paul Joins the ‘Let Democrats Raise Taxes and Own It’ Crowd 

Gregory Mankiw: The Fiscal Challenge Ahead

The U.S. does not have a capitalist economy 

A new depression: Out of credit

Interview With Richard Duncan, Author of The New Depression 

Richard Duncan on Riding out this Depression on a Deflationary Debt Raft! 

    “The New Depression” Book w/ Glenn Beck & Richard Duncan

The New Depression: Richard Duncan | McAlvany Commentary 

Pt 1/5: Can governments end the crisis cycle? 

Pt 2/5: Can governments end the crisis cycle? 

Pt 3/5: Can governments end the crisis cycle?

Pt 4/5: Can governments end the crisis cycle?

Pt 5/5: Can governments end the crisis cycle?

Jim Rogers  New Recession/Depression Coming

Peter Schiff interviews Marc Faber on Schiffradio Oct 2012 

Why the global recession is in danger of becoming another Great Depression, and how we can stop it

When the United States stopped backing dollars with gold in 1968, the nature of money changed. All previous constraints on money and credit creation were removed and a new economic paradigm took shape. Economic growth ceased to be driven by capital accumulation and investment as it had been since before the Industrial Revolution. Instead, credit creation and consumption began to drive the economic dynamic. In The New Depression: The Breakdown of the Paper Money Economy, Richard Duncan introduces an analytical framework, The Quantity Theory of Credit, that explains all aspects of the calamity now unfolding: its causes, the rationale for the government’s policy response to the crisis, what is likely to happen next, and how those developments will affect asset prices and investment portfolios.

In his previous book, The Dollar Crisis (2003), Duncan explained why a severe global economic crisis was inevitable given the flaws in the post-Bretton Woods international monetary system, and now he’s back to explain what’s next. The economic system that emerged following the abandonment of sound money requires credit growth to survive. Yet the private sector can bear no additional debt and the government’s creditworthiness is deteriorating rapidly. Should total credit begin to contract significantly, this New Depression will become a New Great Depression, with disastrous economic and geopolitical consequences. That outcome is not inevitable, and this book describes what must be done to prevent it.

• Presents a fascinating look inside the financial crisis and how the New Depression is poised to become a New Great Depression
• Introduces a new theoretical construct, The Quantity Theory of Credit, that is the key to understanding not only the developments that led to the crisis, but also to understanding how events will play out in the years ahead
• Offers unique insights from the man who predicted the global economic breakdown

Alarming but essential reading, The New Depression explains why the global economy is teetering on the brink of falling into a deep and protracted depression, and how we can restore stability.

http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1118157796.html

The New Depression: Richard Duncan’s prognosis of our economic ills and the answer to them

“… In a nutshell, his case is half-Austrian. Or indeed half-Keynesian. That is because whilst Duncan’s diagnosis of the current economic ills is very much in the Austrian school of economics, with its emphasis on the role of credit, his prescription for fixing the economy is large-scale borrowing to fund infrastructure work, all of which sounds rather Keynesian.

It is a more fiscally responsible version of Keynesianism than some, for Duncan argues that, “The U.S. government can now borrow money for ten years at a cost of 2 percent interest a year. If it borrows at that rate and invests in projects that yield even 3 percent … on a grand scale in grand projects … [our economy] could be transformed”. In other words, borrow massively to boost economic growth, but spend those funds on projects that will generate future returns which make the borrowing affordable.

Duncan has a particular set of target for his investment plans for the American economy – developing new industries to reduce the trade deficit and generate new tax revenues. In particular, he talks about renewable energy, arguing that massive investment will cut energy bills whilst also providing the sort of financial return that makes the massive spending of money on it a prudent rather than profligate move.

All that means there are three main bones of contention in the book: is Richard Duncan right in blaming the crash on credit conditions; is he right that massive infrastructure investment on projects which pay returns the answer; and if money is to be invested in infrastructure that pays returns, does renewable energy fit the bill? Although a book principally about the US economy and the policy choices faced by Americans, those three questions are very applicable to other countries too, even if his evidence tends to be centred on the USA.

As he mulls over these three questions, most readers will find at least one eye-catching piece of evidence to savour, such as when he describes how heavily the financial system became dependent on credit not going sour:

In 1945 [American] commercial banks held reserves and vault cash of … the equivalent of 12 percent of their total assets … By 2007, the banks’ reserves and vault cash [was] 0.6 percent.

He goes on to argue that

Economic progress was no longer achieved the old-fashioned way through savings and investments, but, rather, by borrowing and consumption … The new reality is that credit has displaced money as the key economic variable.

Hence the book’s subtitle, “The Breakdown of the Paper Money Economy”.

Each of the three main questions in themselves could sustain not merely one whole book but a mini-book publishing flurry of titles. To condense credible arguments over all three into one relatively slim and easy to follow volume is tribute to the Duncan, even if some readers may choose to agree with less than all three of the main points of his case. …”

http://www.libdemvoice.org/the-new-depression-richard-duncans-prognosis-of-our-economic-ills-and-the-answer-to-them-28981.html

Glenn Beck talks to Penn Jillette, author of “Every Day is an Atheist Holiday! More Magical Tales”

Penn Jillette: Reading the Bible (Or the Koran, Or the Torah) Will Make You an Atheist

Bible, real facts? 1 

Bible, real facts? 2 

Bible, real facts? 3

Penn Jillette on Capitalism, Magic and Morality

Penn Jillette: Why I Am A Libertarian

Penn Jillette book signing Barnes & Noble Tribeca NYC 11-14-2012

Penn Jillette: Glenn Beck Is a Nut—But I Like Him

    Penn Jillette: Mistrust of Government Is a Beautiful Thing

Penn Jillette: Reconciling Atheism with Libertarianism

Penn Jillette: An Atheist’s Guide to the 2012 Election 

Mitt’s Magical Mormon Undies: Penn Jillette’s Rant Redux 

Penn’s Sunday School “November 18th, 2012″ 

Penn Jillette on His New Book 

Penn Jillette: Don’t Leave Atheists Out on Christmas

Penn Jillette: How to Raise an Atheist Family 

Penn Says:      Santa & My Kids

Penn Jillette: Penn and Teller Are Not Lovers

IAMA – Penn and Teller Answer reddit.com’s Top 10 Questions 

Penn & Teller Tell A Lie – Teller Speaks!

penn and teller tell a lie

What We Believe, Part 1: Small Government and Free Enterprise.

What We Believe, Part 2: The Problem with Elitism

What We Believe, Part 3: Wealth Creation

What We Believe, Part 4: Natural Law

What We Believe, Part 5: Gun Rights

What We Believe, Part 6: Immigration

What We Believe, Part 7: American Exceptionalism

Team Wreckers: Speaker Boehner Tells ‘Tea-Party’ Republicans To Fall in Line! 

Tea Party Backlash: Far Right-Wing ‘Num-Nuts’ Lash Out at GOP Leadership on

Speaker Boehner’s Looming War With The Hard Right Tea-Party Extremists

Boehner punishes conservative David Schweikert – Mark Levin

Rush Limbaugh: John Boehner is purging the GOP of Tea Party conservatives

Boehner Starts War With Tea Party By Removing 4 Members From Key Positions

Justin Amash: GOP leadership is out of step with America

The Tea Party vs. John Boehner

SA@TAC – The State of the Right

What We Believe, Part 1: Small Government and Free Enterprise.

What We Believe, Part 2: The Problem with Elitism

What We Believe, Part 3: Wealth Creation

What We Believe, Part 4: Natural Law 

What We Believe, Part 5: Gun Rights

What We Believe, Part 6: Immigration

What We Believe, Part 7: American Exceptionalism

EAT THE RICH!

Rand Paul Warns Boehner, Cantor: Hope You’re Not Aspiring for Higher Office

PJTV: Will the GOP Allow Obama to Raise Taxes on the Rich?

Background Articles and Videos

Debt Ceiling Crisis: Boehner vs. Tea Party

Tea Party Leaders Cite Member “Concern” about Speaker Boehner’s Leadership

Democrats—Republicans–Tea Party Conservatives

CNBC Squawk Box: Unemployment Rate Slides to 7.7%

Fmr. Obama Economist Jared Bernstein: Unemployment Drop Due To Labor Force

U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7% 

Rick Santelli Epic Rant on November Jobs Report & Soak The Rich: They Love to Fib About Statistics

The Unemployment Game Show: Are You *Really* Unemployed? from Mint.com

U.S. Unadjusted Unemployment Shoots Back Up

Unemployment situation best for college grads, whites, men, and older workers

U.S. unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, was 7.8% for the month of November, up significantly from 7.0% for October. Gallup’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate is 8.3%, nearly a one-point increase over October’s rate.

Although the increase in the unadjusted rate in November is a sharp contrast to the 0.9-point decline seen in October, November’s 7.8% rate is still tied for the second-best unadjusted unemployment monthly reading of 2012. However, on an adjusted basis, November’s rate is the highest reading in six months. Looking at year-to-year comparisons, seasonally adjusted unemployment is down from 8.9% in November 2011.

Underemployment, as measured without seasonal adjustment, was 17.2% in November, a 1.3-point increase since the end of October. The uptick in November also puts an end to the six-month trend of improvements or no change. Still, underemployment has improved 0.9 points since November 2011.

Gallup’s U.S. underemployment measure combines the percentage who are unemployed with the percentage of those working part time but looking for full-time work. Gallup does not apply a seasonal adjustment to underemployment.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/159104/unadjusted-unemployment-shoots-back.aspx

US Unemployment Rate Dropped in December 2012 – What’s the Good and the

Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

Household Data Summary Table A. Household Data, Seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]

http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm

Employment Level

143,262,000

Series Id:           LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Civilian Labor Force Level

155,291,000

Series Id:           LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Labor Force Participation Rate

63.6 %

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Unemployment Level

12,029,000

Series Id:           LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status:  Unemployed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Unemployment Rate U-3

7.7%

Series Id:           LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Unemployment Rate U-6

Series Id:           LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status:  Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over
Percent/rates:       Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

By NELSON D. SCHWARTZ

“…Shaking off the effects of Hurricane Sandy and the looming fiscal impasse in Washington, the economy created 146,000 jobs in November, well above the level economists had been expecting.

The report released Friday by the Labor Department also showed the unemployment rate fell to 7.7 percent, the lowest level in four years. But the drop came largely from a decline in the number of people seeking work and counted as officially unemployed.

Among specific industries, the retail sector was especially healthy, adding 53,000 jobs as the holiday shopping season approached. In the last three months, retail employment has increased by 140,000.

One notable point of weakness was the manufacturing sector, which lost 7,000 jobs in the month. Demand from Europe and other overseas markets has weakened recently, while some manufacturing companies have held off on spending as political leaders square off in Washington over how to cut the deficit.

Highlighting just how vulnerable to shocks the economy remains, one widely followed index of consumer sentiment showed a marked drop in early December. The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan’s index of consumer confidence, released Friday, fell to 74.5, down from 82.7 in November.

That was the lowest it has been since August – a decline that Bricklin Dwyer, an economist with BNP Paribas, attributed to the showdown in Washington over the budget.

“The deterioration in consumers’ future expectations was probably related to increased concerns relating to the political theater surrounding the ‘fiscal cliff’ negotiations,” he wrote in a report Friday.

The Labor Department revised job growth in previous months downward somewhat. October growth fell to 138,000 from an initial estimate 171,000, and September’s declined to 132,000 from 148,000. Average hourly earnings in November rose 0.2 percent, the report showed.

By the widest measure of joblessness, unemployment also eased slightly: after factoring in people looking for work as well as those forced to take part-time positions because full-time work wasn’t available, the total unemployed fell to 14.4 percent in November from 14.6 percent in October.

The report for November was relatively strong, economists said, and showed fewer effects from Hurricane Sandy that had been expected. In Friday’s announcement, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the storm did “not substantively impact the national employment and unemployment estimates for November.”

Ethan Harris, co-head of global economics at Bank of America of Merrill Lynch, said, “It’s a pretty solid report. It’s consistent with a slow recovery in the job market.”

“It’s encouraging that with the fiscal cliff looming, the corporate sector seems willing to hire even with the worries about what’s going in Washington,” Mr. Harris said.

If the budget impasse can’t be resolved this month, however, it’s likely that jobs growth will weaken early next year, he added. “The fiscal cliff is a very dangerous game,” he said.

Indeed, other economists remained cautious about the jobs outlook.

“It’s not something to get too excited about,” said Nigel Gault, chief United States economist for IHS Global Insight. “The number is 146,000 and the average so far this year is 151,000. We’re pretty much in line with what we’ve been doing.”

Mr. Gault said Hurricane Sandy’s impact may have been seen in construction, where the number of jobs fell by 20,000, as well as in manufacturing.

The labor participation rate, which represents the proportion of the adult population that is either employed or actively looking for work, remains very low by historical standards.

At 63.6 percent in November, Mr. Gault said, it was just 0.1 percent above the low point for the current economic cycle, which was reached in August 2012.

“We’re not at the point in which the jobs market is strong enough to pull discouraged workers back into the labor market,” he said. …”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/08/business/economy/us-creates-146000-new-jobs-as-unemployment-rate-falls-to-7-7.html?hp&_r=0

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed                         USDL-12-2366
until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, December 7, 2012

Technical information:
 Household data:       (202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data:   (202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:         (202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov

                         THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- NOVEMBER 2012

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 146,000 in November, and the unemployment
rate edged down to 7.7 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Employment increased in retail trade, professional and business services, and health
care.

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 |                                                                                     |
 |                                Hurricane Sandy                                      |
 |                                                                                     |
 |Hurricane Sandy made landfall on the Northeast coast on October 29th, causing severe |
 |damage in some states. Nevertheless, our survey response rates in the affected       |
 |states were within normal ranges. Our analysis suggests that Hurricane Sandy did not |
 |substantively impact the national employment and unemployment estimates for November.|
 |BLS will release the regional and state estimates on December 21st. For additional   |
 |information on how severe weather affects employment and unemployment data, see      |
 |Question 8 in the Frequently Asked Questions section of this release.                |
 |                                                                                     |
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Household Survey Data

The unemployment rate edged down to 7.7 percent in November. The number of unemployed
persons, at 12.0 million, changed little. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (7.2 percent), adult
women (7.0 percent), teenagers (23.5 percent), whites (6.8 percent), and Hispanics (10.0
percent) showed little or no change in November. The unemployment rate for blacks (13.2
percent) declined over the month. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.4 percent (not
seasonally adjusted), little changed from a year earlier. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little
changed at 4.8 million in November. These individuals accounted for 40.1 percent of
the unemployed. (See table A-12.)

The civilian labor force participation rate declined by 0.2 percentage point to 63.6 percent
in November, offsetting an increase of the same amount in October. Total employment was
about unchanged in November, following a combined increase of 1.3 million over the prior
2 months. The employment-population ratio, at 58.7 percent, changed little
in November. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as
involuntary part-time workers), at 8.2 million in November, was little changed over the
month. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or
because they were unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

In November, 2.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, essentially
unchanged from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals
were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job
sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not
searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 979,000 discouraged workers in November, little
changed from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers
are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for
them. The remaining 1.5 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in November
had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school
attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 146,000 in November. Since the beginning
of this year, employment growth has averaged 151,000 per month, about the same as the 
average monthly job gain of 153,000 in 2011. In November, employment rose in retail
trade, professional and business services, and health care. (See table B-1.)

Retail trade employment rose by 53,000 in November and has increased by 140,000 over the
past 3 months. Over the month, job gains occurred in clothing and clothing accessory stores 
(+33,000), in general merchandise stores (+10,000), and in electronics and appliance stores
(+9,000). Employment in miscellaneous store retailers decreased by 13,000.

In November, employment in professional and business services rose by 43,000. Employment
continued to increase in computer systems design and related services.

Health care employment continued to increase in November (+20,000), with gains in hospitals
(+8,000) and in nursing care facilities (+5,000). Health care has added an average of 26,000
jobs per month this year.

Employment in wholesale trade edged up over the month (+13,000). Since reaching an employment
trough in May 2010, the industry has added 228,000 jobs.

Information employment also edged up in November (+12,000), with the increase concentrated
in motion picture and sound recording (+15,000). On net, information employment has changed
little over the past 12 months.

In November, leisure and hospitality employment continued to trend up (+23,000). Over the
past 12 months, the industry has added 305,000 jobs.

Employment in construction declined by 20,000 in November, with much of the loss occurring
in construction of buildings (-11,000). Since early 2010, employment in construction has
shown no clear trend.

Manufacturing employment changed little over the month. Within the industry, job losses
in food manufacturing (-12,000) and chemicals (-9,000) more than offset gains in motor
vehicles and parts (+10,000) and wood products (+3,000). On net, manufacturing employment
has changed little since this past spring.

Employment in other major industries, including mining and logging, transportation and
warehousing, financial activities, and government, showed little change in November.

