Quite the little country we’re becoming.

[no_such_reality]

[quote]So what I wanted to see is if you could give me a yes or no answer to the question: Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”
Clapper: “No, sir.”[/quote]

[quote]Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is really struggling to explain why he told Congress in March (see video above) that the National Security Agency does not intentionally collect any kind of data on millions of Americans. His latest take: It’s an unfair question, he said, like “When are you going to stop beating your wife?” And it seems to depend on the meaning of “collect.”[/quote]

I gave least untruthful answer

No, that’s call lying.

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV]I get that CAR. Everything you’ve pasted, copied and commented on is disturbing to say the least, I’m just not seeing any connection between those with power and wealth (the government, and big business) and the anti-gun movement. If anything, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, and unlike on some issues, they’re not meeting at the other end of the circle.[/quote]

The bolded part is only true if you believe in the “two-party” system. IMHO, we have “two parties,” with all of their highly-emotional points and counterpoints (gay marriage, abortion, religion, etc.) so that the masses can be better controlled and prevented from ever working together. They keep us fighting amongst ourselves (including the “private” vs. “public” and “union” vs “non-union” worker nonsense) so that the PTB can continue with the business of amassing more wealth/power without much notice.

The left and the right, as we see them in this country today, are simply the two hands of the same puppeteer. The days of labor/the masses having any kind of true representation in the upper levels of the power structure are largely over, and that’s by design. Now, they want to disarm us because people are finally starting to wake up to what’s really been going on (as with the *original* Tea Party and OWS groups that were so effectively co-opted and disbanded by the PTB).

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter]
Looking for conclusive evidence is both idealistic and immature. [/quote]

And the Flying Spaghetti Monster is real. And it would be both idealistic and immature to question its authority. Facts and evidence aren’t necessary when the “truth” is so obvious.[/quote]

Not sure if you tried wittiness or sarcasm. On the remote chance that you interpreted my sentence about idealism and immaturity to refer to you, I’d like make sure you understand that I was referring to the act of looking for it, not to you.
All I meant is that in politics & society affairs unlike science, conclusive evidence means nothing and waiting for that evidence before you act on it will be too late.
For example, if you waited for conclusive evidence about funny stuff going on with Enron or WorldCom, it would have been too late.
Humans are wired to take actions on weak correlations especially if it comes to their survival or reproduction. The caveman waiting for conclusive evidence of a cheetah waiting to pounce on him based on just an outline on a moonless night would have never made it.

[SK in CV]

[quote=dumbrenter]That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.[/quote]

What set of correlations leads you to the conclusion that the US “faces an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.”

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter]That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.[/quote]

What set of correlations leads you to the conclusion that the US “faces an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.”[/quote]

And what makes you think this is not an either/or choice?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

NSR: You do know that James Clapper used to work, in a senior capacity, for Booz Allen, right?

[SK in CV]

[quote=dumbrenter][quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter]That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.[/quote]

What set of correlations leads you to the conclusion that the US “faces an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.”[/quote]

And what makes you think this is not an either/or choice?[/quote]

You made the assertion. You claimed you have evidence in the form of correlations. Back it up.

There are all kinds of other possibilities. Deflation. Controlled growth. A black swan event preceding a deep depression. Or even as is currently projected, slow growth leading to decreased deficits over the short term, and growing over the intermediate term. None of those require massive inflation or increased taxes/decreased welfare.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter][quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter]That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.[/quote]

What set of correlations leads you to the conclusion that the US “faces an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.”[/quote]

And what makes you think this is not an either/or choice?[/quote]

You made the assertion. You claimed you have evidence in the form of correlations. Back it up.

There are all kinds of other possibilities. Deflation. Controlled growth. A black swan event preceding a deep depression. Or even as is currently projected, slow growth leading to decreased deficits over the short term, and growing over the intermediate term. None of those require massive inflation or increased taxes/decreased welfare.[/quote]

Context, Context….You might want to re-read what I wrote. My observations about correlation relate to actions of moneyed class and general availability of arms & ammunition. This was in response to your specific question “Irrespective of that, I would think that if there is a connection between the monied crowd and gun control, it could be identified. Is Monsanto funding gun control advocacy? JP Morgan? Goldman Sachs?”

I did not make an “assertion” nor claimed “evidence”.

It would be my pleasure to provide you with my reasoning (fully acknowledging I could be wrong) but your distortion of context (deliberate or otherwise) make it harder for me to communicate with you.

