Thursday, July 24, 2014
   
Text Size

Search our Site or Google

About Me

Basic Information

Professional Investor?
No
Favorite Stock Tickers
SLW, RBI, GPR
Gender
Male
Hometown
Vancouver, B.C.
About me
I became seriously attracted to the precious metal sector around the middle of this decade - through my own, personal investing. After publishing an amateur blog for about a year, I became acquainted with C.J. McNamara and we decided to form Bullion Bulls Canada at the end of 2008.

Contact Information

State
BC
City / Town
Vancouver
Country
Canada

Education

College / University
University of British Columbia
Graduation Year
1989 (Llb.)
Jeff Nielson
Jeff Nielson
  • Profile Video
  • My Profile Video
  • Karma
  • Member since
  • Saturday, 11 July 2009 20:47
  • Last online
  • 5 hours 51 minutes ago
  • Profile views
  • 213787 views
Today
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: The Daily Grind in the forums.
It's Wednesday July 23rd; and after a couple of long editions of The Grind, I'll keep today's version somewhat shorter. In part, I'll do this by referencing another post from the Forum (earlier this morning) where I discussed today's central topic in considerably more detail.

And that "topic" is the Big Banks pretending to "leave the commodities business". This is something that would never happen because it is simply something which could never happen. Much like there is no way the banksters could never "unwind" their crooked "derivatives" casino -- because it's now more than twenty times as large as the entire global economy -- their (assorted) commodities frauds are too large for these criminal entities to simply walk away.

Not only is there the problem of countless (enormous) "skeletons in the closet" which would be inherited by any supposed "purchaser" of these businesses; but in simply making an "exit" (and taking all their fraudulent paper with them), the massive economic carnage caused by the (sudden) removal of that paper would be proof, by itself, of the size of the previous frauds which had been taking place. I pointed out another obvious example of precisely the same sort of silly charade in that earlier post.

New Bubble-Highs In U.S. Markets Prove No Tapering

Even beyond revealing their secrets, and revealing their crimes; there is a more-fundamental reason why the One Bank will not/cannot simply walk away from its commodities-manipulation racket: the manipulation of commodity prices is an integral part of the "inflation" lie, and thus an integral part of delaying the inevitable hyperinflation of Western currencies. NOTHING could induce the One Bank to jeopardize its precious (fraudulent) "fiat currencies".

It shouldn't be necessary for myself (alone) to debunk yet another silly lie by the bankers (and their parrots in the mainstream media). Yet time after time (as we saw with the myth of the Bullion Banks being "net long" in gold); the banksters (and media drones) simply say that they are going to do something (or already have done it) and other commentators believe it.



The net-result is that I end up getting "preachy", because the same people are getting sucked-in again and again. We're seen all their cons before. We're seen all their lies before. When the banksters trot-out new versions of these same shams/scams; they should fool no one.

Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice; shame on me.

Get fooled a half-dozen times, and you simply need to give your head a shake. While I strongly encourage readers to read/visit the other post on this topic (as there are several points of this discussion only mentioned there); I will pluck-out one, especially important excerpt from that earlier post:

Note that Basher Central (inadvertently) reveals how we will KNOW that the banksters haven't "left commodities": the impact on prices. In any/every market in which these Criminals operate; they bring mountains of their fraudulent paper with them. If they ever (truly) "left" a market/sector; it would be the literal, economic equivalent of "the tide going out". Prices would have to fall (dramatically) because with any banker-dominated market being at least 90% fraudulent paper; if you remove that "90%" the (fraudulent) market must collapse.
Yet look at precisely what Basher Central is telling us in the piece of tripe below: the banksters are going to leave these commodities markets, and take their 100:1 leverage with them, but these paper-saturated markets will not collapse.



It's really, really simple: if we do not see a "crash" across the broad spectrum of commodities (like we saw when the PAPER was pulled out of the paper-called-gold market last year, and caused a 30% drop in the price of gold), then we have absolutely conclusive proof that this "exit from commodities" is just another silly ruse.

On the other hand; if we do now suddenly see commodities markets crashing across-the-board, then that would mean that the bankers' paper was withdrawn. That would (likely, but not certainly) also mean that they really did sell their businesses. It's also possible they could simply withdraw some of their paper (to cause a crash), but keep control of those businesses.

However; if we do see a commodities-crash in the near future; I'll be the first to admit that my analysis today was at least partially mistaken...