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls remained at 34.4
hours in November. The manufacturing workweek edged up by 0.1 hour to 40.6 hours, and
factory overtime was unchanged at 3.2 hours. The average workweek for production and
nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up 0.1 hour to 33.7 hours.
(See tables B-2 and B-7.)

In November, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose
by 4 cents to $23.63. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have risen by
1.7 percent. In November, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and
nonsupervisory employees edged up by 3 cents to $19.84. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for September was revised from +148,000
to +132,000, and the change for October was revised from +171,000 to +138,000.

_____________
The Employment Situation for December is scheduled to be released on Friday,
January 4, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. (EST).

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 |                                                                                        |
 |                   Revision of Seasonally Adjusted Household Survey Data                |
 |                                                                                        |
 |In accordance with usual practice, The Employment Situation release for December 2012,  |
 |scheduled for January 4, 2013, will incorporate annual revisions in seasonally adjusted |
 |unemployment and other labor force series from the household survey. Seasonally adjusted|
 |data for the most recent 5 years are subject to revision.                               |
 |                                                                                        |
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  |                                                                                       |
  |                         Household Survey Reference Period                             |
  |                                                                                       |
  |In the household survey, the reference period for November 2012 was the calendar week  |
  |that included the 5th of the month. Typically, the reference period for the household  |
  |survey is the calendar week that includes the 12th of the month. In accordance with our|
  |usual practice for November, the reference and survey periods were a week earlier this |
  |year so that household survey interviews would not be conducted during the Thanksgiving|
  |holiday.                                                                               |
  |                                                                                       |
   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FISCAL CLIFF, OH NOES!!

World’s Tallest Bungee Jump HD (Backwards)

Aussie tourist’s bungee cord snaps

Fiscal Cliff: What Republicans, Democrats Agree on So Far

Dan Mitchell Commenting on Republican Weakness in Fiscal Cliff Negotiations

Grover Norquist: Obama “Thinks Somebody Made Him King”

Peter Schiff: Many Other Cliffs Await the US Economy – CNBC 12/05/2012

“Grover Norquist confident Republicans will abide by no tax pledge” Grover Scares The GOP

Fiscal Cliff solution: Simpson-Bowles?

Fiscal Cliff GOP Plan Offered by John Boehner White House Rejects Plan

Obama – Finally An Aggressive Progressive?!

White House ‘Reluctantly’ Willing to Go Off Fiscal Cliff?

Obama On Rejecting GOP Plan: It’s Just A Matter Of Math’

Sen. Hatch: Obama’s “fiscal cliff” plan a “bait and switch”

Joe Scarborough Hammers Fiscal Cliff Offer: Was It Necessary For Obama ‘To Be So Provocative?’

Charles Krauthammer Fiscal Cliff Analogy: Obama Offer Worse Than Appomattox

Timothy Geithner ‘This Week’ Interview: Fiscal Cliff is in the GOP’s Court

Dr. Coburn on OUTFRONT with Erin Burnett Regarding Speaker Boehner’s Offer and Fiscal Cliff

Fiscal Cliff Hangout – Nov. 30, 2012

The Engineered Fiscal Cliff

Jumping off the fiscal cliff and bouncing back towards peace and prosperity with bungee budgets!

By Raymond Thomas Pronk

The year-end fiscal cliff time bomb of massive tax increases and huge spending cuts is ticking louder and louder.

On Nov. 29, President Barack Obama sent Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to Congress to present his opening proposal to increase tax revenues by $1.6 trillion over the next 10 years, a possible extension of the temporary Social Security payroll tax cut and increased presidential power to raise the national debt without limit. Obama would support $600 billion in spending cuts including $350 billion from Medicare and other health programs.

However, Obama wants an additional $200 billion in new spending outlays for jobless benefits, aid for struggling homeowners and at least $50 billion for public works infrastructure projects—another stimulus package. In summary, Obama wants four times as much in tax increases as spending cuts.  Obama’s so-called balanced approach offer was dead on arrival in the Republican-controlled House..

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and other Republican leaders responded by sending Obama the GOP plan in a Dec. 3 letter that includes $800 billion in higher tax revenues over the next decade. The letter pointed out that Erskine Bowles, co-chair of Obama’s debt commission, recommended a balanced middle ground approach that included significant spending cuts as well as $800 billion in new tax revenue.

However, the GOP plan would keep the Bush marginal tax rates for all brackets, including those for higher income earners in place. The Republican letter pointedly said,

“The new revenue in the Bowles plan would not be achieved through higher tax rates, which we continue to oppose and will not agree to in order to protect small businesses and our economy.”

The Republican plan would also cut over ten years $600 billion from costly health care programs including Medicare, $300 billion from national defense and domestic programs and another $300 billion from other proposals including forcing federal workers to contribute toward their pension plans. The Republican plan would produce an estimated $2.2 trillion in savings over 10 years.

Neither the Democratic nor Republican proposals to avoid the year-end fiscal cliff would balance the budget in the next ten years. The Republicans as much as admitted this in their letter by stating, “This is by no means an adequate long-term solution, as resolving our long-term fiscal crisis will require fundamental entitlement reform. Indeed, the Bowles’ plan is exactly the kind of imperfect but fair middle ground that allows us to avert the fiscal cliff without hurting our economy and destroying jobs.”

The president after reading the Republican proposal letter, rejected the GOP plan out of hand because it did not increase the marginal tax rates on those earning more than $250,000, the majority of whom are successful business owners who create wealth, income and jobs.

The table below summarizes the failed 10 year record of both political parties in controlling government spending that have produced massive fiscal-year deficits and an ever increasing national debt.

Neither the Democratic Party led by President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi nor the Republican Party led by House Speaker Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, are capable of balancing the budget of the U.S. government.

U.S. government budget deficits are financed or paid for by the issuing of debt in the form of Treasury bills, notes or bonds by the Department of the Treasury. The sale of Treasury securities results in an increase in the national debt and an increase in the interest that must be paid by the American people to those who purchase the Treasury securities.

The Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, has been artificially suppressing interest rates for more than four years, to near zero rates (.25 percent) for federal funds, money loaned overnight by commercial banks to each other. Once inflation or a rise in the general price level hits the economy, interest rates will quickly rise to market levels. The interest paid by the federal government on its Treasury securities will quickly double and triple to more than $750 billion per year.

Until the U.S. government lives within the means of the American people by balancing its budget, the economy:

(1)   will grow at relatively low rates between 1 and 2 percent per year,

(2)   have persistently high unemployment rates in the 8 to 10 percent range,

(3)   and inflation or price increases will exceed 3 to 6 percent or more per year.

Economists describe such a situation as stagflation, a portmanteau of stagnation and inflation

Forget about the fiscal cliff. Focus on economic growth and job creation. Balance the budget.

A balanced budget is one in which total spending outlays equal total tax receipts. A budget deficit is one in which total spending outlays exceed total tax receipts. A budget surplus is one in which total tax receipts exceed total spending outlays.

Balance the U.S. government’s budget by Sept. 30, 2016, the end of fiscal year 2016, by cutting total government spending $250 billion or about 7 percent per year for four years until the budget is balanced or in surplus.

Federal government spending outlays would be capped at the following fiscal-year levels:

Extend the so-called Bush marginal tax rates for four years or until the current complex Internal Revenue Code and regulations are replaced by either a single flat income tax or a broad-based national consumption retail sales tax—the FairTax. The proposed bungee budgets for fiscal years 2013-2016 require leaders with courage, vision and wisdom to pass and implement them. The possibility of the above proposal being passed by Congress and signed into law by the president are slim and none.

Today the U.S. has a national debt exceeding $16 trillion and unfunded liabilities for Social Security and Medicare exceeding $63 trillion according to the latest report of the trustees of both programs. The unfunded liability is the amount the government has promised in benefits looking indefinitely into the future less the payroll taxes and premiums the government expects to collect.

The U.S. government’s national debt and unfunded liabilities now exceed $80 trillion or more than five times the total estimated U.S. real gross domestic product for 2012. The U.S. warfare and welfare state has already fallen off the fiscal cliff and is accelerating toward a default on its Treasury debt.

Yet the political theater in Washington, D.C., over the phony fiscal cliff crisis will continue into 2013. The American people deserve the leadership they voted for in November. Now the American people will pay the price as the economy heads toward another recession. The party is over. Happy New Year!

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com.

Anonymous   WORLD ANONYMOUS NOW

Greetings citizens of the world, the following is a very special message for all of humanity. Too long have we lived in fear, fear of greed, fear of corruption, fear of failure, fear that everything we’ve known turned out to be wrong.

No longer will we live in fear! It ends here and now, with you and me! We are brothers and sisters of humanity, the time has come for us to unite! We must forge a new beginning of peace and love, we must be the good we want to see in the world.

Humanity is still young, and for the first time ever in human history we have a real chance at true peace as a species. The internet has united us more than ever before, its time we use this gift to promote the unity of us all. Its time we stand up as a planet and declare we will no longer take part in a system based on fear, greed, corruption, and war.

Lets put everything into perspective for those of you that need more convincing, the United Sates alone has spent trillions of dollars on wars. War has claimed the lives of over 264 million people throughout the course of known human history, many of whom where civilians. Human progress has been halted by senseless wars.

While we fight amongst ourselves on Earth there’s an entire universe passing us by. There are an estimated 160 billion planets in our galaxy alone, many of which could potentially be home to carbon-based life as we know it. Stars go supernova, entire solar systems get destroyed, even whole galaxies collide while we argue and fight over small and pointless issues. We should be happy we have a planet to live on, not fighting over who owns the planet. In truth no individual or even an entire species owns it, because in truth all life on Earth owns this planet.

Someday soon humanity will venture to the stars, will we go into the unknown divided and fighting? Or will we say as one voice, as one species, “We the People of Earth, united as one, declare from this day fourth that no force, however big or small, shall ever divide the spirit of humanity again. United in our cause for peace, knowledge, and progress, we go forward into the unknown as brothers and sisters, as a species no longer divided by war, greed, corruption, and fear.”

The choice is yours to make, you are Anonymous, you are the future of Earth. You can either continue the wars and division of humanity, or you can try something new. You can give peace a chance, you can help secure a beautiful world of peace, knowledge, and progress for all generations to come.

You are Anonymous,
You are part of Humanity,
You should Forgive,
yet You should never Forget,
It’s time to Expect Yourself…Lets unite under WORLD ANONYMOUS NOW.

With your help, may one day the innocent never suffer and the brave never die, for on that day we’ll truly be free. United as one, divided by zero.

anonymous ITU and WCIT 3-15 december

New Trend: Governing the Internet 

TAKE ACTION for a FREE and OPEN INTERNET, Threat Wire Ep. 002

This week on Threat Wire, Darren and Shannon discuss the issues with the ITU and keeping the internet free and open for the world.

For a list of stories and links visit: http://hak5.org/threatwire/0002

U.S. Resists U.N.-controlled Internet 

The UN have apparently released details that they will to add certain levels of control on the internet, which would for one thing cause traffic from abroad to larger international websites based in the US (such as facebook or Google) to have to pay a tax,.

“”Proposals for the new ITU treaty run to more than 200 pages. One idea is to apply the ITU’s long-distance telephone rules to the Internet by creating a ‘sender-party-pays’ rule. International phone calls include a fee from the originating country to the local phone company at the receiving end. Under a sender-pays approach, U.S.-based websites would pay a local network for each visitor from overseas, effectively taxing firms such as Google and Facebook. “

ALERT – United Nations To Seize Control Of Internet ?!?

The U.N. Threat To Internet Freedom
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204792404577229074023195322.html

United Nation Planning to Control The Internet – Alex Jones Tv

United Nations Seeks to Control the Internet – Thoughts & Opinions

Does the ITU threaten freedom of speech on the Internet? – Truthloader

Assange s prophecy  Govnts plan Internet takeover

Richard Hill at the EIF debate on WCIT and ITRs

The 193 member countries of the ITU will meet in Dubai 3-14 December at World Conference on International Telecommunication 2012 to revise the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs), a 1988 treaty-level document establishing policies governing international telecommunications services between countries. While some Member States of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), as well as a few independent groups, are advocating for expanded intergovernmental powers over the Internet with respect to the Internet as well as wireless, IP-based, and next generation networks; other countries believe that the WCIT should adopt only minor changes to the ITRs as necessary to modernize the existing provisions of the treaty, and that new provisions and authorities are unnecessary.

Europe’s role and view will be crucial in the debate and to its outcome. In the dinner debate organised by the European Internet Foundation, representatives from the European Commission, European Industry and Civil society had been invited to exchange views on issues at stake and present their positions.

Perspectives from the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) were  presented by Richard Hill, Counsellor at the ITU

Vint Cerf on the ITU

Vint Cerf, Google’s Chief Internet Evangelist, shares a message with participants at the Big Tent Dublin on the importance of free expression. Vint also expresses his concerns about potential threats to an Open Internet in Internet governance reform at the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) conference in Dubai in December 2012.

YOUR INTERNET IS IN DANGER!!! 

Your internet is fine. I lied. But Google lied first, so I think it’s justified.

Links!
Google’s “Take Action”: https://www.google.com/intl/en/takeaction/
The International Telecommunications Union: http://www.itu.int/

International Telecommunication Regulations (doc): http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/itr/files/ITR-e.doc
Document leaks: http://wcitleaks.org/

Alex Jones Exposes Google’s Plan to Dominate the Internet 

Goodlatte speaks in opposition to UN control of the Internet 

ITU TELECOM WORLD 2012 – Highlights Video

Highlights video of ITU TELECOM WORLD 2012, Dubai, UAE.

ITU Telecom World 2012, 14-18 October 2012, Dubai International Convention and Exhibition Centre (DICEC).

Five days of pivotal discussion and debate on some of the hottest topics facing the ICT industry.

The world is changing faster than ever before in human history, thanks largely to the explosive growth of the ICT sector. New technologies, new industry players and new global trends is at the heart of debates in Dubai.

Hundreds of industry leaders came together with government ministers, regulators and manufacturers for five days of critical debate to shape the policies, regulations and competitive strategies of future communications.

ITU INTERVIEW @ WCIT-12: Paul Budde, Independent Analyst, BuddeComm

Interview with Paul Budde, Independent Analyst, BuddeComm at WCIT 2012
Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 3-14 December 2012.

The World Conference on International Telecommunications will review the current International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs), which serve as the binding global treaty designed to facilitate international interconnection and interoperability of information and communication services, as well as ensuring their efficiency and widespread public usefulness and availability.

ITU Secretary – General Video Message: Dr Hamadoun I.Touré, S-G, ITU on WCIT – 12 

ITU Secretary General Video Message: Dr Hamadoun I.Touré, Secretary-General, International Telecommunications Union, speaking about the World Conference on International Telecommunications 2012(WCIT -12).

ITU will convene the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, from 3-14 December 2012. This landmark conference will review the current International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs), which serve as the binding global treaty designed to facilitate international interconnection and interoperability of information and communication services, as well as ensuring their efficiency and widespread public usefulness and availability.

FRANCE 24 Tech 24:      Who rules the Web? : ITU vs. ICANN

Internet at Liberty 2012: Plenary II -  Riz Khan, Gary Fowlie, Ben Wagner

Possible Internet Take Over By The ITU (UN) [HD]

 Spread the word, share & take action! :

*Sign-on Letter Opposing ITU Authority Over the Internet :

{https://www.cdt.org/letter/sign-letter-opposing-itu-authority-over-internet}

*ITU Advocacy Tools:

[Internet advocates all over the world are organizing around the upcoming ITU conference. On this page, we've collected a set of tools and resources to help interested groups and citizens get involved.]

{https://www.cdt.org/content/itu-tools-advocates}

*ITU Commentary by Global Experts:

{https://www.cdt.org/content/itu-commentary-global-experts}

*CDT Analyses of Key ITU Proposals:

{https://www.cdt.org/content/cdt-analyses-key-itu-proposals}

*ONLINE PETITION: Protect Global Internet Freedom (Organizations:924 – Countries Represented: 161) :

{http://www.protectinternetfreedom.net/}

Internet should stay free and open

Ivailo Kalfin (MEP, BG) argues in the European parliament that Internet should stay free and open, ahead of the WCIT meeting in Dubai in December. Internet is a very strong tool these days and there are many that would like to control it and the people, using it. For example by changing its business model and making it more expensive and less accessible. Some governments are even suggesting creating a “national internet”, which is an oxymoron, something that is against the nature of Internet itself, says Kalfin

Operation WCIT – Keep OUR internet Free

We love the internet.
And we’re guessing you do too. Think about all the awesome things it gives us: A vast communication network; innovative businesses; a platform to freely speak or challenge powerful governments; and hundreds and hundreds of hours of cat videos.

All this great stuff is available because the internet was designed in an open and inclusive way, with a multitude of voices being able to get a say on how it’s governed.
But the internet is in danger.