Going back to what you “thought” I was referring to: deflation is already being tried, interest rates have been kept low and QE game of buying up treasuries to lower the yield is what is going on now. please enlighten us what else can be done to keep the deflation going?
I’ll discount black swan events (and alien attacks) since the very nature of those, by definition, are hard to predict and quantify.
The option of slow growth is dictated not by monetary policy but by the patience of the holders of paper assets and those countries in whose interest it is to keep buying treasuries. I honestly do not know how long they’d want to go but it cannot be forever.
so, by elimination, the only two remaining options are what I mentioned before. You can already see elements of option ‘b’ beginning this year.
Now, I’d love for you to tell my why either of those options will not be considered.

[SK in CV]

[quote=dumbrenter]
Context, Context….You might want to re-read what I wrote. My observations about correlation relate to actions of moneyed class and general availability of arms & ammunition. This was in response to your specific question “Irrespective of that, I would think that if there is a connection between the monied crowd and gun control, it could be identified. Is Monsanto funding gun control advocacy? JP Morgan? Goldman Sachs?”

I did not make an “assertion” nor claimed “evidence”.

It would be my pleasure to provide you with my reasoning (fully acknowledging I could be wrong) but your distortion of context (deliberate or otherwise) make it harder for me to communicate with you.

Going back to what you “thought” I was referring to: deflation is already being tried, interest rates have been kept low and QE game of buying up treasuries to lower the yield is what is going on now. please enlighten us what else can be done to keep the deflation going?
I’ll discount black swan events (and alien attacks) since the very nature of those, by definition, are hard to predict and quantify.
The option of slow growth is dictated not by monetary policy but by the patience of the holders of paper assets and those countries in whose interest it is to keep buying treasuries. I honestly do not know how long they’d want to go but it cannot be forever.
so, by elimination, the only two remaining options are what I mentioned before. You can already see elements of option ‘b’ beginning this year.
Now, I’d love for you to tell my why either of those options will not be considered.[/quote]

You both made an assertion and claimed you had evidence for it. Here’s your assertion:

SK, in near future the country will face an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.

I’m not sure how the context is important here. That’s a pretty absolute claim.

And then you said:

That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.

Now that that’s out of the way…

QE has not caused any significant deflation. Deflation, by definition is an inflation rate below zero. Inflation was negative during the 15 months immediately following the onset of QE1, coinciding with the recession, but there has been positive inflation for the last 40 months that data is available. So your question of “what else can be done to keep the deflation going” again begs the question. The premise of your question is invalid.

You’ve hardly eliminated every other option. The Fed is likely to reduce QE spending by the end of this year. It’s very possible that the economy will continue to limp along as it has been, and barring obstructionist roadblocks, government debt will continue to paid on time, with only relatively small expansion of that debt, and even a continuation of the reduction in the debt/GDP ratio, without further tax increases and without further spending cuts.

Foreign central and private banks will stop buying US debt when….probably never. They really don’t have a lot of attractive alternatives.

And back to the original question…is there any evidence that those with money and power are pushing an anti-gun agenda? So far, all you’ve provided is some scenarios based on false premises, explaining why there may be motivation for them to do so. Surely, if the Fed or Wall Street was trying to take our guns, there would be some evidence of that actually happening.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter]
Context, Context….You might want to re-read what I wrote. My observations about correlation relate to actions of moneyed class and general availability of arms & ammunition. This was in response to your specific question “Irrespective of that, I would think that if there is a connection between the monied crowd and gun control, it could be identified. Is Monsanto funding gun control advocacy? JP Morgan? Goldman Sachs?”

I did not make an “assertion” nor claimed “evidence”.

It would be my pleasure to provide you with my reasoning (fully acknowledging I could be wrong) but your distortion of context (deliberate or otherwise) make it harder for me to communicate with you.

Going back to what you “thought” I was referring to: deflation is already being tried, interest rates have been kept low and QE game of buying up treasuries to lower the yield is what is going on now. please enlighten us what else can be done to keep the deflation going?
I’ll discount black swan events (and alien attacks) since the very nature of those, by definition, are hard to predict and quantify.
The option of slow growth is dictated not by monetary policy but by the patience of the holders of paper assets and those countries in whose interest it is to keep buying treasuries. I honestly do not know how long they’d want to go but it cannot be forever.
so, by elimination, the only two remaining options are what I mentioned before. You can already see elements of option ‘b’ beginning this year.
Now, I’d love for you to tell my why either of those options will not be considered.[/quote]

You both made an assertion and claimed you had evidence for it. Here’s your assertion:

SK, in near future the country will face an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.