Bank Exodus From Commodities Could Hurt Liquidity Short Term; Otherwise Limited Impact Seen

www.kitco.com/news/2014-07-22/Bank-Exodu...ted-Impact-Seen.html

The trend of major banks leaving the commodities business could hurt liquidity in the short term, but eventually other trading firms will fill the void, say veterans of the commodities business.

Most do not look for a major impact on the price trend of commodities in general; after all, speculators can establish either long or short positions. Nevertheless, some pointed out that past moves by banks to exit happened to coincide with a bottoming in commodities prices.

Credit Suisse said Tuesday it plans to wind down its commodities trading to focus on other areas of its business. Previously, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan and Barclays also said they are either scaling back or exiting the commodities arena...
01:32 PM
Last year; as the banksters' paper-called-gold funds were about to totally collapse because (legitimate) investors were stampeding out of these fraud-funds, the bullion-banks were forced to soak-up so many millions of units of this fraudulent paper that (at least at one point) they were technically "net long" in the gold market.

The propaganda machine published this half-truth (to cover-up what was really happening), and all of the commentators in the precious metals sector (except myself) simply lapped-up this nonsense. Deluded investors waited for bullion prices to rise because the banksters were (supposedly) "long gold" (lol!!!!), only to be disappointed when the charade was exposed -- and my own analysis was proven correct.

"Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice; shame on me"?

Apparently not when it comes to the commentators of the alternative media. This year; the new propaganda lie is that the banksters are "leaving the commodities sector" -- something about their ever-more extreme acts of fraud/manipulation getting them nervous, and so they are seeking to "limit their exposure" (i.e. potential legal liability).

Lol !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And like good chumps; once again we hear alternative-media commentators echoing this nonsense and then "speculating on its impact" on commodity markets.

naivety - the state of being naïve, having or showing a lack of experience, understanding or sophistication

gullible - Easily deceived or duped.


When the One Bank's psychopath-minions or corporate tentacles "announce" that they are going to do something; we don't assume it's true -- and then go around parroting it. We assume it's a lie (like most of what spews from their treacherous lips).

Then we begin speculation on WHY they are lying, and what the Truth really is. Indeed, these days we generally speculate that the banksters will do the precise/perverse OPPOSITE of what they say they doing. Thus when they claim to be "leaving commodities"; more-likely-than-not it means they plan on expanding their mega-frauds in these markets.

So when the One Bank's tentacles announce that they are "leaving the commodities business"; the one thing that we know they are NOT doing is "leaving the commodities business". This brings us to Stage Two: why are they lying -- and what are they really doing?

As previously noted; the reason they are "announcing" this supposed retreat from their commodities racket is because decades of their mega-frauds in these markets has made these markets increasingly perilous -- i.e. increasing likely to expose the One Bank to some mega-$billion or mega-$trillion legal liability.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Not exactly. If you're a bankster, and you can no longer stand the 'heat' of your own, fraudulent kitchen; you simply pretend to leave the kitchen. What you really do, is to simply give your kitchen a NEW NAME -- and then pretend that someone else owns it.



It's not like this is a new charade. Even the most-comatose Sheep is familiar with the business vernacular "corporate front" -- i.e. a paper shell to hide the Puppet-Master behind the curtain.

It's not necessary to explain this to readers here; but perhaps YOU all can explain this to other commentators: when the banksters say that they are going to "do something", don't believe them.



Note that Basher Central (inadvertently) reveals how we will KNOW that the banksters haven't "left commodities": the impact on prices. In any/every market in which these Criminals operate; they bring mountains of their fraudulent paper with them.

If they ever (truly) "left" a market/sector; it would be the literal, economic equivalent of "the tide going out". Prices would have to fall (dramatically) because with any banker-dominated market being at least 90% fraudulent paper; if you remove that "90%" the (fraudulent) market must collapse.

Yet look at what Basher Central is "predicting" (lol!):

Bank Exodus From Commodities Could Hurt Liquidity Short Term; Otherwise Limited Impact Seen

We're told that the tide is about to go out in the commodities sector (dramatically), but we're also told (in advance) not to expect a "low tide" when the tide goes out.



This was identical to how the Fed has told us (year after year) that its "quantitative easing" was pumping-up markets (obviously?). Yet when it sold the pathetic lie of "tapering" to the Sheep (and commentators in the alternative media) we were also told NOT to expect all these pumped-up markets to collapse when it withdrew some of that paper.



Please see:

The Wonderland Matrix





Bank Exodus From Commodities Could Hurt Liquidity Short Term; Otherwise Limited Impact Seen

www.kitco.com/news/2014-07-22/Bank-Exodu...ted-Impact-Seen.html

The trend of major banks leaving the commodities business could hurt liquidity in the short term, but eventually other trading firms will fill the void, say veterans of the commodities business.