There’s a meeting between the world’s governments in a just a few weeks, and it could very well decide the future of the internet through a binding international treaty. It’s called the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT), and it’s being organized by a government-controlled UN agency called the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).

If some proposals at WCIT are approved, decisions about the internet would be made by a top-down, old-school government-centric agency behind closed doors. Some proposals allow for internet access to be cut off more easily, threaten privacy, legitimizes monitoring and blocking of online traffic. Others seek to impose new fees for accessing content, not to mention slowing down connection speeds. Used as a pretext to internet pornography among other things as an excuse to censor sensitive material pages (note that there are too many cases of child pornography that are ignored by the police) In addition to paying for internet service, you’d also have to pay for visiting certain sites, such as YouTube. Your communications would be constantly monitored and archived, meaning the end of Internet privacy. This could potentially lead to individuals becoming victims of blackmail by malicious people who control the monitoring. The Internet is home to many organized social movements which fight for human rights worldwide. If we allow this, we will not be able to use the Internet to organize the defense of our rights…

If the delicate balance of the internet is upset, it could have grave consequences for businesses and human rights.
This must be stopped.

Only governments get a vote at WCIT, so we need people from all around the world to demand that our leaders keep the internet open.
Watch the video, and take action above to tell your governments to oppose handing over key decisions about the internet to the ITU. Let’s use the internet’s global reach to save it.

Watch the video here https://www.whatistheitu.org/?ref=an

Leaked documents here http://www.wcitleaks.org/

WebChat: http://webchat.voxanon.org/?channels=opwcit

We are the internet
We are anonymous
We are here to help you with your revolution

Background Articles and Videos

World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12)

“…ITU will convene the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, from 3-14 December 2012. This landmark conference will review the current International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs), which serve as the binding global treaty designed to facilitate international interconnection and interoperability of information and communication services, as well as ensuring their efficiency and widespread public usefulness and availability.

HISTORY OF ITU: “The International Telecommunication Union” – 1966 United Nations Film (Part 1)

HISTORY OF ITU: “The International Telecommunication Union” – 1966 United Nations Film (Part 2)

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Julian Assange–Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet–On Turnkey Totalitarianism With The Internet–Videos

Ron Paul’s Farewell Speech to Congress, November 14th, 2012

Ron’ Pauls Greatest Speech “The Last Nail” 

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned 

Thank You Dr. Ron Paul 

Duncan Pays Tribute to Ron Paul

Ron Paul RNC Tribute Video 

Ron Paul ‘Exit Interview’ with The Washington Post 11/29/2012

Background Articles and Videos

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America

G. Edward Griffin – The Collectivist Conspiracy 

Constitutional Conservatism or Die

A man of principle and integrity ahead of his time.

He will be greatly missed by the American people who love liberty.

Balancing the Budget Without Cutting Spending Would Cause Taxes to Skyrocket

America is running massive deficits, and a balanced budget requirement is often considered a way to rein in red ink.

Without serious entitlement and spending reforms, the level of taxes required to balance the budget would reach economically stagnating levels.

Entitlement Spending Will Nearly Double by 2050

Spending on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the Obamacare subsidies will soar as 78 million baby boomers retire and health care costs climb.

Total spending on federal health care programs will more than double.

Future generations will be left with an untenable debt burden.

Tax Revenues Devoured By Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security in 2045

Spending on Medicare, Medicaid, the Obamacare subsidies, and Social Security will devour all revenues by 2045.

Entitlement spending is already crowding out vital constitutional functions, such as defense.\

Robert Welch Accurately Predicted Fall Off Fiscal Cliff in 1974

Peter Schiff 2012 – Stop spending and consuming, start saving and producing! 

What is the Fiscal Cliff? Everything You Need To Know

Pat Buchanan: Republicans Should Stand Their Ground on Tax Hikes

Speaker Boehner: “I’m Determined to Solve Our Debt Problem. We Have a Serious Spending Problem”

Ouch! Geithner Is Busted Lying About Non-Existent War Savings

Timothy Geithner ‘This Week’ Interview: Fiscal Cliff is in the GOP’s Court 

Fiscal Cliff Explained – How Do We Land? Mike Maloney Gold & Silver Inc 

When Will the Real Fiscal Cliff Negotiations Begin?: ‘This Week’ Roundtable Discussion 

Ron Paul on Secession, Romney, Fiscal Cliff, the GOP’s Future and

Constitutional Conservatism or Die

Fiscal Cliff history lesson

Hear a history lesson about the fiscal cliff of 1990 known as the 1990 Budget summit agreement. It resulted in budget surpluses and balanced budgets for our federal government from 1994 until just after the attack of 9/11 of 2001. Elizabeth B. Letchworth is the only women in the United States Senate history to be elected by the Senate to serve as the U.S. Senate Secretary for the Majority for the Republicans. She is now a principal @ Congressional Global Strategy, LLC and owner of GradeGov.com

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Forward Off The Fiscal Cliff…Falling…Falling…Splat!–Videos

Public Opinion for Libertarians – Bryan Caplan 

Doug Wead: Romney Threatened Ron Paul with PR A-Bomb

Ron Paul’s Senior 2012 Campaign Adviser Doug Wead gives WeAreChange an exclusive interview about the Ron Paul RNC delegate controversy, criticism of Jesse Benton, and the real reason Ron Paul didn’t attack Mitt Romney during the campaign. 

Ron Paul RNC 2012 Tribute Video

The Truth about Tax “Fairness”

Fairest of Them All: Finding Real Economic Justice – CBN.com

An Evening with Stephen Moore

Stephen Moore delivered the keynote address at the 2012 Annual Dinner of the Kansas Policy Institute October 18, 2012. Moore is an economic writer and policy analyst who founded and served as president of the Club for Growth from 1999 to 2004. He is currently a member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, regularly writes for that paper’s opinion page and frequently appears on national broadcast media including CNBC and Fox News.

An Overdue Book

By Thomas Sowell

“…If everyone in America had read Stephen Moore’s new book, “Who’s The Fairest of Them All?”, Barack Obama would have lost the election in a landslide.

        The point here is not to say, “Where was Stephen Moore when we needed him?”  A more apt question might be, “Where was the whole economics profession when we needed them?” Where were the media?  For that matter, where were the Republicans?

        Since “Who’s The Fairest of Them All?” was published in October, there was little chance that it would affect this year’s election.  But this little gem of a book exposes, in plain language and with easily understood facts, the whole house of cards of assumptions, fallacies and falsehoods which constitute the liberal vision of the economy.

        Yet that vision triumphed on election day, thanks to misinformation that was artfully presented and seldom challenged. The title “Who’s The Fairest of Them All?” is an obvious response to liberals’ claim that their policies are aimed at creating “fairness” by, among other things, making sure that “the rich” pay their “fair share” of taxes.  If you want a brief but thorough education on that, just read chapter 4, which by itself is well worth the price of the book.

        A couple of graphs on pages 104 and 108 are enough to annihilate the argument about “tax cuts for the rich.”  These graphs show that, under both Republican President Calvin Coolidge and Democratic President John F. Kennedy, high-income people paid more tax revenues into the federal treasury after tax rates went down than they did before.

        There is nothing mysterious about this. At high tax rates, vast sums of money disappear into tax shelters at home or is shipped overseas. At lower tax rates, that money comes out of hiding and goes into the American economy, creating jobs, rising output and rising incomes.  Under these conditions, higher tax revenues can be collected by the government, even though tax rates are lower. Indeed, high income people not only end up paying more taxes, but a higher share of all taxes, under these conditions.

        This is not just a theory.  It is what hard evidence shows happened under both Democratic and Republican administrations, from the days of Calvin Coolidge to John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.  That hard evidence is presented in clear and unmistakable terms in “Who’s The Fairest of Us All?”

        Another surprising fact brought out in this book is that the Democrats and Republicans both took positions during the Kennedy administration that were the direct opposite of the positions they take today.  As Stephen Moore points out, “the Republicans almost universally opposed and the Democrats almost universally favored” the cuts in tax rates that President Kennedy proposed.

        Such Republican Senate stalwarts as Barry Goldwater and Bob Dole voted against reducing the top tax rate from 91% to 70%.  Democratic Congressman Wilbur Mills led the charge for lower tax rates.

        Unlike the Republicans today, John F. Kennedy had an answer when critics tried to portray his tax cut proposal as just a “tax cut for the rich.”  President Kennedy argued that it was a tax cut for the economy, that changed incentives meant a faster growing economy and that “A rising tide lifts all boats.”

        If Republicans today cannot seem to come up with their own answer when critics cry out “tax cuts for the rich,” maybe they can just go back and read John F. Kennedy’s answer.

        A truly optimistic person might even hope that media pundits would go back and check out the facts before arguing as if the only way to reduce the deficit is to raise tax rates on “the rich.”

        If they are afraid that they would be stigmatized as conservatives if they favored cuts in tax rates, they might take heart from the fact that not only John F. Kennedy, but even John Maynard Keynes as well, argued that cutting tax rates could increase tax revenues and thereby help reduce the deficit.

        Because so few people bother to check the facts, Barack Obama can get away with statements about how “tax cuts for the rich” have “cost” the government money that now needs to be recouped.  Such statements not only promote class warfare, to Obama’s benefit on election day, they also distract attention from his own runaway spending behind unprecedented trillion dollar deficits. …”

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/11/28/an_overdue_book/page/full/

WSJ Economist Moore: No Grounds for Obama’s Tax on Wealthy

By Jim Meyers and John Bachman

“…Moore is a senior economics writer and editorial board member for The Wall Street Journal. He is the founder and former president of the Club for Growth and a best-selling author. He also wrote the cover story for Newsmax magazine’s October issue.

Moore’s new book is “Who’s The Fairest of Them All: The Truth about Opportunity, Taxes and Wealth in America.”

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV, Moore was asked if Obama and the Democrats are advocating higher taxes on the wealthy to improve the economy or to win over middle-class voters.

“I don’t think anybody thinks that raising tax rates will improve the economy. At least I certainly hope no one does because the history is so unequivocal that that’s not the case,” Moore says.

“In fact, what you want is lower tax rates, not higher tax rates, especially when we’re living in a global economy where United States companies are competing against companies in India and China and Germany and France and all over the world.

“So there’s no case on economic grounds for raising tax rates. President Obama is selling that idea on the grounds of fairness and that’s really the reason I wrote this book, to sort of define what does it really mean to be a fair society.

“What I show in this research is that the fairest  system of them all is the free enterprise system. The free enterprise system is what creates growth, creates jobs and higher living standards for almost all Americans. So it’s hard to improve on that system. President Obama believes that the way to create a fairer system is to redistribute income from the rich to the poor. That’s never worked very well.”

Americans are an “aspirational society” and don’t believe that rich people are evil, Moore adds.

“Most of us aspire to be rich and that’s really the American Dream — to try to work hard, start a business, do the right thing so you can get rich. And America’s still the best country in the world to do that, despite all the obstacles that government tries to create.

“I think President Obama is driven much more by an ideology that says, ‘Redistribute wealth instead of creating.’ It’s almost like the wealth is just automatically there and all we have to do is just cut up that pie differently. What I show in the book is that when you try to do that, what happens is the pie shrinks and everybody is worse off.”

Vice President Joe Biden recently said the middle class has been “buried” during the last few years. But Moore argues that the demise of the middle class is a myth.

He comments: “First of all, let me say that the demise of the middle class over the last three years is very real. We have seen a very steep decline in middle income earnings over the last three and a half years. Since President Obama came into office, there’s been a $4,500 decline in income. That’s huge. That’s one month’s income.

“What I was talking about in the book is, over the last several decades, in the ‘80s, ‘90s and even the first of the 2000s, the middle class did very well. President Obama says, ‘Oh, the recent decades have been a time of decline in the middle class.’ That’s not
true. The real decline of the middle class was George Bush’s last year in office and Barack Obama’s first three and a half years in office.” Moore points out that the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans pay most of the taxes — 75 percent of income taxes and 45 percent of all taxes. Yet some argue that the richest Americans are still doing really well when compared to the other 90 percent and can afford to chip in a little more in taxes.

“Look, we do need more tax revenues if we want to balance this budget. There’s absolutely no  question about it,” Moore says.

“Tax revenues as a percent of our GDP are lower than they’ve been in 40 years. My response to this argument about why not just soak the rich is that that’s never really worked very well. History proves if you want to get more revenues out of rich people, cut their tax rates, don’t raise them. That’s a lesson that John F. Kennedy taught us, Ronald Reagan taught us, even George W. Bush taught us.

“I don’t think there’s any evidence  that raising tax rates way up is going to get more money out of the rich because the rich will find shelters, they will find tax carve-outs and loopholes and deductions to hide their money.”

Another argument from the left is that we should raise tax rates to where they were under President Clinton. President Obama has pointed out that those rates did not slow down economic growth during Clinton’s tenure. Moore takes issue with that point of view.

“A couple of things,” he says. “One is that President Obama doesn’t want to just raise the rates to the Clinton era, he wants them to be a lot higher. People forget that also in the Obamacare healthcare law, there’s a 3.8 percent investment surtax so rates would actually go up about four percentage points higher than they were in the Clinton administration.

“But the other thing to point out is the Clinton years were prosperous, in part because under a Republican Congress and Bill Clinton, who was a conservative in terms of his fiscal policies, government spending fell as a share of GDP from 22 percent to 18 percent. So that’s like a tax cut when you cut government spending by four percentage points of GDP.

“Barack Obama’s done just the opposite. He’s raised gross spending by almost four percentage points of GDP. We’ve been averaging about 24 percent, which is the highest it’s been any time since World War II when we were fighting the Nazis and the Japanese.

“So the point I would make is that Barack Obama’s kind of the anti-Clinton. Obama’s not a fiscal conservative. He’s driven up the debt by over $1 trillion a year. Just last week, the numbers came out that we had a $1.1 trillion deficit in 2012. That’s four straight years with trillion-dollar deficits. That isn’t fiscal conservatism. That doesn’t help anybody.”

The Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire next year at the same time that automatic cuts in government spending are scheduled to take effect, possibly leading to what some have called a “fiscal cliff.” That makes this year’s election crucial, Moore asserts.

“The most important fiscal cliff is this tax increase, and the reason this is such an important election is if Barack Obama wins, he will have a mandate from voters to raise tax rates,” he tells Newsmax.

“I agree with the Congressional Budget Office and a lot of other economists that that’s something that could cause a double dip recession. And if you think the economy’s bad now, wait until
those tax rates go up in 2013.

“One of the arguments for Mitt Romney is he’s actually going to cut the rates, not raise them. I do think we need spending cuts. There’s a lot of people who say that we can’t afford to do these spending cuts next year. Yes, we can afford to do that.

“In fact, we have to do that. We have to start really taking a blade to government spending because that’s so inefficient and every dollar the government spends is a dollar less the private sector has to spend on its own expansions.”

Mitt Romney is vowing to cut taxes by 20 percent across the board and pay for those cuts by eliminating loopholes. Romney also says he believes in a progressive tax structure.

“I like his tax plan,” Moore says. “I don’t agree with everything in it but [I agree with] the basic concept, which Ronald Reagan did with Dan Rostenkowski and Bob Packwood and Ted Kennedy and Democrats back in the
1980s.

“It’s amazing how the Democrats have moved to the left. Back then, what we did is we cut tax rates significantly, very significantly, and we closed off loopholes to make a much more efficient tax system and it worked really well. That’s what Mitt Romney, for the most part, is trying to do — get rid of the pollution and the special interest carve-outs in the tax system, lower the rates for everybody.

“It’s been proven time again, that’s a very productive way to get the economy moving again. The numbers can add up. Ronald Reagan proved the numbers can add up. When we did the 1986 tax act, that lowered the rate all the way down to 28 percent. We actually got more revenues into the treasury, not less.”

Asked to give Romney’s plan a letter grade, Moore responds: “I’ll give him a B-plus. The tax plan is strong and it will move us right in the right direction.

“Now I’d like to see a flat tax. I’m a Steve Forbes guy. One rate for everybody with no deductions, no loopholes and you get rid of the double tax on saving and investment. That would be the optimal tax system but Mitt Romney’s plan moves us in that direction.

“Interestingly, under Mitt Romney, the top tax rate would be about 28 percent. Under Barack Obama, the top tax rate goes up to 42 percent. That’s a big difference.”

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/moore-obama-tax-plan/2012/10/09/id/459261#ixzz2DeMBPkui

75% of Obamacare taxes will be on middle-class

Stephen Moore: We’ve Spent Over a Million Dollars For Each Green Job 

Wall Street Journal Stephen Moore – Ron Paul’s IRS proposal 

Wall Street Journal’s Stephen Moore on the 2012 Election 

Ashbrook Center – Stephen Moore – Can Capitalism Make a Comeback? – April 4 2012 

Stephen Moore, Senior Economics writer for the Wall Street Journal speaks at an Ashbrook Center Major Issues Lecture on April 4, 2012. Moore addresses the topic : Can Capitalism Make a Comeback?