I’m not sure how the context is important here. That’s a pretty absolute claim.

And then you said:

That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.

Now that that’s out of the way…

QE has not caused any significant deflation. Deflation, by definition is an inflation rate below zero. Inflation was negative during the 15 months immediately following the onset of QE1, coinciding with the recession, but there has been positive inflation for the last 40 months that data is available. So your question of “what else can be done to keep the deflation going” again begs the question. The premise of your question is invalid.

You’ve hardly eliminated every other option. The Fed is likely to reduce QE spending by the end of this year. It’s very possible that the economy will continue to limp along as it has been, and barring obstructionist roadblocks, government debt will continue to paid on time, with only relatively small expansion of that debt, and even a continuation of the reduction in the debt/GDP ratio, without further tax increases and without further spending cuts.

Foreign central and private banks will stop buying US debt when….probably never. They really don’t have a lot of attractive alternatives.

And back to the original question…is there any evidence that those with money and power are pushing an anti-gun agenda? So far, all you’ve provided is some scenarios based on false premises, explaining why there may be motivation for them to do so. Surely, if the Fed or Wall Street was trying to take our guns, there would be some evidence of that actually happening.[/quote]

It is a shame that you keep taking the comments out of context.

I suggest you look up why there is a shortage of ammo. who is buying it all up? why? What good are all the guns without the ammo?
You want conclusive evidence? I cannot provide you with a certified copy of the DHS memo where all the ammo is going, neither can I provide you with an approved academic journal reference (per your political preference) as to why there is a shortage at this time while any rational analysis would show that there should be an oversupply of the same. All I have to go by is my observations. Hence my disclaimer. Is this a false premise? Maybe. There has been a run on small arms and ammo since 2008 (rational or otherwise), enough time for the manufacturers to ramp up the inventories. How come they are scarce now? Who is leaning on them?

Providing you with “conclusive evidence” is equivalent to waking up somebody who is pretending to asleep.

[CA renter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]NSR: You do know that James Clapper used to work, in a senior capacity, for Booz Allen, right?[/quote]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Allan.

………….

WASHINGTON — Edward J. Snowden’s employer, Booz Allen Hamilton, has become one of the largest and most profitable corporations in the United States almost exclusively by serving a single client: the government of the United States.

John M. McConnell, a former director of national intelligence, is now an executive at Booz Allen.
…

Over the last decade, much of the company’s growth has come from selling expertise, technology and manpower to the National Security Agency and other federal intelligence agencies. Booz Allen earned $1.3 billion, 23 percent of the company’s total revenue, from intelligence work during its most recent fiscal year.

The government has sharply increased spending on high-tech intelligence gathering since 2001, and both the Bush and Obama administrations have chosen to rely on private contractors like Booz Allen for much of the resulting work.

Thousands of people formerly employed by the government, and still approved to deal with classified information, now do essentially the same work for private companies. Mr. Snowden, who revealed on Sunday that he provided the recent leak of national security documents, is among them.

As evidence of the company’s close relationship with government, the Obama administration’s chief intelligence official, James R. Clapper Jr., is a former Booz Allen executive. The official who held that post in the Bush administration, John M. McConnell, now works for Booz Allen.

“The national security apparatus has been more and more privatized and turned over to contractors,” said Danielle Brian, the executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit group that studies federal government contracting. “This is something the public is largely unaware of, how more than a million private contractors are cleared to handle highly sensitive matters.”

————-

Just have to add my 2 cents…this is why we’re hearing so much about how horrible “public sector unions” are. It is ALL about privatization and the growing of the wealth/income divide (privatization leads to a larger gap, while public employment leads to a stronger middle class). Note, taxpayers are NOT saving money as a result of privatization; they are losing good jobs, instead.

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV]

And back to the original question…is there any evidence that those with money and power are pushing an anti-gun agenda? So far, all you’ve provided is some scenarios based on false premises, explaining why there may be motivation for them to do so. Surely, if the Fed or Wall Street was trying to take our guns, there would be some evidence of that actually happening.[/quote]

This wasn’t directed at me, but how about Bloomberg? Wouldn’t you admit that he represents the interests of Wall Street and many of the “moneyed elite”?

How about Walmart executives?

—–

“Wal-Mart Toughens Gun Policies

By DEVLIN BARRETT

WASHINGTON (AP) — Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest seller of firearms, announced Monday it will toughen rules for gun sales, from storing video of purchases to creating an internal log of which guns they sell that are later used in crimes.