Most do not look for a major impact on the price trend of commodities in general; after all, speculators can establish either long or short positions. Nevertheless, some pointed out that past moves by banks to exit happened to coincide with a bottoming in commodities prices.

Credit Suisse said Tuesday it plans to wind down its commodities trading to focus on other areas of its business. Previously, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan and Barclays also said they are either scaling back or exiting the commodities arena.

Commodity markets generally may be less liquid for a year or two, said Dennis Gartman, a veteran trader and publisher of The Gartman Letter.

“But even that will, over the course of time, be eased,” Gartman said. “People will move in and take their place. That’s already happening. We’re seeing hedge funds and we’re seeing the Glencores, et al, buying the commodity businesses that the banks are getting rid of.”...
12:11 PM
As everyone knows; the United Nations is (absurdly) subservient to U.S. interests, and the U.S. is absurdly subservient to Israel's interests. So when the UN itself starts talking about "Israeli war-crimes", clearly a particularly obvious and/or particularly heinous atrocity is taking place.

Given the (previous) eye-witness account of the cold-blooded murder of unarmed civilians by Israeli soldiers; certainly there is nothing surprising here -- except that this report is actually appearing at Basher Central. As with the rest of the mainstream media; it typically only publishes materials which stick to the (mindless) mantra that Israel can do no wrong.

And when it does do something which seems like a crime-against-humanity; we're told it always has a really good excuse. But not here. What is being exclusively described outside the mainstream media, and now beginning to be mentioned within the mainstream media is simply more of Israel's slow-genocide.



Note in particular one piece of "good advice" which would be a complete revelation to the fascist leadership of Israel:

"When in doubt, the houses of civilians are not legitimate targets."

Of course, one would also have to provide the terrorist Netanyahu with a dictionary -- so that he could first look-up the words "legitimate target", as these words have been totally alien to every Israeli regime for at least two decades.






The UN Warns Of Possible Israeli War Crimes In Gaza As Death Toll Climbs

www.kitco.com/news/2014-07-23/The-UN-War...ath-Toll-Climbs.html

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay on Wednesday warned that Israeli military attacks on Gaza could constitute a war crime, as the death toll in Israel's two-week offensive on the Palestinian enclave rose to 670, mostly civilians.

Pillay told a special session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva that independent reports on the Israeli attacks indicated "a strong possibility that international humanitarian law has been violated, in a manner that could amount to war crimes".

The top UN official, who also branded as "unacceptable" the indiscriminate rocket attacks by Palestinian militants against Israel, stressed that "the houses of civilians are not legitimate targets unless they are used or contribute to military purposes. When in doubt, the houses of civilians are not legitimate targets"...
11:20 AM
Thanks Jeff,


"to be able to distinguish high-probability results from these aerial surveys from low-probability results?"

Here's a link showing the maps


media3.marketwire.com/docs/958596a.pdf
11:16 AM
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: News Release Geophsics Reported in the forums.
Auriferous, it's my understanding that sometimes the "imaging" work produced from these aerial surveys is little more than an educated guess, and sometimes it's (almost) an indication of a sure-thing. And it doesn't necessarily depend on the "strength" of the imaging signal -- but rather the particular type of geology involved.

Is there any way for an Average Investor (i.e. someone without any background in geology) to be able to distinguish high-probability results from these aerial surveys from low-probability results?
11:06 AM
Yesterday
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: The Daily Grind in the forums.
It's Tuesday July 22nd, and as promised yesterday; the topic-of-the-day is the Bloomberg clip of Marc Fabar -- and how it ties into Sunday's commentary on how surreal/artificial is the world of the Wonderland Matrix.

With Marc Fabar; we have an individual of considerable intelligence, insight, and experience in observing (and trading in) markets. So why have my reviews of Mr. Fabar's public appearances had some degree of ambivalence in the past? Because with respect to Fabar's interviews in the mainstream media; either he is (intentionally) self-editing his own remarks (in order to make them PALATABLE to the Corporate media), or he is allowing the media entities whom he works with to IMPOSE constraints on how far he is allowed to go with his comments.

An obvious example of this occurs at the 2:40-mark of the clip:

The economy of the U.S. is growing at a very slow pace at the very best, it depends on how you translate the economic data that the government is publishing into reality...