Stephen Moore – America at a Crossroads

Dr. Mathew Manweller of Central Washington University and Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal join members of the Freedom Foundation to discuss the direction the United States going into the 2012 election.

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

http://www.federalbudget.com/

http://www.federalbudget.com/

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
                                                  STAR - TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE
             TABLE 1.  SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS)

                                                        ACCOUNTING DATE:  10/12

   PERIOD                                                                     RECEIPTS                OUTLAYS    DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-)
+  ____________________________________________________________  _____________________  _____________________  _____________________
   PRIOR YEAR

     OCTOBER                                                                   163,072                261,539                 98,466
     NOVEMBER                                                                  152,402                289,704                137,302
     DECEMBER                                                                  239,963                325,930                 85,967
     JANUARY                                                                   234,319                261,726                 27,407
     FEBRUARY                                                                  103,413                335,090                231,677
     MARCH                                                                     171,215                369,372                198,157
     APRIL                                                                     318,807                259,690                -59,117
     MAY                                                                       180,713                305,348                124,636
     JUNE                                                                      260,177                319,919                 59,741
     JULY                                                                      184,585                254,190                 69,604
     AUGUST                                                                    178,860                369,393                190,533
     SEPTEMBER                                                                 261,566                186,386                -75,180

       YEAR-TO-DATE                                                          2,449,093              3,538,286              1,089,193

   CURRENT YEAR

     OCTOBER                                                                   184,316                304,311                119,995

       YEAR-TO-DATE                                                            184,316                304,311                119,995

http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts1012.txt

Another Day Older & Deeper In Debt: Federal Deficit to Top $1 Trillion for Fiscal Year  2012

Peter Schiff U.S. Debt Crisis

Vicious cycle of the US Debt & Deficit

President Obama Blaming Bush for Debt

Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending

Public Opinion for Libertarians – Bryan Caplan

Social Security trustees: We’re going broke

John C. Goodma

“…Here’s some bad news: The latest report of the Social Security and Medicare trustees shows an unfunded liability for both programs of $63 trillion. That is equal to about 4.5 times the entire U.S. gross domestic product.

US could be on path to fifth straight $1 trillion deficit after government runs $120 billion October deficit

“…The federal government started the 2013 budget year with a $120 billion deficit, an indication that the nation is on a path to its fifth straight $1 trillion-plus deficit.

The Facts About Budget Deficits: How The Presidents Truly Rank

James K. Glassman, Contributor

“…Please forgive me. Over and over, I hear misinformation about deficits in prior administrations, and I can’t keep quiet any longer. I have to correct the record.

The latest was on “Squawk Box” on Monday morning. Joe Kernan, the host, is interviewing former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, ex-candidate for president and chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Kernen cites campaign comments about “bad policies” going back “decades” affecting the high rate of unemployment today.

He asks, “What specific policies in the Bush Administration do you think are still being used to explain 8 percent unemployment?”

Dean responds, “The biggest ones are the deficits that were run up…. The deficits were enormous

Let’s shed some factual light on the situation by turning to table B-79 of the current Economic Report of the President. There we find the official statistics on federal spending, receipts, and deficits (or surpluses) as proportions of Gross Domestic Product. These are the figures that economists use in determining the relationship of the deficit to the overall economy, answering the question, “How much more are we spending than taking in?”

We can average the deficit-to-GDP ratio during a presidential term and get a good take on whether “deficits were enormous” in historic terms or not. The only tricky part is whether to give a president credit (or blame) for his incoming and outgoing years. For example, President Reagan took office on Jan. 20, 1980, but fiscal year 1980 started four months earlier. Similarly, he left office Jan. 20, 1989, but fiscal 1989 still had four months to run.

I decided to use three sets of calculations for each president: first, the deficit-to-GDP ratio from the fiscal year he took office to the fiscal year he left minus one (thus, for Reagan: 1981-88); second, from his first fiscal year plus one to the fiscal year he left (thus, 1982-89); and third, an average of the first two

Here are the ratios of deficit to GDP for the past five presidents:

Ronald Reagan 1981-88 4.2 % 1982-89 4.2 Average 4.2

George H. W. Bush 1989-92 4.0 1990-93 4.3 Average 4.2

Bill Clinton 1993-2000 0.8 1994-2001 0.1 Average 0.5

George W. Bush 2001-08 2.0 2002-09 3.4 Average 2.7

Barack Obama 2009-12* 9.1 2010-12 8.7 Average 8.9 *fiscal 2012 ends Sept. 30, 2012, so this figure is estimated

Source: Economic Report of the President, February 2012

The results for President Bush are skewed by the 10.1 percent deficit/GDP ratio in fiscal 2009. A large chunk of spending in that year went to the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. In fiscal 2009, TARP contributed $151 billion to the budget deficit, but in 2010 and 2011, $147 billion of that amount was recouped and thus reduced the size of the deficit during President Obama’s watch. (These calculations are complicated and are laid out by the Office of Management and Budget. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/spec.pdf, p. 49.)

As for spending itself, during the George W. Bush years (2001-08), federal outlays averaged 19.6 percent of GDP, a little less than during the Clinton years (1993-2000), at 19.8% and far below Reagan, whose outlays never dropped below 21 percent of GDP in any year and averaged 22.4%. Even factoring in the TARP year (2009), Bush’s average outlays as a proportion of the economy was 20.3 percent – far below Reagan and only a half-point below Clinton. As for Obama, even excluding 2009, his spending has averaged 24.1 percent of GDP – the highest level for any three years since World War II.

Americans can judge for themselves whether deficits are “enormous”– but only if they have the facts. In this case, there is no denying the order in which the last five presidents rank on the basis of deficits: Clinton, Bush 43, Bush 41 and Reagan in a virtual tie, and Obama. …”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesglassman/2012/07/11/the-facts-about-budget-deficits-how-the-presidents-truly-rank/

U.S. Debt by President

By Kimberly Amadeo, About.com Guide

The Best Way to Measure Debt by President:

President Barack Obama:

President George W. Bush:

President Ronald Reagan:

President George H.W. Bush:

Budget Deficits by Fiscal Year Since 1960:

Thelma & Louise:Ending Scene

Coyote Fall 

Fastest with the Mostest

Where Have all the Flowers Gone: Eve of Destruction 

Pete Seeger: Where Have All the Flowers Gone? 

Fiscal Cliff

The fiscal cliff: Another phony emergency to give the government more power

U.S Fiscal Cliff, What Could Happen? 

John Boehner on Fiscal Cliff: ‘White House Has to Get Serious’

Democratic Leaders: GOP Has Yet To Make Serious Offer As Fiscal Cliff Looms

Fiscal Cliff: Raising Taxes on Middle-Income Americans

Fiscal Cliff: Why Reducing Spending is Our Only Hope

Fiscal Cliff Debate: Austerity One Way or Austerity Another Way

Fiscal Cliff An Artificial Crisis

Robbing the Future with Budget Deficits

Taxes, Debt and the Fiscal Cliff pt3

Word of the Day: Fiscal Cliff!

Forward off the fiscal cliff: falling, falling, splat! 

Time is quickly running out for President Barack Obama and the congressional leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties as they attempt to negotiate a deal that would avert going over the year-end “fiscal cliff.”

If a deal or fiscal cliff fix is not agreed to by then, the so-called Bush marginal tax rate cuts would expire on Jan. 1, 2013 followed by the cutting or sequestration of government spending on Jan. 15.

Should these massive tax hikes and huge spending cuts happen, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has projected that the unemployment rate would rise above 9 percent in the latter half of 2013 from its present level of 7.9 percent with the economy going into another recession, with negative economic growth in real gross domestic product for the first two quarters of 2013.

In a November report titled “Economic Effects of Policies Contributing to Fiscal

Tightening in 2013,” the CBO projected that “if all of that fiscal tightening occurs, real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) will drop by .5 percent in 2013 (as measured by the change from the fourth quarter of 2012 to the fourth quarter of 2013), reflecting a decline in the first half of the year and renewed growth at a modest pace later in the year.”

The estimated 10-year cost of the expiration of the Bush 2001/2003 marginal rate tax cuts is $2.4 trillion. The estimated cost of the expiration of Alternative Minimum Tax (ATM) patches is $864 billion and of various “tax extenders” is $890 billion.   Over a 10-year period, the spending cuts or sequester of 10 percent of defense spending is estimated to be $510 billion and of 8 percent of non-defense spending is estimated to be $335 billion.

A majority of Democrats and Republicans appear to agree that the Bush marginal rate tax cuts should be extended for those individuals earning less than $250,000. Both parties also agree on extending the ATM patches, tax extenders (R&D tax credit and others) and the so-called doc fix for Medicare reimbursement. Both parties appear to agree on not extending the temporary one year 2 percent reduction in the Social Security (FICA) employee payroll tax and not extending unemployment insurance benefits.

The biggest disagreements between both political parties is over Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, with its additional 3.8 percent tax on dividends and capital gains and a .9 percent tax on wage income for those earning more than $250,000. The Republican Party wants to repeal Obamacare in its entirety, while the Democrat Party wants Obamacare to be implemented on schedule.

Obama and the Democratic Party want to raise the marginal tax rates of those earning above $250,000 by increasing the marginal tax bracket rates from 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent to 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent and increasing the estate tax from 35 percent for estates over $5 million to 55 percent for estates over $1 million. The Democrats also want to increase the capital gains tax from 15 percent to 20 percent and tax dividends as ordinary income.

In a nationally televised statement to the nation on Nov. 28, Obama said, “”Our ultimate goal is to get an agreement that is fair and balanced.” “If Congress does nothing, every family in America will see their taxes automatically go up at the beginning of next year,” the president added.

The Republican Party wants the Bush marginal tax rates either made permanent or extended for at least another year and either the elimination of the estate tax or no changes in the current estate tax. Republicans also want to either eliminate the tax on capital gains and dividends taxes or leave their taxation unchanged. They argue that it is the successful small business owner who creates wealth, income and jobs.

House Speaker John Boehner said, “Raising tax rates is unacceptable.” and added “Frankly, it couldn’t even pass the House. I’m not sure it could pass the Senate.”

Boehner concluded, “The goal here is to grow the economy and control spending. You’re not going to grow the economy if you raise the top 2 percent rates. It’ll hurt small businesses and it’ll hurt our economy, why this is not the right approach.”

However, the biggest differences between both political parties in their attempt to avoid falling off the fiscal cliff concerns government spending cuts or sequestration. The real problem is not adequate tax revenues, but excessive government spending, with deficit spending under President George W. Bush of nearly $3.3 trillion over eight fiscal years (2002-2009) and Barack Obama of nearly $5.1 trillion over four fiscal years (2010-2013).

Next week part 2 of this article will address the challenge of cutting federal government spending.

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com

TIME Explains- the Fiscal Cliff

Complete explanation of ‘fiscal cliff’

The Fiscal Cliff — Everything You Need to Know Explained

The fiscal cliff explained (with help from Hollywood)

Fiscal Cliff An Artificial Crisis

Peter Schiff Explains Why Libs Are Willing To Go Off The ‘Fiscal Cliff’

Douglas Holtz-Eakin: Going Off the Fiscal Cliff Is Irresponsible

Senator Pat Toomey on Fiscal Cliff: A Strong Recovery Is within Reach

2012 Fiscal Cliff

Fiscal Cliff: How Much Would Taxes Rise in 2013?

Donald Marron, director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, walks viewers through the anatomy of the Fiscal Cliff, explaining exactly what as it stake for Americans in various income groups.

RON PAUL TALKING ABOUT THE FISCAL CLIFF!

Fiscal Cliff – Clock Ticking – Cavuto

MiMike Maloney on the Fiscal Cliff and the “Holy Sh*t” Demographic Bankrupting America!

Black Friday, Fiscal Cliff, Gold, Dollar

The Real Fiscal Cliff: How to Spot the Ledge | Peter Schiff

With Election Over, Washington Shifts Focus to Fiscal Cliff

Is America about to Fall off the Fiscal Cliff?

United States fiscal cliff

“…The “Fiscal Cliff” refers to the expected slow down in the U.S. economy if spending from the government goes down as much as scheduled and taxes go up as much as scheduled on January 2013.^[1] These laws include tax increases due to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and spending cuts under the Budget Control Act of 2011. The Congressional Budget Office reported an increased risk of recession during 2013 if the deficit is reduced suddenly, while indicating that lower deficits and debt would in time improve long-term economic growth.^[2] The deficit for 2013 is projected to be reduced by roughly half. Further, over the next ten years, projected increases in the United States public debt would be lowered by as much as $7.1 trillion or about 70%, resulting in a considerably lower ratio of debt relative to the size of the economy.

The Budget Control Act of 2011 was enacted as a compromise to resolve a dispute concerning the public debt ceiling. Deficit spending previously appropriated by Congress was bringing the federal government’s total debt close to the statutory ceiling. Republicans in Congress refused to approve an increase in the ceiling unless there were deep spending cuts. The Budget Control Act included an immediate increase in the debt ceiling, along with a mechanism for facilitating two additional increases. It also provided for automatic spending cuts to begin on January 2, 2013.

The year-over-year changes for fiscal years 2012–2013 include a 19.63% increase in tax revenue and 0.25% reduction in spending. These changes would return tax revenue to approximately its historical average of 18% GDP, while continuing to spend at dollar levels held approximately the same since 2009.^[3] Some major programs, like Social Security, Medicaid, federal pay (including military pay and pensions), and veterans’ benefits, are exempted from the spending cuts. Spending for federal agencies and cabinet departments would be reduced through broad, shallow cuts (referred to as budget sequestration).

The projected effects of these changes have led to calls both inside and outside of Congress to extend some or all of the tax cuts, and to replace the across-the-board reductions with more targeted cutbacks. It has been speculated that any change is unlikely to come until the period roughly between the 2012 federal elections and the end of the year. Additionally, the debate may be exacerbated by the expectation that the debt ceiling is expected to be reached before the end of 2012,^{[note 1]} unless “extraordinary measures” are used.^[4] Nearly all proposals to avoid the fiscal cliff involve extending certain parts of the 2010 Tax Relief Act or changing the 2011 Budget Control Act or both, thus making the deficit larger by reducing taxes and/or increasing spending.

Etymology

The term ‘fiscal cliff’ had in the past been used to refer to various fiscal issues. The term started being used in the current context near the original expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2010.^[5] In 2011, the term started to be used to refer to the deficit reductions that would occur in 2013 under current law.^[6]

In late February 2012, Ben Bernanke, chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, popularized the term “fiscal cliff” for this crisis. Before the House Financial Services Committee he described that “a massive fiscal cliff of large spending cuts and tax increases” would take place on January 1, 2013.^[7][8]

Some analysts have argued that “fiscal slope” or “fiscal hill” would be more appropriate terminology because while the cumulative economic effect over all of 2013 would be substantial, it would not be felt immediately but rather gradually as the weeks and months went by.^[9]

Legislative history

During a lame duck session in December 2010, Congress passed the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. The act extended the Bush tax cuts for an additional two years and “patched” the exemptions to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) for tax year 2011. This act also authorized a one-year reduction in the Social Security (FICA) employee payroll tax. This was extended for an additional year by the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, which also extended federal unemployment benefits and the freeze on Medicare physician payments.^[10]

On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011 as part of an agreement to resolve the debt-ceiling crisis. The Act provided for a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the “super committee”) to produce legislation by late November that would decrease the deficit by $1.2 trillion over ten years. If the committee failed to do so, as it in fact had failed to do,^[11] another part of the Act directs automatic across-the-board cuts (known as “sequestrations”), split evenly between defense and domestic spending, beginning January 2, 2013. Also, the Affordable Care Act imposed new taxes on families making more than $250,000 a year ($200,000 for individuals) starting at the same time.^[12]

At the end of 2011, the patch to the AMT exemptions expired. Technically, the AMT thresholds immediately reverted to their 2000 tax year levels, a drop of 26% for single people and 40% for married couples. Anyone over these reduced thresholds at the end of 2012 would be subject to the AMT. Therefore, more taxpayers would pay more unless some legislation was passed (as was done in 2007) that affects the exemptions retroactively.^[10]

Current laws leading to the fiscal cliff

The following provisions of current law are most involved in the fiscal cliff:^[13][14]

• Expiration of the Bush tax cuts extended by President Obama in the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010;

• Across-the-board spending cuts (“sequestration”) to most discretionary programs as directed by the Budget Control Act of 2011;

• Reversion of the Alternative Minimum Tax thresholds to their 2000 tax year levels;

• Expiration of measures delaying the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate from going into effect (the “doc fix”), most recently extended by the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (MCTRJCA);

• Expiration of the 2% Social Security payroll tax cut, most recently extended by MCTRJCA;

• Expiration of federal unemployment benefits, most recently extended by MCTRJCA and

• New taxes imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

Without new legislation, these provisions will automatically go into effect on January 1 or 2, 2013, except for the Alternative Minimum Tax growth, which may be changed retroactively. Some provisions will increase taxes (the expiration of the Bush and FICA payroll tax cuts and the new Affordable Care tax and AMT thresholds) while others will reduce spending (sequestration, expiration of unemployment benefits and implementation of the Medicare SGR).^[13]

Proposals to avoid the fiscal cliff involve repealing legislation containing certain of these provisions or passing new legislation to extend provisions that are due to expire. Different proposals may include changes to some or all of the above provisions. For example, the Congressional Budget Office’s “Alternative Fiscal Scenario” includes only the first four items above. Changes to other provisions are also sometimes included in such proposals; for example, changing the original caps on discretionary appropriations contained in 2011′s Budget Control Act, indexing the AMT exemptions for inflation or the wholesale or partial reform of the tax laws or entitlement programs.^[15]

Congressional Budget Office projections

US federal debt from 1940 to 2022. The right side of the diagram projects what would happen to the debt if Congress (a) allows current laws to take effect and reduce the deficit (the baseline) or (b) extends the current policies, such as keeping tax cuts in place (the alternative).