J.P. Suarez, the chief compliance officer for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., appeared with outspoken gun control advocate Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York to announce the changes at a gathering of Bloomberg’s group Mayors Against Illegal Guns.”

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/ap_041408.shtml

——————-

It seems to me that Bloomberg would be doing society a much greater service if he would focus on the “financial terrorism” unleashed on us by Wall Street. Why is he so hell-bent on gun control, but so totally weak on breaking the backs of those in the financial industry who’ve just about brought this country to its knees? Why are there no high-level financial executives in jail for causing the financial bubble/collapse? Please don’t try to tell us that they “didn’t know what they were doing.”

[SK in CV]

[quote=dumbrenter]
It is a shame that you keep taking the comments out of context.

I suggest you look up why there is a shortage of ammo. who is buying it all up? why? What good are all the guns without the ammo?
You want conclusive evidence? I cannot provide you with a certified copy of the DHS memo where all the ammo is going, neither can I provide you with an approved academic journal reference (per your political preference) as to why there is a shortage at this time while any rational analysis would show that there should be an oversupply of the same. All I have to go by is my observations. Hence my disclaimer. Is this a false premise? Maybe. There has been a run on small arms and ammo since 2008 (rational or otherwise), enough time for the manufacturers to ramp up the inventories. How come they are scarce now? Who is leaning on them?

Providing you with “conclusive evidence” is equivalent to waking up somebody who is pretending to asleep.[/quote]

You’re going to have to explain in detail how the context changes your assertion. Maybe if we were talking about duck hunting, claiming that there are only two paths for the US economy, I’d read it differently. But I don’t think so. Absolute claims are absolute claims, irrespective of context.

The shortage of ammo is pretty easy to explain. People who are afraid the government wants to take guns is driving some people to buy ammo. The myth that ammo is being purchased by the government at any significantly higher rates than in the past has been debunked so many times, I shouldn’t have to address it. Because you might have read it on infowars.com doesn’t make it so.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]

This wasn’t directed at me, but how about Bloomberg? Wouldn’t you admit that he represents the interests of Wall Street and many of the “moneyed elite”?

How about Walmart executives?

—–

“Wal-Mart Toughens Gun Policies

By DEVLIN BARRETT

WASHINGTON (AP) — Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest seller of firearms, announced Monday it will toughen rules for gun sales, from storing video of purchases to creating an internal log of which guns they sell that are later used in crimes.

J.P. Suarez, the chief compliance officer for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., appeared with outspoken gun control advocate Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York to announce the changes at a gathering of Bloomberg’s group Mayors Against Illegal Guns.”

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/ap_041408.shtml

——————-

It seems to me that Bloomberg would be doing society a much greater service if he would focus on the “financial terrorism” unleashed on us by Wall Street. Why is he so hell-bent on gun control, but so totally weak on breaking the backs of those in the financial industry who’ve just about brought this country to its knees? Why are there no high-level financial executives in jail for causing the financial bubble/collapse? Please don’t try to tell us that they “didn’t know what they were doing.”[/quote]

Bloomberg is the mayor of the biggest city in the country. That’s where his interest in gun control originates. His views are very similar to other big city mayors wrt guns. “Financial terrorism” isn’t within the purview of most mayors, including Bloomberg. The NY AG, whose scope of responsibility does include “financial terrorism” is addressing it.

The issue of why there aren’t any high-level executives in jail isn’t something I can defend, nor is it anything I would try to. Nor do I think it’s related to the issue we’re discussing. I suspect we’re in strong agreement on that point.

Do big corporations have disproportional influence? Absolutely. Does the finance industry have disproportional influence with both political parties? Absolutely. Is the federal government systematically invading our constitutional rights to privacy and due process? Absolutely. Do they have a motivation to take away guns? Quite possibly. Is there any evidence that they’re trying to do so? I’m still waiting. They couldn’t pass a watered down bill on background checks in the senate, much less the house. So what has actually happened over the last 5 years with regards to the government taking away guns? Absolutely nothing.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter] The shortage of ammo is pretty easy to explain. People who are afraid the government wants to take guns is driving some people to buy ammo. The myth that ammo is being purchased by the government at any significantly higher rates than in the past has been debunked so many times, I shouldn’t have to address it. Because you might have read it on infowars.com doesn’t make it so.[/quote]

While at making unfounded claims, just parroting your masters at wall street does not help much.

If it is regular folk buying up the ammo to the point of causing shortage, where are they storing it? Has there been a commensurate increase in storage space? Increase in usage?

Anyway, don’t bother. Did not realize you were a partisan.

[Author]

Posts