[emphasis mine]

Here Fabar is doing nothing less than 'speaking in code'. The U.S. economy is "growing slowly, at best"? Clearly with the opening part of this statement Fabar is implying that perhaps one cannot trust these "growth" numbers. Then he goes a little further, with more 'code':

...it depends on how you translate the economic data that the government is publishing into reality.

And now Fabar's implication gets closer to an outright accusation. With the U.S. government claiming that the U.S. economy has been growing at roughly a 3% rate, quarter-after-quarter, for several years; exactly what requires "translation"?

Obviously the only numbers which would require "translating...into reality" are LIES. And yet here Fabar (Bloomberg?) draws the line. Fabar can imply that the "U.S. recovery" is just a propaganda myth, but (unlike what I do all the time in my own commentaries) he either can't or won't say this directly.

We get more of the same later in the clip, when Bloomberg (briefly) allows Fabar to discuss gold, and responds to the (idiotic) question from the Bloomberg talking-head about whether gold was "in a bubble" (lol) at previous highs. Here is Fabar's response:

That is the view of some people, and the majority of investors and strategists are rather bearish about gold. But in my view, given all the uncertainties that we have, all the money-printing that we have, and all the worsening geopolitical conditions that we have; I think investors should own some gold...

This simply pains me, because Mr. Fabar simply knows better than this, and here he is currently choosing to engage in significant understatement (i.e. self-censorship). I am quite sure that Marc Fabar understands that in relative terms the money-printing now drowns-out all other variables.

There are two inferences to draw from this. First of all; the other "variables" Fabar threw into the question are just window-dressing -- to please Bloomberg -- because it is the propaganda machine (in particular) which likes to pretend that all these factors are equal/integral components in determining the "proper" price for gold.

Secondly; the suggestion that "I think investors should own some gold" is simply WEAK. Again, Fabar clearly has a sophisticated enough understanding of the pending economic nightmare to know what he should have said:

All investors must hold a significant component of gold (or silver) in their portfolios.

How does this tie into my latest commentary, about the difficulty of trying to present a sane world to readers (a world of value-for-value, versus a world of hard assets in exchange for worthless scraps of paper)? Because no one listening to the Fabar clip (whose mind is currently 'plugged into' the Wonderland Matrix) could have ever been freed/enlightened by listening to that clip.

Only those already outside the Wonderland Matrix would know what Fabar was really talking about -- and there is the problem. There are so few astute/intelligent, and (relatively) honest commentators out there (inside or outside the mainstream media) who are capable of enlightening people as Fabar could.

More to the point; Fabar is one of only a handful of such individuals with access to the mainstream media, and the (potential) size of audience that represents. What hope is there for any of the Sheep (90+% of our populations) when people such as Fabar won't even try to reach/free their minds from the Matrix???



Obviously I say this as someone who doesn't have anywhere near the size/scope of business interests as Mr. Fabar, and thus don't have nearly as much to lose/protect. But I was one of the few alternative media commentators who did have some "mainstream" exposure. Obviously my refusal to compromise my own message (and the fact that I had started getting hired for more paid pieces) was what got me censored from TheStreet.com.

"Certain people" are very adamant that my message is not seen/heard by the masses, especially since that message was refined with my introduction/explanation of the One Bank. If nobody is prepared to place "principal" ahead of financial/career expediency; than all hope for all the Sheep is lost...




'Dr. Doom' Faber: Stocks in a Bubble, Buy Gold

www.bloomberg.com/video/marc-faber-says-...dSOKSj184n5PPag.html
05:35 PM
Auriferous replied to the topic News Release Geophsics Reported in the forums.
North American Nickel News Finds New Lobes with Geophysics / Drilling Continues

"This gravity high extends south of the current Spotty drilling and also extends to the northwestward towards the Imiak North area. Another larger more complex double lobed gravity high lies in the immediate vicinity of the mineralized Imiak Hill norite intrusion. One lobe of this gravity high extends south of the Imiak Hill drilling and the other lobe lies to the NW."


News Linkweb.tmxmoney.com/article.php?newsid=69143087&qm_symbol=NAN
10:21 AM
2 days ago
Jeff Nielson created a new topic "Silver Opium – The Eastern Revenge" in the forums.
This comes to me via "Rory" (of the SGT Report gang) and his own blog "The Daily Coin"...




Silver Opium – The Eastern Revenge

thedailycoin.org/?p=3611

When I began to explore the opium wars, which began in the early 1700′s and came into full view in the early 1800′s, Britain, France and the United States, had taken full aim at China in the name of “free trade”. Things haven’t changed all that much since the West looked East to find a flow of wealth they could not control.