CBO scenarios

Decisions regarding the fiscal cliff will have meaningful implications for deficits, debt, and economic growth. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has projected two fiscal scenarios for the years 2013 to 2022:^[16]

• The baseline projection. This scenario would have lower deficits and debt but also have lower spending and higher taxes.

• The alternative fiscal scenario. Higher deficits and debt but lower taxes and higher spending.^{[note 2]}

These paint starkly different fiscal futures. If Congress and the President do not act, allowing tax cuts to expire and mandated spending cuts to be implemented, the next decade will more closely resemble the baseline projection. If they act to extend current policies, keeping lower tax rates in place and postponing or preventing the spending cuts, the next decade will more closely resemble the alternate fiscal scenario.

Baseline projection. The CBO has been publishing baseline projections since 1985.^[15] Under “the baseline”, tax cuts are allowed to expire and spending cuts are implemented in 2013, resulting in higher tax revenues plus lower spending, deficits, debt and interest for the next decade and beyond. Future deficits would be reduced from an estimated 8.5% of GDP in 2011 to 1.2% by 2021. Revenues would rise towards 24% GDP, versus the historical average 18% GDP.^[17]

The total deficit reduction or debt avoidance over ten years could be as high as $7.1 trillion, versus the $10–11 trillion debt increases if current policies are extended. In other words, roughly 70% of debt increases projected over the next 10 years could be avoided by allowing laws on the books during 2012 to be implemented.^[18]

CBO estimates under the baseline projection that public debt rises from 69% GDP in 2011 to 84% by 2035.^[19] In the long run, lower deficits and debt should lead to relatively higher growth estimates. But, in the short run, real GDP growth in 2013 would likely be reduced to 0.5% from 1.1%. This would mean a high probability of recession (a 1.3% GDP contraction) during the first half of the year followed by 2.3% growth in the second half.^[20][21]

Alternate fiscal scenario. If Congress “avoids” the fiscal cliff, the future more closely resembles the continuation of 2012 policies, described by the CBO’s “alternative fiscal scenario.” This scenario involves extending the Bush income tax cuts, restricting the reach of the AMT, and keeping Medicare reimbursement rates at the current level (the so-called “doc fix”, versus declining by one-third as mandated under current law). Revenues are assumed to remain around the historical average 18% GDP. Under this scenario, public debt rises from 69% GDP in 2011 to 100% by 2021 and approaches 190% by 2035. This scenario has considerably higher debt and interest payments than the baseline projection, but short-term impact on the economy is avoided.^[19]

CBO Infographic.

Projected effects

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that allowing certain laws on the books during 2012 to expire or take effect in 2013 (the baseline scenario) would cut the 2013 deficit approximately in half and significantly reduce the trajectory of future deficits and debt increases for the next decade and beyond. However, the 2013 deficit reduction would adversely impact the economy in the short-run. On the other hand, if Congress acts to extend current policies (the alternative scenario), deficits and debt will rise rapidly over the next decade and beyond, slowing the economy over the long run and dramatically increasing interest costs.^[16]

CBO estimates that if the baseline scenario is allowed to take effect in 2013, it would reduce federal spending by $103 billion and increase tax revenues by $399 billion (and another $105 billion “mostly in revenue”) through September 2013 (the end of FY2013). This would amount to a net total of $560 billion, roughly half the $1.2 trillion FY2011 deficit.^[20] The White House estimates that a family of four with an income of $50,000 to $85,000 would pay an additional $2,200 in federal taxes.^[22]

The CBO has identified the following metrics for its baseline and alternative scenarios for the period starting January 2013:^[23]

Consideration of these scenarios and other options^{[note 2]} leads to what the CBO calls “a broad spectrum of fiscal policy choices”.^[23]

Estimated deficit for the first year

The CBO estimated that the total deficit of fiscal year 2012 (which ends on September 30, 2012) will be $1.171 trillion. The CBO also estimated that the total reductions to the fiscal year 2013 deficit by letting current laws take effect (which increase taxes and reduce spending) would be about $560 billion.^[20]

Therefore, since the total US public debt was approximately $11.053 trillion as of July 2012,^[24] the public debt would climb by the end of FY2013 to either $11.664 trillion (if Congress does nothing, allowing current law to take effect) or $12.224 trillion (if the fiscal cliff is avoided, extending current tax and spending policies into the future), all other considerations remaining the same. This difference amounts to 5.07% of the federal debt in nine months.

Under current laws scheduled to take effect by the end of 2012, the total 2013 deficit will be $612 billion, as opposed to $1,171 billion for the previous year. The chart at the right contains a breakdown of the currently authorized reductions to the FY2013 deficit. The total of this chart is $606 billion but this is without considering economic feedback. Reduced taxes and increased spending, due to the 1.3% contraction in the first half of 2013, as well as other constraints, are expected to decrease the savings by $47 billion, giving a net total of $560 billion in deficit reduction during FY2013.^[20][21]

CBO analysis of policy options

The CBO reported in November 2012 the economic and employment effects of various policy options related to the cliff. Each option has a different GDP and employment impact per dollar of deficit impact. In other words, some choices are more economically efficient. CBO explained why spending cuts have a more significant adverse impact on the economy than tax increases per dollar of deficit reduction: “The larger ‘bang for the buck’ next year of the spending policies under the alternative fiscal scenario occurs because, CBO expects, a significant part of the decrease in taxes (relative to those under current law) would be saved rather than spent.”^[25]

Effects of sequestration

The spending reduction elements of the fiscal cliff are primarily contained within the Budget Control Act of 2011, which directed that both defense and non-defense discretionary spending^{[note 3]} be reduced by “sequestration” if Congress was unable to agree on other spending cuts of similar size. Congress was unable to reach agreement and therefore the sequestrations are expected start taking effect on January 2, 2013 if Congress, and President Obama, do not agree to a budget deficit reduction plan. The scope of the law excludes major mandatory programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

The effect on both defense and non-defense discretionary spending will be significant if the cliff is not avoided. Cuts totaling $110 billion per year will be applied from 2013 to 2022, split evenly ($55 billion each) to defense and non-defense discretionary spending. For scale, discretionary funding for 2011 totaled $1,277 billion: budget authority of $712 billion for defense and funding totaling $566 billion for non-defense activities.^[15]

During 2013, defense and non-defense discretionary spending would be maintained around 2012 levels due to the sequester. However, the spending begins to rise thereafter, but not at the pace projected prior to the sequester. In other words, the trajectory of spending increases is reduced, but spending is not frozen at 2012 levels. Defense and non-defense discretionary spending increases from 2013–2021 would be about 1.5% annually, significantly below the prior decade.^[15]

For example, according to the CBO Historical Tables, defense spending (including overseas contingency operations for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) grew from $295 billion in 2000 to $700 billion in 2011, an annual growth rate of 8.2%. Non-defense discretionary spending grew at a 6.6% annual rate during that time, from $320 billion to $646 billion.^[26]

The austerity represented by the sequester is not unprecedented; from 1990–1999, defense spending actually declined by about 1% annually, from $300 billion to $276 billion, although non-defense discretionary spending grew by 4.5% annually, rising from $200 to $297 billion.^[26]

The CBO estimated the possible impact on defense spending in October 2011 testimony: “Compliance with the caps on discretionary funding could occur through many different combinations of defense and non-defense funding. For example, defense and nondefense appropriations might be cut proportionally relative to the funding that would be necessary to keep pace with inflation. In that case, funding for defense programs apart from overseas contingency operations would drop from $552 billion in 2011 to $538 billion in 2012 before rising again and reaching $637 billion in 2021 (see Table 3).^[15]

Between 2012 and 2021, such funding would be $445 billion less than the amount that would occur if the amount of funding for 2011 grew at the rate of inflation. When measured as a share of GDP, funding for defense would decline by about 1 percentage point from 2011 to 2021, or by more than one-fourth (see Table 5). Funding for defense in 2021 (excluding overseas contingency operations) would represent 2.7 percent of GDP; by comparison, annual funding for defense (excluding overseas contingency operations) has averaged 3.4 percent of GDP during the past decade.”^[15]

The CBO estimated the possible impact on non-defense discretionary spending in October 2011 testimony: “If defense and nondefense appropriations were cut proportionally relative to the funding that would be necessary to keep pace with inflation, nondefense budget authority would decrease from $511 billion in 2011 to $505 billion in 2012 before rising again and reaching $597 billion in 2021 (see Table 4). Between 2012 and 2021, budget authority for nondefense purposes would be $418 billion less than the amount that would be provided if funding grew at the rate of inflation after 2011. Under an assumption that the obligation limitations for certain transportation programs grow over time at the rate of inflation, nondefense funding in 2021 would represent 2.8 percent of GDP; by comparison, such funding has averaged 4.1 percent of GDP during the past decade (see Figure 6).”^[15]

Effects of tax increases

Various sources estimated the 2013 impact on taxpayers (individual and married filing jointly) from the tax increases that would occur if the Bush income tax cuts and Obama payroll tax cuts are allowed to expire. The table below shows the dollar and percentage increase in taxes due and assumes two federal allowances are taken. The interactive tool at the source cited can be adjusted based on the reader’s circumstances.^[27]

Commentary

Many experts have argued that the U.S. should avoid the fiscal cliff while taking steps to bring the long-term deficit and debt trajectory under control.^[28][29][30] For example, economist Paul Krugman recommended that the U.S. focus on employment in the short-run, rather than the deficit.^[30] Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke emphasized the importance of balancing long-term deficit reduction with actions that would not slow the economy in the short-run.^[29] Charles Konigsburg, who directed the bi-partisan Domenici-Rivlin deficit reduction panel, advocated avoiding the fiscal cliff while taking steps to reduce the budget deficit over time. He recommended the adoption of ideas from deficit panels such as Domenici-Rivlin and Bowles-Simpson that accomplish these two goals.^[28]

Other experts at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Carlyle Group have argued that allowing the tax increases and spending cuts to occur under current law may be necessary to create the “grand bargain” required to get the U.S. deficit and debt trajectory under control for the long-run. In other words, allowing current law to take effect would create conditions under which legislators might be forced to enact better designed deficit reduction approaches of similar or greater magnitude.^[31]

Even financial news networks CNBC and CNBC.com are launching a network-wide initiative aimed at calling attention to the fiscal situation. The network’s campaign is called “RISE ABOVE”^[32], a call to action appealing to everyone to rise above partisan political views in an effort to come to agreement on a plan that tackles both the long and short term challenges to the American economy. CNBC plans to engage business leaders, politicians and viewers through a series of programming efforts designed to increase the understanding of the core issues and to raise the level of dialogue beyond the rhetoric and talking points that have saturated media coverage of the ‘fiscal cliff.’^[33]

Proposals to mitigate the fiscal cliff

Congress

U.S. Federal budget deficit as % of GDP assuming continuation of certain policies for 2012-2022. The baseline deficit assumes current law takes effect, meaning tax cuts expire and spending cuts are applied. Avoiding the “fiscal cliff” increases the projected deficit.

Congressional Republicans have proposed that the Bush tax cuts be extended in their entirety.^[34] In August 2012, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that extending these tax cuts for the 2013–2022 time period would add $3.18 trillion to the national debt relative to the current law baseline, comprising $2.74 trillion in foregone tax revenue plus another $0.44 trillion for interest and debt service costs.^[35]

On July 25, 2012, the U.S. Senate voted 51–48 to pass a bill supporting the President’s tax proposal which extended cuts for most taxpayers, while rejecting the Republican proposal of extending the tax cuts for all 45–54.^[36] The U.S. House of Representatives rejected, 170–257, the President’s tax proposal on August 1, 2012.^[37]

As of November 1, 2012, a group of senators, now called the Gang of Eight, composed of Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin D-Il., Finance Committee member Tom Coburn, R-Okla., Budget Committee Chair Kent Conrad, D-N.D., Sen. Michael F. Bennet, D-Colo., Sen. Mark R. Warner, D-Va., Finance member Mike Crapo, R-Idaho., Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., and Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., have been working since 2011 but “has so far failed to reach an agreement after more than a year of talks.”^[38] Because of the number of spending cuts and tax changes, at least half a dozen committees, such as the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees, might want to weigh in on the bill.^[38] Congressional rules allow bills to skip committee hearings, but the group lacks the clout to “push its plan through Congress outside the regular order of business”.^[38]

On November 16, 2012, the US leaders announced that President Obama (D) met with House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) “to discuss” the plan “to work on” a plan “over the weekend” “to create a plan” that would be ready to present the week of November 26, 2012 concerning the fiscal cliff.^[39]

IRS

In a three-page letter, Steven Miller, acting IRS Commissioner, outlined the effects of the fiscal cliff and said that the IRS is working under the assumption that Congress would “patch” the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The patch prevents the AMT from impacting many more taxpayers. This is similar to what Congress has done in previous years.^[40]

President’s position

Since the budgetary and economic impact is due to existing laws, Congress would have to pass new legislation and have the President sign it into law to avoid the cliff. Since a Presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate to override, a Presidential veto of attempts to avoid the cliff would likely ensure that significant deficit reduction would occur. The President has promised to veto any attempt to bypass the cliff that does not include an increase of tax rates for the wealthy.^[41]

Timeline

• March 23, 2010: President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. One of this law’s provisions is to impose new taxes on families making $250,000 per year or more starting in 2013.^[42]
• December 17, 2010: Obama signed the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, patching the AMT through 2011 and extending the Bush tax cuts to the end of 2012.^[43]
• August 2, 2011: The President signed the Budget Control Act of 2011. This act provided that, if the Joint Select Committee did not produce bipartisan legislation, across-the-board spending cuts would take effect on January 2, 2013.^[44]
• February 22, 2012: Obama signed into law the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, which extended the following provisions until December 31, 2012: the 2% Social Security payroll tax cut, federal unemployment benefits and the freeze on Medicare physician payments.^[45]
• February 29, 2012: Ben Bernanke popularized the term “fiscal cliff” in his testimony before the House Financial Services Committee.^[8][7]
• July 3, 2012: IMF head Lagarde warned that the threat of “going over the fiscal cliff” could weaken the US economy later in 2012. The IMF also reduced its projection for US growth in 2013 from 2.4 to 2.25 percent of GDP.^[46]
• July 17, 2012: Bernanke pushed Congress to avoid the fiscal cliff, warning that a failure to do so will further dampen the sluggish economic recovery.^[29]
• July 31, 2012: Reid and Boehner agreed on a continuing resolution that would pay for the day-to-day running of the government until the end of March 2013. This does not affect the fiscal cliff or the debt-ceiling.^[47]
• August 7, 2012: Obama signed the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012, which directed his administration to detail in 30 days how they plan to implement the automatic cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act.^[48]
• September 14, 2012: Obama released his 400-page document detailing cuts.^[49] http://cdn.govexec.com/media/gbc/docs/pdfs_edit/091412cc1.pdf ^[50]
• October 22, 2012: At the third of three presidential debates, Obama says sequestration will not happen.^[51]
• November 16, 2012: US leaders announced that they met “to discuss” the plan “to work on” a plan “over the weekend” “to create a plan” that would be ready to present the week of November 26, 2012 concerning the fiscal cliff.^{[39] …”}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_fiscal_cliff

Why Not Just Fall Off the Fiscal Cliff?

Contrarians and some politicos on both the left and the right have started to ask the forbidden question

By Joyce Hanson, AdvisorOne

“…As everyone knows by now, considering all the talk by market pundits and business media, fear of falling off the fiscal cliff has become the obsession du jour ever since President Obama won re-election. The threatened results of a failure to resolve the issue – including tax hikes, spending cuts and an almost certain recession – sound so dire that nobody wants the U.S. to fall off that cliff.

Then again, maybe some do. Contrarians and some politicos on both the left and the right have started to ask the forbidden question: Why not just fall off the fiscal cliff?

For example, conservative thinker Marc A. Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute dared suggest in an opinion piece for The Washington Post on Monday that the best way to start the new year in a bipartisan fashion would be to head over the cliff.

“Today, the only ones in Washington who advocate fiscal cliff-diving are liberal Democrats. It’s time for conservatives to join them. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will strengthen the GOP’s hand in tax negotiations next year, and it may be the only way Republicans can force President Obama and Senate Democrats to agree to fundamental tax reform,” Thiessen wrote.

True enough, liberal Paul Krugman in a post-election column for The New York Times on Nov. 8 urged Democrats not to make a deal in terms of accommodating Republican demands.

“I don’t mean to minimize the very real economic dangers posed by the so-called fiscal cliff that is looming at the end of this year if the two parties can’t reach a deal,” Krugman wrote. “The looming combination of tax increases and spending cuts looks easily large enough to push America back into recession. Nobody wants to see that happen. Yet it may happen all the same, and Mr. Obama has to be willing to let it happen if necessary.”

Facing What May Become Reality

After the Dec. 31 deadline, if no compromise is reached, both the Bush-era tax cuts and the Obama administration’s payroll tax cut are scheduled to expire. At the same time, $1.2 trillion of automatic “sequestration” spending cuts divided equally between defense and non-defense discretionary programs are set to kick in.

Some market participants are girding themselves to face the reality of Washington gridlock if lawmakers fail to reach any kind of a fiscal cliff compromise, whether it’s a continued kicking of the can down the road or a grand bargain.

For example, Mike Acton (left), director of research for AEW, an institutional investment manager that focuses on real estate, said that contrarians are arguing that if tax rates go back to where they were 10 years ago, it would generate as much as $4.5 trillion of new revenue.

“So if in January the Bush tax cuts went away, that would allow $1.5 trillion of reduction in the debt ceiling as called for by the deficit supercommittee,” Acton said. “They created that as a way to force an agreement.”

Acton noted that falling off the cliff would mean that the capital gains tax, dividend tax, estate taxes and personal income tax rates would all go back up. …”

http://www.advisorone.com/2012/11/20/why-not-just-fall-off-the-fiscal-cliff

Greenspan: ‘Markets Will Crater’ With Fiscal Cliff

Former Fed chairman says mild recession is ‘cheap price’ of coming crisis

By John Sullivan, AdvisorOne

“…Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan told Bloomberg Television on Friday that “markets will crater if we run into any evidence that we can’t solve this [fiscal cliff] problem.”

Greenspan, who said recently that big Wall Street banks should allowed to go bankrupt, said, “If we get out of this with a moderate recession, I would say that the price is very cheap.”

Greenspan on the fiscal cliff:

“We have to recognize that this is going to be extraordinarily difficult to solve. All of the simple low hanging fruits have been picked and the presumption that we are going to resolve the big issue on spending by making a few little twitches here and there I think is a little naive. If we get out of this with a moderate recession, I would say that the price is very cheap. The presumption that we will solve this problem without paying I think is grossly inappropriate.”

On Simpson and Bowles saying that the markets could crash if a deal isn’t made:

“I think it is not only Simpson-Bowles. I think the markets are getting very shaky. And they are getting shaky because I think fiscal policy is out of control. And I think the markets will crater if we run into any evidence that we cannot solve this problem. And I think the notion that the issue of the impact on the economy is strictly the spending tax issue, is also the market. I think we underestimate the extent to which the market value of assets has a very important impact on real GDP.”

On whether the U.S. is headed into a recession even if a deal is made:

“Not necessarily. I am just saying that we may get a deal, which will take us for next year or so. But the question isn’t that. I think the question is essentially how are we going to stop what is a critical problem here, an extraordinarily rapid rise in what the Department of Commerce calls government social benefits to persons, which has been rising very rapidly bipartisanly in the sense that it has been rising even faster under Republican administrations than Democratic administrations. And they are all very closely involved in these new benefits, the only problem is that it is eating into the savings of the society and our long-term growth. And yes, we can continue for the next year or so without any really serious problems emerging. But I think it is a highly risky endeavor.

“The problem is, if we are going to come to grips with this thing, we are going to have to recognize that even if we have got to pay the cost of a significant rise in taxes to get a significant slowing and then decline in social benefits, that is a very cheap price in the sense that a large increase in taxes required to fund what is currently on the books is going to cause a recession. But I think that if we can get away with that is the only cost to this whole problem, I think that is a pretty good deal.”

On where Republicans and Democrats will find common ground on cutting entitlement programs:

“It is going to be extraordinarily difficult. The issue is that words matter. If you ask the average person in the street about, for example, their social security benefits, they will say we have paid in, it is our money, we have earned it, I am getting it back. It is not welfare, it is not charity. It is equivalent to a private, fully-funded pension fund. It isn’t. It is essentially extremely underfunded. In fact, if we were to go to a fully-funded system, comparable to those fully-funded private systems, we would have to cut benefits by the equivalent of 4% points of payroll taxes or raise payroll taxes by the equivalent amount. Those are very large numbers and would suggest that yes, indeed, people have put money in, but certainly not enough to fund what they are getting back. The notion that we have to confront is that people do not think that this is any different from a private fund. The trouble is that it is.”

On tax policy:

“The problem basically is that we have tried for decades to somehow manage our budget in such a way that, yes we can run deficits of this or that size, and we use it sophisticatedly for fiscal policy. It turns out we cannot do that well. It gets out of hand and this is not an accident. There is no question that raising taxes will turn the economy downward. Ideally I would like to just cut spending. I do not think politically that is feasible because the problem, no matter how you look at it, is fundamentally this extraordinary rise in social benefits to persons. That is the core of the problem. But the issue is, if we can solve it the way I would want to solve it, if we go back to where we were earlier at a much lower level of those benefits because I think what is then going on in recent years, we have not been able to afford.”

On whether tax rate increases or eliminating deductions and closing loopholes will get the revenue agreement:

“I agree with those who argue that marginal tax rates really do matter. And I thought the genius of the Simpson-Bowles plan to identify a trillion dollars’ worth of tax expenditures which Republicans can a look at as subsidies, and the Democrats can look at as increased taxes to upper income groups. The problem is you are looking at the same issue and you can compromise on that. But look, if the issue here is whether you do it tax rates or you do it by taking loopholes out so to speak, obviously the latter is the better choice by far. The issue here is in both cases, you lower the rate of savings in a society and that will curtail capital investment, curtail the rate of growth and productivity, and essentially slow down the rate of real resource creation, which at the end of the day is what funds social benefits.” …”

http://www.advisorone.com/2012/11/17/greenspan-markets-will-crater-with-fiscal-cliff?t=tax-planning&page=2

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

21 New or Higher Taxes Coming With Obamacare in 2013–Falling Off The Fiscal Cliff Into The Abyss of The Obama Recession And Fall–Reviving America–Reprieve–Videos

Economic Consequences of Obama: Worse Economic Recovery in U.S. History–Jumping Off The Fiscal Cliff–Fuse Lit On Debt Bomb!–Videos

Petraeus – Benghazi Scandal: Best Explanation out there today!!! Glenn Beck 11.12.12

Benghazi-gate Obama Cover-Up

Benghazi Gate – Obama Admin & The Cover-up Continues

Obama Admin Are You Lying About Benghazi To Get Elected? – Judge

Obama and his Press Secretary Blaming the Video for the Benghazi Attack

Rice: Libya attacks spontaneous

LIBYA Susan Rice: Embassy Attack By Extremists Is Spontaneous, Heavy Weapons Accessible

Ambassador Rice: Anti-Islam Film Responsible For Attacks, Not Administration’s Policy

Chris Wallace Grills Robert Gibbs Over Obama Admin.’s Insistence That Libya Attack Was Spontaneous

Innocence of Muslims Full Movie HD 1080P Trailer

SHOCKING: OBAMA Knew Libya Attack Was Terrorism Within 24 Hours

Glenn Beck discusses Benghazi and Petraeus with Judge Napolitano

Glenn Beck – Sex, Lies, and Libya Part 1

Glenn Beck – Sex, Lies, and Libya Part 2

Obama Has Crossed A Line – TheBlaze

GBTV: President is lying

Rush Limbaugh – Obama Lied About the Benghazi Terrorist Attack

James Clapper, Dir. of Nat’l Intelligence, is making Gen. Petraeus “an offer he can’t refuse” (Beck)

Benghazi Libya – James Clapper Taking The Blame?

Intelligence chief on Benghazi

The O’Reilly Factor Recorded Nov 16, 2012

US CONSULATE In LIBYA Was Actually ATTACKED By AL-QAEDA

Benghazi-Gate: Connection between CIA and al-Qaeda in Libya and Syria, with Turkey’s Help

Gowdy Calls for Clear Answers on Benghazi from the Administration

Judge Napolitano on Fox News: Libyan Embassy Attack Is Blowback 10/22/12

Petraeus, Allen, Gaouette, Ham: The Benghazi Story The Media Isn’t Telling You

General Petraeus Sex Scandal…

Benghazi why not what

Petraeus wants to clear up confusion

Gen. Petraeus Testimony Ends GOP Benghazi Scandal Or Does It?

David Petraeus Affair Scandal Fallout: ‘This Week’ Roundtable Discussion

CNN: FBI Raids Home Of General Petraeus Mistress

Benghazi Attack Exposed – G Edward Griffin Speculates on the Conspiracy – Is Petraeus a Scapegoat?

Was There A Libya Cover-Up? – Pat Caddell Democratic Pollster On O’Reilly

BENGHAZI-GATE “Sex, Lies and Obama’s Smoking Gun” (Part 1)

In Part 1 of Benghazi-gate, Christopher Greene investigates the Obama Administration’s massive cover-up that killed Christopher Stevens and three other Americans at the Libyan embassy on Sept 11, 2012.

Bombshell: Clinton Ordered More Security In Benghazi, Obama Denied Request

Petraeus testifies in Congress behind closed doors

‘Commander curse in Afghanistan both domestic rivalry & policy backfire’

The US campaign in Afghanistan has suffered a military-grade blow with at least two celebrity generals and veterans of the intervention falling from grace. A sex scandal that started with revelations of the ex-CIA chief having an affair, has now claimed the reputation of the current Afghan campaign commander.

Dr. Sreeram Chaulia, from the Jindal School of International Affairs in India believes the generals’ main mistake was total failure in Afghanistan.

Petraeus Gagged? ‘Scandal timing may mean political cover-up’

Death And Deceit In Benghazi – Did Obama Amind Try Hide The Truth? – W Bret Bair

Benghazi Attack: Ambassador Patrick Kennedy Opening Statement

General Petraeus’ sex scandal: CIA vs FBI?

General David Petraeus’ resignation as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency came after the FBI investigated complaints of harassing emails. This lead to the discovery of Petraeus’ love affair with his biographer and many believe that the rivalry between the FBI and the CIA had something to do with the leaked information. So does the FBI have the power to search emails without a warrant? Trevor Aaronson, author of the book The Terror Factory, gives us his take on the scandal.

General Petraeus leaked secret info on Benghazi attack to his mistress?

General David Petraeus has been making headlines for his extramarital love-affair and his lack of judgement during the Benghazi attacks on the US consulate in Libya among other things, but the mainstream media has not held Petraeus accountable for his controversial action during his military career. So what is going on with the fourth estate? Retired Colonel Morris Davis joins us with more on Petraeus’ career and relation with the media.

David Petraeus Resigns from CIA Over Affair

David Petraeus Scandal: Truth Behind Resignation, Paula Broadwell

Petraeus’ Fall from Grace; Details of Former CIA Director General Petraeus’ Extramarital Affair

The Real Reason Petraeus Resigned

Glenn Beck on David Petreaus sex scandal

Petraeus Sex Scandal: FBI Agent Who Launched Investigation ID’d as Frederick H

Barack Obama Questions Petraeus in September 2007

The Benghazi Gates Part 1, A Two Pronged Attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi Libya

Benghazi Gates Part 2, What Happened to Ambassador Stevens?

Michael Savage on New Benghazi Information Uncovered – 10/26/12

[youtubr=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1Eo3sP1gn4&feature=related]

Killed U.S. Ambassador Illustrates Obama’s Disastrous Foreign Policy in Libya

The Obama Libya Cover Up Explained pt1

The Obama Libya Cover Up Explained pt2

Background Articles and Videos

Insider! CIA is Purging The U.S. Military in Globalist Coup!

Chris Stevens, U.S. Ambassador To Libya Killed In Rocket Attack, Served As Envoy During Revolution

Muhammad Movie Trailer : “Life of Muhammad” (US ambassador killed over this film.)

U.S. Envoy Chris Stevens Delivers Remarks on the Situation in Libya

Remembering U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens

Hillary Clinton address regarding Libya Killing of Chris Stevens

Benghazi Libya Attack: State Department’s Charlene R. Lamb Opening Statement

GEN Petraeus Exit Interview

A Conversation with Gen. David Petraeus

Top GOP lawmaker pressures Clapper to explain altered talking points on Libya

Topic: James Clapper

McClatchy: Obama admin changed story on Benghazi to blame video 3 days after attack