The Chinese had a lock on trade in the early 1700′s by having products that people wanted to purchase, silk, tea and porcelain in particular. The Chinese were not that interested in what the East had to offer. At the time silver was not only money, but it was the currency of the day. People used silver like we use worthless paper dollars/debit cards today. The biggest difference from then to now is that silver has value and the dollar is a promise to generate more debt. I find it interesting that Rothschild began taking over the global banking system towards the end of the opium war and just prior to the Civil War in the United States.

“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it’s profits or so dependant on it’s favors, that there will be no opposition from that class.” — Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863 (source)

It seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same.

“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is, perhaps, the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banks can in fact inflate, mint and un-mint the modern ledger-entry currency.” Major L L B Angus. (source)

So, you see these banksters have understood and implemented their evil genius for well over 150 years. They knew during the opium wars in the 1700 and 1800′s and they know today. I believe the banksters are losing control of the current narrative, the same way they did during the opium wars. Thus having to create real war to distract and steal unabated. The narrative today is that Russia is the problem, Iran is the problem, the President of Syria is the problem, etc.. This is to distract from the real problem which is the USDollar, not only losing it’s world reserve currency status, but losing all it’s value due to the transfer of wealth through money printing by the Federal Reserve.

So, what role did silver play at the very beginning of this wealth transfer? What role does it play today?

Silver was being drained out of Britain and the United States and the two countries, being tied at the hip, joined forces and created a problem, which generated a reaction and the criminal elite provided the solution. Nothing has changed, the same play-book is being used against you today. Are you paying attention?

The British introduced opium along with tobacco as an export item to China in order to reduce the trade deficit. Under the disguise of free trade, the British, the Spanish and the French, with the tacit approval of the Americans, continued sending their contraband to China through legitimate as well as illegitimate trade channels even after the Chinese dynasty put an embargo on opium imports.

All the silver (read money) was moving from West to East–the same as today–and the Anglo-American axis could only offer debt and death–the same as today. By supplying (read bootlegging) drugs into China and creating a huge population of addicts the West was able to completely change the “currency” China was using from silver to opium. They were unsuccessful at stopping the flow of silver completely but they were able to change the overall movement from West to East. By 1838 the West was, illegally, exporting 1,400 TONS of opium annually, a 100 fold increase in 100 years. Can you imagine the number of addicts 1,400 tons of opium would create? The Chinese authorities sure could and they were doing everything within their power to slow or stop the importation of opium into their country.

Silver is money and was used as coined currency, the world over, right up the 1960′s. The United States stopped using minted silver coins in 1964 and another round of debasement was underway. This was one of the last major currency debasements to happen. The banksters weren’t done, but this was a heist on a scale similar to 1933. The theft of a nations wealth was being finalized.



Todays cultivation of poppy in Afghanistan is at it’s highest level since someone, probably the UN keeping tabs on their business, began tracking production.

If you simply remove opium or change it’s name to USDollars you will see that nothing has changed. The heroin addicts now live on Wall Street and trade Treasury Bonds for manufactured goods out of China. The opium war still rages, but the suppliers and destinations have changed. The magnitude has changed, but the over-lords are still the same. The banksters operating in plain sight and nobody seems to notice and nobody seems to care.



As you can see silver was flowing out of the West and the Anglo-American Axis were losing all their money to the manufacturing base, which was China. Today the Anglo-American Axis traded the manufacturing base for debt (the USDollar/Treasury Bond) not even money or currency–pure debt. The silver, real money, is long since gone and the Chinese have, basically, been winning the opium war since the 1960′s. Why would this be? Why would the Rothschild’s allow the flow of money out of the West into China? Who controls the Peoples Bank of China and where is all the silver that China procured during the past 150 years? These are questions for the next installment. Talk with you soon.
07:39 PM
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: Israel escalates latest Gaza invasion in the forums.
agau121 wrote:
But why? Is it just about oil? Military power? I know you have some thoughts about this, so if you're willing to share them and motivated to write about it, I would be interested to hear it.

Lol AgAu!

I probably should have just skipped that observation; since I'm trying to avoid (unnecessarily) wading into the whole (disinformation) "anti-Semitism" mine-field. Perhaps the best way to respond to this would be to simply re-post a previous commentary.

The Fourth Reich

While the One Bank clearly appears to be a Jewish-dominated entity; obviously the state of Israel is much too small a power-base to support a global empire (with a large fascist/military component). The One Bank needed "muscle", so it hijacked "the World's Only Superpower" -- long before it ever became the "World's Only Superpower".