October 10	The four witnesses called to testify at the October 10, 2012 hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (l to r) were Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, Utah National Guard, U.S. Army; Eric Nordstrom, Regional Security Officer, U.S. Department of State; Charlene Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, U.S. Department of State; and Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, Under Secretary for Management, U.S. Department of State. An image of the U.S. compound can be seen behind Ms. Lamb. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held its hearing, “The Security Failures of Benghazi.”[174] In addition to the three witnesses originally named, a fourth witness testified: Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, Under Secretary for Management, U.S. Department of State. In sworn testimony, Mr. Kennedy said, “…if any administration official, including any career official, were on television on Sunday, September 16th, they would have said what Ambassador Rice said. The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point.”[182] However, in a briefing to congressional staffers on September 13, Mr. Kennedy said that the attack appeared planned.[147] During testimony State Department witnesses acknowledged that it rejected appeals for more security at its diplomatic posts in Libya in the months before the attack.[183] The “annex” and “safe house” in the second diplomatic compound was inadvertently revealed to be a U.S. intelligence post.[184][185][186] Charlene Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs, said in her prepared testimony that she had a firm grasp on what happened in Benghazi, starting moments after the assault began. ”When the attack began, a Diplomatic Security agent working in the tactical operations center immediately … alerted the annex U.S. quick reaction security team stationed nearby … and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington. From that point on, I could follow what was happening in almost real-time.”[38] During testimony Representative Issa described the existence of video tape of the attack taken from consulate security cameras; the tape was not available to committee members at the time of the hearing.
October 12	U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs announced its plan to conduct a bipartisan investigation. Part of their investigation will seek to determine “why the Administration’s initial public assessments of this attack were subsequently proven inaccurate.”[187]
October 14	Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), speaking on CBS’ Face the Nation, said that “[t]he intelligence community on the ground in Libya has told Senator Corker and myself that within twenty-four hours, they communicated up to Washington that this was a terrorist attack.”[188]
October 15	U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton assumed responsibility for the Benghazi attack, saying that she is in charge of her 60,000-plus staff all over the world and “the president and the vice president wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They’re the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision.”[189] Republican Senator John McCain praised her “laudable gesture, especially when the White House is trying to avoid any responsibility whatsoever” but insisted that either there were drastic failures in the national security operation in not keeping the president aware of ongoing threats, or Obama himself knew of the threats and needed to take responsibility for the shortcomings.[190]In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, the two Libyan militiamen guarding the consulate denied aiding the attackers. The compound was “lazily quiet” in the hours before the assault, they said. Around 9:30 p.m., the guards heard cries of “Allahu akbar!”—”God is great”—three times from outside the walls, then a voice called out in Arabic “You infidels!” and the attackers raced inside.[191]The New York Times reported that witnesses of the attack knowledgeable of the circumstances were very convinced that it was carried out by a group of local Islamic militants in response to the video. According to local militia leaders familiar with the militant group, it was capable of carrying out the attack on short notice with only a few hour’s planning.[192]
October 17	Libyan officials report that the founder of Libya’s Islamist militia Ansar al-Sharia was at the compound during the attack, but that he remains free a week after those allegations were disclosed to Libyan political leaders and U.S. investigators.[193] The militia commander, identified as Ahmed Abu Khattalah, is a former political prisoner whose fighters were also blamed for assassinating a senior military officer after he defected to the opposition during last year’s revolution against Moammar Kadafi.[194]
October 18	Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs made its first request for documents and briefings into the circumstances surrounding the attack. In separate letters to Secretary Hillary Clinton, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the committee requested a classified briefing for members of the committee. The briefing is to address threat assessments before the attack, security needs, requests for security, description and chronology of the attack, and what the Obama administration knew about the attack in the immediate aftermath and “whether any initial public statements issued by members of the Administration in the days following the attack were inaccurate and, if so, why.”[195]Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, questioned the security at the compound and the initial intelligence surrounding the attack. Feinstein was quoted in an interview: “I think what happened was the director of national intelligence, which we call the DNI, who is a very good individual, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Gen. Jim Clapper, put out some speaking points on the initial intelligence assessment. I think that was possibly a mistake.”[196]
October 19	Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa and National Security Subcommittee Chairman Jason Chaffetz sent a 10-page letter to President Obama,[197] accompanied by 166 pages of unclassified documents[198] and photos.[199] The committee stated that the “letter requests that the White House respond to questions about its role in the controversial decision to have the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya pursue a course of ‘normalization’ that was intended to help create the perception of success in Libya and contrast it to U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.”[200]Representative Peter T. King (R-NY), Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, sent a letter to President Obama requesting him to release Intelligence Community (1) reporting that led Obama Administration officials to initially characterize the assault as a “spontaneous reaction” to a film and (2) data and intelligence that led the Administration to change its characterization from a “spontaneous reaction” to a “terrorist attack.”[201]Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) renewed their request from 10 days ago that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director David Petraeus and John Brennan, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, answer questions regarding “the shifting official explanations surrounding” the attack. The senators wrote, “Our questions should not be hard to answer, and the American people have a right to learn what our intelligence communities knew about the events of September 11, 2012, and when they knew it.”[202]U.S. officials told The Associated Press that the CIA station chief in Libya compiled intelligence reports within 24 hours of the attack that indicated there was evidence it was carried out by militants, using the pretext of demonstrations against U.S. facilities in Egypt against the film to cover their intent. The report from the station chief was written late Wednesday, Sept. 12, and reached intelligence agencies in Washington the next day. It was not clear how widely the information was circulated.[203]
October 20	The Washington Post reported that talking points prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15 stated: “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.” [106]CBS News reported Congress members have asked why military assistance was not sent. General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta “looked at available options, and the ones we exercised had our military forces arrive in less than 24 hours, well ahead of timelines laid out in established policies.” A unmanned Predator drone was sent to Benghazi, and the drone observed the final hours of the attack. The Pentagon said it moved a team of special operators from central Europe to Naval Air Station Sigonella; other nearby military forces available were fighter jets and AC-130 gunships. Gary Berntsen stated, “They made zero adjustments in this. They stood and they watched and our people died.”[204]
October 22	The New York Times reported that Ms. Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, “has said that the judgments she offered on the five talk shows on Sept. 16 came from talking points prepared by the C.I.A., which reckoned that the attack that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans had resulted from a spontaneous mob that was angry about an anti-Islamic video that had set off protests elsewhere. That assessment, described to Ms. Rice in briefings the day before her television appearances, was based on intercepted communications, informants’ tips and Libyan press reports, officials said.” [113]
October 23	Media reports indicate that the State Department’s Operations Center sent a “Sensitive but unclassified” email at 4:05 p.m. Washington time (10:05 p.m. Benghazi time) on September 11 titled “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack” to the White House Situation Room and other U.S. security units and two hours later sent an email titled “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”[205][206] The first email reads in part: “approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM (Chief of Mission/embassy) personnel are in the compound safe haven.”[207] Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton cautioned that those emails are “not in and of itself evidence” that the administration had definitively assessed the assault as a terrorist attack from the beginning.[208] A Tunisian man who was arrested in Turkey earlier this month with reported links to the Benghazi attack has been returned to Tunisia and is facing terrorism charges.[209][210]
October 25	A suspected Al-Qaeda member who was believed to have been involved in the Consulate attack was shot dead by Egyptian police, after they received a tip that he was staying in an apartment in Madinat Nasr. Egyptian police also arrested a seven-member cell in Cairo, five of whom are Libyans and the other two Egyptians.[211]
October 26	Republican Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte wrote to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Petraeus, and Attorney General Eric Holder requesting they make public the surveillance video taken at the consulate during the attack.[212]Fox News reported that military back-up was denied by the CIA chain of command, and the annex was instructed twice to “stand down”. Woods, and two others, ignored those instructions and evacuated the consulate. Upon returning to the annex, and after beginning to taking fire, the annex requested fire support as they had a laser targeted on the mortar team that was attacking them. A CIA spokeswoman, Jennifer Youngblood, denied the claims.[61]
October 27	The Associated Press published a timeline of the comments by the administration and Libyan officials regarding the Benghazi attack,[29] as well as Libyan witnesses account.[27]
October 28	Retired Army Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer told Fox News that he has sources saying President Obama was in the White House Situation Room watching the assault unfold in real time.[213]
October 31	Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich suggested that “at least two networks have emails from the National Security Adviser’s office telling a counterterrorism group to stand down” in assisting the besieged U.S. consulate in Benghazi.[214]Gingrich said that the bombshell emails could be revealed within the next two days.Fox News reported that a cable marked “SECRET” and addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton summarized an “emergency meeting” convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi on August 15, 2012. In the meeting the State Department’s regional security officer “expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound.” According to Fox News, “The details in the cable seemed to foreshadow the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. compound, which was a coordinated, commando-style assault using direct and indirect fire. Al Qaeda in North Africa and Ansar al-Sharia, both mentioned in the cable, have since been implicated in the consulate attack.”[215]

November 2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_the_U.S._diplomatic_mission_in_Benghazi

George Carlin Doesn’t vote

President Obama’s Election Night Victory Speech – November 6, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois 

G. Edward Griffin – The Collectivist Conspiracy 

George Carlin -”Who Really Controls America” 

“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of  the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
Abraham  Lincoln

Why Rand Was Right to Endorse Romney 

“I did not come to praise the progressive Republican establishment but to replace them.”

Raymond Thomas Pronk

SA@TheDC – Conservatism for What? 

Open Memo To Republican Party: No more progressives or your party will go the way of the Whigs.

Dewey, Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, and Romney–Progressive Republicans all.

Since the end of World War II, the only conservative libertarian Republican elected President was Ronald Reagan and the progressive Republicans or Rockefeller Republicans did not want him.

Millions of Independent conservatives as well as Republican conservatives stayed home in 2012 or did not vote for either Romney nor Obama, get a clue Republican Party establishment.

I stayed home.

The time has come for tea party candidates to form their own political party.

The Republican Party like the Democratic Party is controlled by progressive Republicans that favor big government intervention in the economy and abroad.

Conservatives are leaving the Republican Party in droves.

The only way to get a politician or political party’s attention is to not vote for them.

Have we got your attention.

I doubt it.

Why would any progressive vote for a Republican progressive?

Why would any conservative–traditional, national defense, social, religious, fiscal or libertarian–vote for a progressive Republican.

Neoconservatives are not conservatives, they are right-wing progressives from the Democratic Party.

Soon the number of independent voters will exceed the number of registered Democrats as well as the number of registered Republicans.

All the Republican Party had to do in 2012 was nominate a conservative, instead the Republican Party establishment nominated a progressive.

Some people and parties never learn.

Romney did not get the young vote.

Ron Paul did in the primaries.

Barack Obama got the majority of the young vote–18-29.

For sheer stupidity and arrogance read the post below from a Romney volunteer and their get out the vote software or website failure!

Romney’s team did not the basics down.

Should be a Havard Business School case study in how not to run a campaign.

Senator Rand Paul for President in 2016!

Senator Rand Paul

Why ‘Mitt Romney’ Lost

The Ultimate Mitt Romney Flip-Flop Collection 

“Can’t Be Worse Than Obama”

“The Libertarian View”

SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’ 

SA@TheDC – Confronting American Empire

SA@TAC – No Excuse: Mitt Romney’s Case for American Empire 

SA@TAC – Ronald Reagan: Isolationist

SA@TAC – Conservatism in Exile

RNC or WWE? 

Snakes on a Campaign: Mitt Romney by the Southern Avenger

How Romney and Republicans Can Appeal to Libertarians 

Ron Paul on Fox News ~ Election Day Analysis 11/6/12

RON PAUL on THE TONIGHT SHOW with JAY LENO (09/04/2012)

Rand Paul Eyes 2016 Run 

Alex Jones It’s gonna get BAD! 7.nov.2012 

Collectivism Running America: Alex Jones Report 

G. Edward Griffin – The Collectivist Conspiracy 

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America

The Truth in Time by Robert Welch

[youatube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLucLyyJxMQ&feature=related]

Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican National Convention 

Reagan – A Time For Choosing 

Turnout shaping up to be lower than 2008

“…

A drop in voter turnout in Tuesday’s election didn’t keep President Barack  Obama from winning a second term.

Preliminary figures suggest fewer people voted this year than four years ago,  when voters shattered turnout records as they elected Obama to his first  term.

In most states, the numbers are shaping up to be even lower than in 2004,  said Curtis Gans, director of American University’s Center for the Study of the  American Electorate. Every state is showing lower numbers than in 2008, Gans  said. Still, the full picture may not be known for weeks because much of the  counting takes place after Election Day.

“This is one of those rare elections in which turnout in every state in the  nation went down,” Gans said.

In Texas, turnout for the presidential race dropped almost 11 percent from  2008. Vermont and South Carolina saw declines that were almost as large. The  drop-off was more than 7 percent in Maryland, where voters approved a ballot  measure allowing gay marriage.

With 97 percent of precincts reporting, The Associated Press’ figures showed  more than 118 million people had voted in the White House race, but that number  will go up as more votes are counted. In 2008, 131 million people cast ballots  for president, according to the Federal Election Commission.

Experts calculate turnout in different ways based on who they consider  eligible voters. A separate, preliminary estimate from George Mason University’s  Michael McDonald put the 2012 turnout rate at 60 percent of eligible voters.  That figure was expected to be revised as more precincts reported and absentee  votes were counted. …”

Read more: http://www.kypost.com/dpps/news/national/turnout-shaping-up-to-be-lower-than-2008_7991483#ixzz2BZ1CMrNE

Read more: http://www.kypost.com/dpps/news/national/turnout-shaping-up-to-be-lower-than-2008_7991483#ixzz2BZ00bhK8

The Unmitigated Disaster Known As Project ORCA

What is Project Orca?  Well, this is what they told us:

Project ORCA is a massive undertaking – the Republican Party’s newest, unprecedented and most technologically advanced plan to win the 2012 presidential election.

Pretty much everything in that sentence is false.  The “massive undertaking” is true, however.  It would take a lot of planning, training and coordination to be done successfully (oh, we’ll get to that in a second).  This wasn’t really the GOP’s effort, it was Team Romney’s.  And perhaps “unprecedented” would fit if we’re discussing failure.

The entire purpose of this project was to digitize the decades-old practice of strike lists.  The old way was to sit with your paper and mark off people that have voted and every hour or so, someone from the campaign would come get your list and take it back to local headquarters.  Then, they’d begin contacting people that hadn’t voted yet and encourage them to head to the polls.  It’s worked for years.

From the very start there were warning signs.  After signing up, you were invited to take part in nightly conference calls.  The calls were more of the slick marketing speech type than helpful training sessions.  There was a lot of “rah-rahs” and lofty talk about how this would change the ballgame.

Working primarily as a web developer, I had some serious questions.  Things like “Has this been stress tested?”, “Is there redundancy in place?” and “What steps have been taken to combat a coordinated DDOS attack or the like?”, among others.  These types of questions were brushed aside (truth be told, they never took one of my questions).  They assured us that the system had been relentlessly tested and would be a tremendous success.

On one of the last conference calls (I believe it was on Saturday night), they told us that our packets would be arriving shortly.  Now, there seemed to be a fair amount of confusion about what they meant by “packet”.  Some people on Twitter were wondering if that meant a packet in the mail or a pdf or what.  Finally, my packet arrived at 4PM on Monday afternoon as an emailed 60 page pdf.  Nothing came in the mail.  Because I was out most of the day, I only got around to seeing it at around 10PM Monday night.  So, I sat down and cursed as I would have to print out 60+ pages of instructions and voter rolls on my home printer.  Naturally, for reasons I can’t begin to comprehend, my printer would not print in black and white with an empty magenta cartridge (No HP, I will never buy another one of your products ever again).  So, at this point I became panicked.  I was expected to be at the polls at 6:45AM and nothing was open.  I was thankfully able to find a Kinko’s open until 11PM that was able to print it out and bind it for me, but this is not something I should have had to do.  They expected 75-80 year old veteran volunteers to print out 60+ pages on their home computers?  The night before election day?  From what I hear, other people had similar experiences.  In fact, many volunteers never received their packets at all.

At 6:30AM on Tuesday, I went to the polls.  I was immediately turned away because I didn’t have my poll watcher certificate.  Many, many people had this problem.  The impression I got was this was taken care of because they had “registered me”.  Others were as well.  But apparently, I was supposed to go on my own to a Victory Center to pick it up, but that was never communicated properly.  Outside of the technical problems, this was the single biggest failure of the operation.  They simply didn’t inform people that this was a requirement.  In fact, check out my “checklist” from my ORCA packet:Notice anything missing?  My guess is the second “Chair (if allowed)” was supposed to be “poll watcher certificate” but they put chair twice.  This was an instruction packet that went out to 30,000+ people.  Did no one proof-read it?

So, I headed back home to see if I could get my certificate.  I called their official help line.  It went unanswered.  I tried their legal line.  Same thing.  I emailed them.  No response.  I continued to do this for six straight hours and never got a response. I even tried to call three local victory centers.  All went straight to voicemail.

While I was home, I took to Twitter and the web to try to find some answers.  From what I saw, these problems were widespread.  People had been kicked from poll watching for having no certificate.  Others never received their pdf packets.  Some were sent the wrong packets from a different area.  Some received their packet, but their usernames and passwords didn’t work.

Now a note about the technology itself.  For starters, this was billed as an “app” when it was actually a mobile-optimized website (or “web app”).  For days I saw people on Twitter saying they couldn’t find the app on the Android Market or iTunes and couldn’t download it.  Well, that’s because it didn’t exist.  It was a website.  This created a ton of confusion.  Not to mention that they didn’t even “turn it on” until 6AM in the morning, so people couldn’t properly familiarize themselves with how it worked on their personal phone beforehand.

Next, and this part I find mind-boggingly absurd, the web address was located at “https://www.whateveritwas.com/orca”.  Notice the “s” after http. This denotes it’s a secure connection, something that’s used for e-commerce and web-based email.  So far, so good.  The problem is that they didn’t auto-forward the regular “http” to “https” and as a result, many people got a blank page and thought the system was down.  Setting up forwarding is the simplest thing in the world and only takes seconds, but they failed to do it.  This is compounded by the fact that mobile browsers default to “http” when you just start with “www” (as 95% of the world does).

By 2PM, I had completely given up.  I finally got ahold of someone at around 1PM and I never heard back.  From what I understand, the entire system crashed at around 4PM.  I’m not sure if that’s true, but it wouldn’t surprise me.  I decided to wait for my wife to get home from work to vote, which meant going very late (around 6:15PM).  Here’s the kicker, I never got a call to go out and vote.  So, who the hell knows if that end of it was working either.

So, the end result was that 30,000+ of the most active and fired-up volunteers were wandering around confused and frustrated when they could have been doing anything else to help.  Like driving people to the polls, phone-banking, walking door-to-door, etc.  We lost by fairly small margins in Florida, Virginia, Ohio and Colorado.  If this had worked could it have closed the gap?  I sure hope not for my sanity’s sake.

The bitter irony of this entire endeavor was that a supposedly small government candidate gutted the local structure of GOTV efforts in favor of a centralized, faceless organization in a far off place (in this case, their Boston headquarters).  Wrap your head around that.

I’m on Twitter at @JohnEkdahl if you have any questions.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/334783.php

November 2nd 2012 CNBC Stock Market Squawk Box (October Jobs Report)

Market Week in Review – November 2, 2012 

Employment Level

143.384 Million

Series Id:           LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Civilian Labor Force Level

155.641 Million

Series Id:           LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Labor Force Participation Rate

63.8%

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Unemployment Level

12.258 Million

Series Id:           LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status:  Unemployed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Unemployment Rate U-6

7.9%

Series Id:           LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Total Unemployment Rate U-6

14.7%

Series Id:           LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status:  Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over
Percent/rates:       Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Background Articles and Videos

Mythical Green Shoots and the Big Government Lie on Unemployment

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed                       USDL-12-2164
until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, November 2, 2012

Technical information:
 Household data:       (202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data:   (202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:         (202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov

                         THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- OCTOBER 2012

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 171,000 in October, and the unemployment
rate was essentially unchanged at 7.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
reported today. Employment rose in professional and business services, health care,
and retail trade.

   _______________________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                               |
  |                                Hurricane Sandy                                |
  |                                                                               |
  |Hurricane Sandy had no discernable effect on the employment and unemployment   |
  |data for October. Household survey data collection was completed before the    |
  |storm, and establishment survey data collection rates were within normal ranges|
  |nationally and for the affected areas. For information on how unusually severe |
  |weather can affect the employment and hours estimates, see the Frequently Asked|
  |Questions section of this release.                                             |
  |                                                                               |
  |_______________________________________________________________________________|

Household Survey Data

Both the unemployment rate (7.9 percent) and the number of unemployed persons (12.3
million) were essentially unchanged in October, following declines in September.
(See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for blacks increased to 14.3
percent in October, while the rates for adult men (7.3 percent), adult women (7.2
percent), teenagers (23.7 percent), whites (7.0 percent), and Hispanics (10.0 percent)
showed little or no change. The jobless rate for Asians was 4.9 percent in October
(not seasonally adjusted), down from 7.3 percent a year earlier. (See tables A-1,
A-2, and A-3.)