As noted by the commentators in your own post; the long history of political and media figures kow-towing to Israel, and Israel's "foreign policy agenda" (i.e. Palestinian genocide) is well-established -- and UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED within the United States.

Even the legions of Israel-lovers in the U.S. (primarily on the so-called "political right") openly acknowledge that Israel is "the tail that wags the dog". The difference is that those Neo-Cons are totally unapologetic about the U.S.'s role as Israel's "muscle". It's simply presumed/assumed that Israel is ALWAYS RIGHT.

It's certainly not only me who views the mighty USA as "Little Israel". Rather, it is likely THE most "open secret" of the Fourth Reich...

12:57 PM
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: Famous Last Words... in the forums.
Earl; I'm not sure that this really fits into the "Famous Last Words" concept, on the other hand, I can't think of any particular niche here on the Forum where this particular post would have naturally fit in.

I think I've mentioned to the Community that I've been getting into yoga more and more seriously over the past few years. Balance work is an integral part of yoga practice. And what you learn through such practice is that balance is only partially a physical feat (i.e. the strength/muscle-tone of our fast-twitch "stabilizer muscles").

An equal component in achieving balance is the mental calm/concentration necessary to achieve the degree of focus necessary for mastering (more and more) difficult feats of balance. In other words, while people may view this demonstration as an impressive but trivial investment of time/effort; that loses sight of the fact that the hours spent mastering the level of concentration necessary to do this has considerable positive/therapeutic value.

On a much more practical level; I urge all of the BBC audience (where most tend to be middle-aged or older) to seriously consider some form of "balance exercises" in your own lives. One of THE primary health risks to aging individuals is the serious harm which can occur when aging individuals (with more-brittle bones) suffer a fall.

Indeed; most-likely every one of us has a family anecdote of at least one (aging) family member who PERMANENTLY became confined to a wheel-chair (or worse) after suffering a serious fall.

The time to bolster our stabilizer-muscles (to dramatically reduce the risk of falling) is not in our 70's or 80's -- after those stabilizer muscles have been allowed to atrophy through lack of use. Rather, do some simple "balance drills" yourselves today (even if it's just something silly/basic like walking along a low ledge).

You can get just as much "balance work" walking along a ledge six inches off the ground as trying to walk along the top of a fence (lol!). And should any neighbours happen to see you (and laugh at you) "playing at" balancing like a small child would, don't let it bother you.

A few minutes a day (regularly) now can add many years of a healthy/active lifestyle later on. Our bodies are amazing machines. Indeed, women in their 90's suffering from acute osteoporosis have been shown to significantly benefit from WEIGHT TRAINING -- because the exercise causes the body to increase BONE DENSITY. This was true even with women who had never exercised in their entire lives.

My "message" (in contrast to Earl's visually stunning clip) is that we don't need to rise some great level of mastery in order to derive HUGE physical/health benefits from various forms of physical improvement.

"Use it or lose it". How's that for some Famous Last Words...???

12:45 PM
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: Musical musings... in the forums.
Earl, I think we all get a kick out of seeing our Heroes at a developmental stage of their career-journey. So for me, it wasn't so much a matter of being "wild about skiffle" as it was an insight into the genesis of Led Zeppelin.

Led Zep is a particularly interesting historical study (for music fans) because of the great complexity/diversity in their music, and the STRONG "influences" of other, more well-known musical genres. It's really easy to spot the (heavy) "blues" influence in many of their songs, while others have a significant "jazz" component.

The interesting question which comes from listening to "Jimmy do Skiffle", and then determining how/where this fit into Page's (and ultimately Led Zep's) musical evolution. It could have pushed Page towards blues, or could have pushed him towards jazz, but (in my amateur opinion) "skiffle" seems to be a more-primitive 'ancestor' of rock 'n roll itself.

Skiffle is the "chimp" which eventually evolved into rock 'n roll. Of course, being a musician yourself; you might have a different (and more-expert) opinion on this subject...



P.S. As I think I also remarked when you originally posted the Page "skiffle clip"; note the intellectual curiosity of those young boys. They had a passion for "exploration" of new ideas. In Page's case; that intellectual passion evolved into musical genius.

Clearly the sort of musical genius contained in Led Zep's compositions could have never been produced by the stereotype of the (mentally) "lazy musician" -- which is how many non-rock 'n roll fans view those who produce(d) this music.