In October, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more)
was little changed at 5.0 million. These individuals accounted for 40.6 percent of
the unemployed. (See table A-12.)

The civilian labor force rose by 578,000 to 155.6 million in October, and the labor
force participation rate edged up to 63.8 percent. Total employment rose by 410,000
over the month. The employment-population ratio was essentially unchanged at 58.8
percent, following an increase of 0.4 percentage point in September. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to
as involuntary part-time workers) fell by 269,000 to 8.3 million in October, partially
offsetting an increase of 582,000 in September. These individuals were working part
time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a
full-time job. (See table A-8.)

In October, 2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, little
different from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.) These
individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had
looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed 
because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See
table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 813,000 discouraged workers in October, a
decline of 154,000 from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.)
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe
no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.6 million persons marginally attached
to the labor force in October had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding
the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See
table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 171,000 in October. Employment growth
has averaged 157,000 per month thus far in 2012, about the same as the average monthly
gain of 153,000 in 2011. In October, employment rose in professional and business
services, health care, and retail trade. (See table B-1.)

Professional and business services added 51,000 jobs in October, with gains in 
services to buildings and dwellings (+13,000) and in computer systems design (+7,000).
Temporary help employment changed little in October and has shown little net change 
over the past 3 months. Employment in professional and business services has grown by
1.6 million since its most recent low point in September 2009.

Health care added 31,000 jobs in October. Job gains continued in ambulatory health
care services (+25,000) and hospitals (+6,000). Over the past year, employment in
health care has risen by 296,000.

Retail trade added 36,000 jobs in October, with gains in motor vehicles and parts dealers 
(+7,000), and in furniture and home furnishings stores (+4,000). Retail trade has added
82,000 jobs over the past 3 months, with most of the gain occurring in motor vehicles
and parts dealers, clothing and accessories stores, and miscellaneous store retailers.

Employment in leisure and hospitality continued to trend up (+28,000) over the month.
This industry has added 811,000 jobs since a recent low point in January 2010, with
most of the gain occurring in food services.

Employment in construction edged up in October. The gain was concentrated in specialty
trade contractors (+17,000).

Manufacturing employment changed little in October. On net, manufacturing employment
has shown little change since April.

Mining lost 9,000 jobs in October, with most of the decline occurring in support
activities for mining. Since May of this year, employment in mining has decreased
by 17,000.

Employment in other major industries, including wholesale trade, transportation and 
warehousing, information, financial activities, and government, showed little change
over the month.

In October, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was
34.4 hours for the fourth consecutive month. The manufacturing workweek edged down by
0.1 hour to 40.5 hours, and factory overtime was unchanged at 3.2 hours. The average
workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged
down by 0.1 hour to 33.6 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

In October, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged
down by 1 cent to $23.58. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have risen
by 1.6 percent. In October, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and
nonsupervisory employees edged down by 1 cent to $19.79. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised from +142,000 to
+192,000, and the change for September was revised from +114,000 to +148,000.

_____________
The Employment Situation for November is scheduled to be released on Friday,
December 7, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. (EST).

US growth up, but not enough to help Obama

The Politics Behind the Latest Government Economic Report

US GDP grows 2% ahead of presidential election

GDP Rises 2% in 3rd Quarter, Consumer Spending Increases

3XSQ: U.S. GDP expands 2%

      Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property
located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 2.0 percent in the third quarter of 2012 (that
is, from the second quarter to the third quarter), according to the "advance" estimate released by the
Bureau of Economic Analysis.  In the second quarter, real GDP increased 1.3 percent.

      The Bureau emphasized that the third-quarter advance estimate released today is based on source
data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency (see box below).  The
"second" estimate for the third quarter, based on more complete data, will be released on November 29,
2012.

      The increase in real GDP in the third quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from
personal consumption expenditures (PCE), federal government spending, and residential fixed
investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from exports, nonresidential fixed
investment, and private inventory investment.  Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of
GDP, decreased.

      The acceleration in real GDP in the third quarter primarily reflected an upturn in federal
government spending, a downturn in imports, an acceleration in PCE, a smaller decrease in private
inventory investment, an acceleration in residential fixed investment, and a smaller decrease in state and
local government spending that were partly offset by downturns in exports and in nonresidential fixed
investment.

____________

FOOTNOTE.  Quarterly estimates are expressed at seasonally adjusted
annual rates, unless otherwise specified.  Quarter-to-quarter dollar changes
are differences between these published estimates.  Percent changes are
calculated from unrounded data and are annualized.  "Real" estimates are in
chained (2005) dollars.  Price indexes are chain-type measures.

      This news release is available on BEA’s Web site along with the Technical Note and Highlights related to this release.
____________

      Final sales of computers added 0.17 percentage point to the third-quarter change in real GDP
after subtracting 0.10 percentage point from the second-quarter change.  Motor vehicle output subtracted
0.47 percentage point from the third-quarter change in real GDP after adding 0.20 percentage point to
the second-quarter change.

      The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents,
increased 1.5 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 0.7 percent in the second.
Excluding food and energy prices, the price index for gross domestic purchases increased 1.3 percent in
the third quarter, compared with an increase of 1.4 percent in the second.

      Real personal consumption expenditures increased 2.0 percent in the third quarter, compared
with an increase of 1.5 percent in the second.  Durable goods increased 8.5 percent, in contrast to a
decrease of 0.2 percent.  Nondurable goods increased 2.4 percent, compared with an increase of 0.6
percent.  Services increased 0.8 percent, compared with an increase of 2.1 percent.

      Real nonresidential fixed investment decreased 1.3 percent in the third quarter, in contrast to an
increase of 3.6 percent in the second.  Nonresidential structures decreased 4.4 percent, in contrast to an
increase of 0.6 percent.  Equipment and software decreased less than 0.1 percent, in contrast to an
increase of 4.8 percent.  Real residential fixed investment increased 14.4 percent, compared with an
increase of 8.5 percent.

      Real exports of goods and services decreased 1.6 percent in the third quarter, in contrast to an
increase of 5.3 percent in the second.  Real imports of goods and services decreased 0.2 percent, in
contrast to an increase of 2.8 percent.

      Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 9.6 percent
in the third quarter, in contrast to a decrease of 0.2 percent in the second.  National defense increased
13.0 percent, in contrast to a decrease of 0.2 percent.  Nondefense increased 3.0 percent, in contrast to a
decrease of 0.4 percent.  Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross
investment decreased 0.1 percent, compared with a decrease of 1.0 percent.

      The change in real private inventories subtracted 0.12 percentage point from the third-quarter
change in real GDP after subtracting 0.46 percentage point from the second-quarter change.  Farm
inventories subtracted 0.42 percentage point from the third-quarter change after subtracting 0.17
percentage point from the second-quarter change.  Nonfarm inventories added 0.30 percentage point to
the third-quarter change after subtracting 0.29 percentage point from the second-quarter change.

      Real final sales of domestic product -- GDP less change in private inventories -- increased 2.1
percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 1.7 percent in the second.

Gross domestic purchases

      Real gross domestic purchases -- purchases by U.S. residents of goods and services wherever
produced -- increased 2.1 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 1.0 percent in the
second.

Disposition of personal income

      Current-dollar personal income increased $89.3 billion (2.7 percent) in the third quarter,
compared with an increase of $130.3 billion (4.0 percent) in the second.

      Personal current taxes increased $13.2 billion in the third quarter, compared with an increase of
$20.2 billion in the second.

      Disposable personal income increased $76.1 billion (2.6 percent) in the third quarter, compared
with an increase of $110.0 billion (3.8 percent) in the second.  Real disposable personal income
increased 0.8 percent, compared with an increase of 3.1 percent.

      Personal outlays increased $111.4 billion (4.0 percent) in the third quarter, compared with an
increase of $57.4 billion (2.0 percent) in the second.  Personal saving -- disposable personal income less
personal outlays -- was $445.0 billion in the third quarter, compared with $480.3 billion in the second.
The personal saving rate -- personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income -- was 3.7
percent in the third quarter, compared with 4.0 percent in the second.  For a comparison of personal
saving in BEA’s national income and product accounts with personal saving in the Federal Reserve
Board’s flow of funds accounts and data on changes in net worth, go to
www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/Nipa-Frb.asp.

Current-dollar GDP

      Current-dollar GDP -- the market value of the nation's output of goods and services -- increased
5.0 percent, or $190.1 billion, in the third quarter to a level of $15,775.7 billion.  In the second quarter,
current-dollar GDP increased 2.8 percent, or $107.3 billion.

______________

BOX.     Information on the assumptions used for unavailable source data is provided in a technical note that
is posted with the news release on BEA's Web site.  Within a few days after the release, a detailed "Key
Source Data and Assumptions" file is posted on the Web site.  In the middle of each month, an analysis of
the current quarterly estimate of GDP and related series is made available on the Web site; click on Survey
of Current Business, "GDP and the Economy."  For information on revisions, see "Revisions to GDP, GDI, and
Their Major Components."
______________

      BEA's national, international, regional, and industry estimates; the Survey of Current Business;
and BEA news releases are available without charge on BEA's Web site at www.bea.gov. By visiting the
site, you can also subscribe to receive free e-mail summaries of BEA releases and announcements.

                                        *          *          *

Next release -- November 29, 2012, at 8:30 A.M. EST for:
Gross Domestic Product:  Third Quarter 2012 (Second Estimate)
Corporate Profits:  Third Quarter (Preliminary Estimate)

                                        *          *          *

Release Dates in 2013

           	 2012: IV and 2012 annual    	2013: I     	2013: II          2013: III

Gross Domestic Product
Advance...		January 30            	April 26	July 31		  October 30
Second...		February 28          	May 30      	August 29	  November 26
Third... 		March 28             	June 26     	September 26	  December 20

Corporate Profits
Preliminary...          ........		May 30      	August 29	  November 26
Revised... 		March 28             	June 26     	September 26	  December 20

                                            Comparisons of Revisions to GDP

     Quarterly estimates of GDP are released on the following schedule:  the "advance" estimate, based on
source data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency, is released near the end of the
first month after the end of the quarter; as more detailed and more comprehensive data become available,
the "second" and "third" estimates are released near the end of the second and third months, respectively.
The "latest"” estimate reflects the results of both annual and comprehensive revisions.

     Annual revisions, which generally cover the quarters of the 3 most recent calendar years, are usually carried
out each summer and incorporate newly available major annual source data.  Comprehensive (or benchmark)
revisions are carried out at about 5-year intervals and incorporate major periodic source data, as well as
improvements in concepts and methods that update the accounts to portray more accurately the evolving U.S.
economy.

The table below shows comparisons of the revisions between quarterly percent changes of current-dollar
and of real GDP for the different vintages of the estimates.  From the advance estimate to the second estimate (one
month later), the average revision to real GDP without regard to sign is 0.5 percentage point, while from the
advance estimate to the third estimate (two months later), it is 0.6 percentage point.  From the advance estimate to
the latest estimate, the average revision without regard to sign is 1.3 percentage points.  The average revision
(with regard to sign) from the advance estimate to the latest estimate is 0.2 percentage point, which is larger
than the average revisions from the advance estimate to the second or to the third estimates.  The larger average
revisions to the latest estimate reflect the fact that comprehensive revisions include major improvements, such as
the incorporation of BEA’s latest benchmark input-output accounts.  The quarterly estimates correctly indicate the
direction of change of real GDP 97 percent of the time, correctly indicate whether GDP is accelerating or
decelerating 72 percent of the time, and correctly indicate whether real GDP growth is above, near, or below trend
growth more than four-fifths of the time.

                           Revisions Between Quarterly Percent Changes of GDP: Vintage Comparisons
                                                     [Annual rates]

       Vintages                                   Average         Average without     Standard deviation of
       compared                                                    regard to sign      revisions without
                                                                                         regard to sign

____________________________________________________Current-dollar GDP_______________________________________________

Advance to second....................               0.2                 0.6                  0.4
Advance to third.....................                .1                  .7                   .4
Second to third......................                .0                  .3                   .2

Advance to latest....................                .3                 1.2                  1.0

________________________________________________________Real GDP_____________________________________________________

Advance to second....................               0.1                 0.5                  0.4
Advance to third.....................                .1                  .6                   .5
Second to third......................                .0                  .2                   .2

Advance to latest....................                .2                 1.3                  1.0

NOTE.  These comparisons are based on the period from 1983 through 2009.

Friedrich Hayek

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

The Life & Thought of Friedrich Hayek–Videos

Remembering Friedrich August Hayek–Video

Friedrich A. Hayek–Interviews–Videos

The Battle For The World Economy–Videos

Frederic Bastiat–The Law–Videos

Walter Block–Videos

Walter Block–Introduction To Libertarianism–Videos

Hunter Lewis–Where Keynes Went Wrong–Videos

Thomas DiLorenzo–The Economic Model of the Fascist State–Videos

Richard Ebeling–America’s New Road to Serfdom and the Continuing Relevance of Austrian Economics –Videos

Milton Friedman–Videos

Milton Friedman–Capitalism and Freedom–Videos

Milton Friedman On Business–Videos

Milton Friedman On Education–Videos

Milton Friedman On Monetary Policy–Videos

Milton Friedman–Debate In Iceland–Videos

Milton Friedman–Free To Choose–On Donahue –Videos

Milton Friedman–Economic Myths–Videos

Paul Edward Gottfried–Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and the Welfare State–Videos

David Gordon–Five Best Books on the Current Crisis–Video

David Gordon–The Confused Literature of Globalization–Videos

Friedrich Hayek–Videos

Inside the Hayek Equation: An Interview with Friedrich von Hayek–Video

An Interview with Friedrich Hayek–Videos

Henry Hazlitt–Economics In One Lesson–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Complex Path of Ideological Change–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Great Depression and the Current Recession–Videos

Robert Higgs–Why Are Politicians Always Trying to Scare Us?–Videos

Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Ethics of Money Production–Videos

Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Life and Work of Ludwig von Mises–Videos

Israel Kirzner–On Entrepreneurship–Vidoes

Paul Krugman–Videos

Hunter Lewis–Where Keynes Went Wrong–Videos

Liberal Fascism–Jonah Goldberg–Videos

Dan Mitchell–Videos

Ludwig von Mises–Videos

Robert P. Murphy–Videos

Robert P. Murphy–Government Stimulus: Repeating the mistakes of the Great Depression–Videos

Gary North–Keynes and His Influence–Take The North Challenge–Videos

The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged and The Ideas of Ayn Rand

George Gerald Reisman–Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian–Videos

Paul Craig Roberts–How The Economy Was Lost–The War Of The Worlds–Videos

Paul Craig Roberts–Peak Jobs–Videos

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr–How Empires Bamboozle the Bourgeoisie–Videos

Murray Rothbard–Videos

Murray Rothbard–A History of Money and Banking in The United States–Videos

Murray Rothbard–The American Economy and the End of Laissez-Faire: 1870 to World War II–Videos

Murray Rothbard–The Case Against The Fed–Videos

Murray N. Rothbard–Introduction to Economics: A Private Seminar–Videos

Murray Rothbard–Libertarianism–Video

Rothbard On Keynes–Videos

Murray Rothbard– What Has Government Done to Our Money?–Videos

Peter Schiff–Videos

Schiff, Forbers and Bloomberg Nail The Financial Crisis and Recession–Mistakes Were Made–Greed, Arrogance, Stupidity–Three Chinese Curses!

Larry Sechrest–The Anticapitalists: Barbarians at the Gate–Videos

L. William Seidman on The Economic Crisis: Causes and Cures–Videos

Amity Shlaes–Videos

Julian Simon–Videos

Julian Simon–The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment–Videos

Thomas Sowell and Conflict of Visions–Videos

Thomas Sowell On The Housing Boom and Bust–Videos

Econ Talk With Thomas Sowell–Videos

Peter Thiel–Videos

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.–Videos

Thomas E. Woods–The Calamity of Anti-Capitalism: A Brief American History–Video

Thomas E. Woods–The Economic Crisis and The Federal Reserve–Videos

Tom Woods–Lectures On Liberty–Videos

Thomas E. Woods–The Market Economy–Videos

Tom Woods On Personal Rights and Property Ownership

Tom Woods–Smashing Myths and Restoring Sound Money–Videos

Tom Woods–Who Killed The Constitution

Tom Wright On The FairTax–Videos

Banking Cartel’s Public Relations Campaign Continues:Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke On The Record

Joel Skousen Part II: Election 2012 – Deception & War