Unfortunately with "musicianship" becoming a lost art-form in our society (and quality musical compositions along with it); ironically today the stereotype of the "lazy musician" is applicable -- since there is so little thought (and/or talent) contained in the music.
12:25 PM
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: The Daily Grind in the forums.
It's Monday July 21st, and naturally one of the topics for discussion for today is Part I of my latest two-part series:

What If We Never Left The Gold-Standard? Part I

Some readers way be wary of a colossal waste of time (lol), given the hypothetical nature of the discussion clearly implied by the title. I address this "concern" within the commentary by pointing out that this discussion hypothesizes sanity -- in an insane world -- and for that reason alone it merits consideration.

This presumes that readers don't prefer living in the current, insane world. In the movie-version of "The Matrix", there were some people who didn't want to take the Red Pill (and leave The Matrix), but instead would rather go back to their (comfortable) fantasy-world.

Presumably, those sorts of people don't come to BBC to begin with (lol!), so I urge readers to invest the time for a journey into sanity. As an aside (and as noted in the commentary), this commentary topic came from a reader question/suggestion.

This used to be a regular source of "inspiration" for new commentary ideas...until the questions/comments/feedback started drying-up around here. So if readers would like to see better/more-interesting commentaries around here, or simply more of them, give me something to work with.



As readers will quickly note within this latest commentary; today's hypothetical doesn't simply back-up to 1971, and when we said good-bye to the last vestiges of a gold standard. Rather, it takes us all the way back to the "purest" days of a gold standard: where we also had/used real money (i.e. gold and silver currency). Here, newer readers might want to read-up on precisely what "good money" really signifies.

What is Money?

I don't want to explain the real significance (at this point) of having societies where both governments and individuals (exclusively) used "honest money" -- without giving away the heart of what will be said in Part II. Instead, I wanted to focus on the real challenge for readers: first imagining a world where commerce involved trading valuable money (i.e. gold and silver currency) for valuable goods (and services).

In that sane world; the question of "how many dollars for this?" has no meaning, because the world "dollar" itself is an utterly meaningless concept. It is merely a LABEL which has been attached to a lie: that worthless scraps of paper (our "money") can somehow have "value" simply because our governments say that the scraps of paper are valuable.

This delusional hypothesis was proven false first with "Tulipmania" 500 years ago, and subsequently with numerous (individual) hyperinflation-episodes. When any currency has been debased to worthlessness (or was simply worthless to begin with); it's exchange-rate WILL fall to zero (or very, very , very close to it) as soon as the Average Person no longer believes that the currency has value.

U.S. Dollar is the new 'Tulip'

Previously, these hyperinflationary crashes involved individual economies (and currencies). But living in a paper world where our "reserve currency" has already been hyperinflated means that we NEED TO REMEMBER the concept of value-for-value, and start to price hard assets in relation to each other -- because our current paper system CAN'T last much longer.

U.S. Hyperinflation and Cultural Insanity

Instead, with anything we wanted to purchase it would be "how many ounces of silver for this?" or "how many ounces of gold for that?" Value for value. Prices are determined not via the crooked manipulation of paper markets, but through real, honest commerce producing the relative values of FREE MARKETS.

Again, just as almost all readers will have no recollections of "honest money" in their entire lifetimes; similarly none will have experienced anything remotely approaching "free markets". Having lived our entire lifetimes with (at very best) quasi-worthless paper currencies, and markets totally dominated (i.e. manipulated) by all that paper, none of us have ever experienced a world of VALUE FOR VALUE.

It's nothing but paper prices for this and paper prices for that, when the paper itself has no value, and thus (by logical necessity) the prices have no meaning...

When Prices Have No Meaning

The point here is that we must stop thinking in terms of "dollars" (at all) and start thinking in terms of value-for-value: how many ounces of silver for that refrigerator? How many ounces of gold for that automobile?

Of greater relevance to investors in the audience: if you're looking for financial advice on where to get the "best value" for your (precious) investor 'dollars' (lol!), you don't need my advice. All you need is a calculator.

While we can't/don't directly price our hard assets in terms of "how many ounces of silver for this?" and "how many ounces of gold for that?" we can do so indirectly -- through converting the bankers' paper-prices into value-for-value prices.

If an ounce of silver is priced at $25 dollars, and a barrel of oil is priced at $100; we know that currently a real price for oil is one barrel of oil for four ounces of silver. At that point; one need simply decide whether they are more influenced by Peak Oil or evaporating silver in deciding whether (at a 4:1 rate of exchange) they would rather hang onto their silver, or swap some of it for oil.

While it's not quite that simple in practical terms; it's still a very useful mental exercise, for two reasons. First of all; it's only by remembering to start pricing the world in terms of value-for-value that we can/will ever return to a world of sanity (rather than a fantasy-world of paper perversion). And it's the only way readers can reacquaint themselves with the concept of relative value -- and once again begin to accurately/realistically assess the (true) "value" of various goods.

As noted at the end of Part I; this is one case where my decision to write a "two-parter" isn't a simple function of the length of the piece, but rather it was a great place for a "mental pause". Before I write (and you read) Part II; I strongly recommend you spend some time visualizing/imagining a SANE WORLD (i.e. a world of value-for-value) -- since all of us have lived all our lives in an insane world...it's just more-insane today.



I was also going to get into a second topic in today's edition: a Bloomberg interview of Marc Faber. However, there is a considerable amount that I want to say about that interview in isolation, and in relation to what I've written in yesterday's commentary. Because it takes a long time (has taken a long time) to describe sanity (to those living in an insane world), I think I'll save my "Marc Faber" discussion for tomorrow's edition of The Grind.

What I will do is provide you all with the Bloomberg link, so that those who are interested can listen to this 5-minute clip with "Dr. Doom" before I chip-in my own thoughts on the contents.


'Dr. Doom' Faber: Stocks in a Bubble, Buy Gold

www.bloomberg.com/video/marc-faber-says-...dSOKSj184n5PPag.html
11:18 AM
3 days ago
agau121 replied to the topic Re: Israel escalates latest Gaza invasion in the forums.
But why? Is it just about oil? Military power? I know you have some thoughts about this, so if you're willing to share them and motivated to write about it, I would be interested to hear it.
11:41 PM
Earl replied to the topic Re: Famous Last Words... in the forums.
To the Community,

When I watched this video, all I could think of was the thousands of comments and commentaries this could illustrate.

From the "house of cards" to "Pension Smoothing" Plan.

Then, I couldn't stop thinking of the positive.

"The Incredible Power Of Concentration"

The many comments on exercising your brain. The virtues of tenacity.

To view such a feat in a noble light is beyond words.

Watch and discover what inspiration and thoughts enter our mind.

Take Care
Earl


08:59 PM
Earl replied to the topic Re: Musical musings... in the forums.
Jeff,

Earl, to me the Bee Gees (along with John Travolta) were the poster-boys for the short-lived "disco craze" of the 1970's. I don't know exactly where you are in the age totem-pole, but for my age-cohort you were either "rock 'n roll" or "disco". Indeed, some knuckle-dragger at a party once wanted to have a fight with me, simply for saying "disco sucks".

I remember "Disco". I remember there was some fashion of jewelry. Men and Women wore a little spoon on a necklace. I actually remember asking a car sales man what it meant, "New Disco fashion" was all he said. A few years later, I went to my first "Disco", sure enough there were all these people wearing spoons. I never did get a direct answer to my fashion question. I did kind of figure out the spoon part later.

Yes, I made a similar "Disco sucks" statement that caused quite a ruckus. I should have said "Disco is stupid" the song Disco Duck was blazing the airwaves and may have been more appropriate. Of course leaving out the "f***ing" word before sucks, may have helped too. I think the fellow I was talking to had one of the spoon necklaces. He seemed very hot headed for "dance music".

I know how you feel Jeff...

Jeff, your comment "like scratching a chalk-board with a nail..." I don't know why record companies do that to a group. The Bee Gees screech, they did the same thing to me one summer with Stevie Nicks (that summer she went solo). "The goat", all summer was the goat. I lost my imaginary love affair of over a decade. I have to listen to the early stuff and remember the good times.

Now just think of this, looking at talent and song writing, musicianship, harmonies.

Skiffle Band-

Born in Chiswick, John Entwistle was a member of the Confederates with Pete Townshend while still in grammar school in 1959. Trained in both the piano and the French horn, he was one of the most musically accomplished teenagers ever to play in a skiffle band.

Jimmy Page's musical tastes included skiffle (a popular English music genre of the time) and acoustic folk playing, and the blues sounds of Elmore James, B.B. King, Otis Rush, Buddy Guy, Freddie King and Hubert Sumlin. "Basically, that was the start: a mixture between rock and blues."

John Lennon's skiffle group The Quarrymen.

Ringo Starr he joined his first band, known as the Eddie Clayton Skiffle Group

The Rattlesnakes were a British skiffle and rock and roll band formed by Barry Gibb in Manchester in 1955, which would eventually evolve into the Bee Gees in 1958. Originally consisting of Barry, Robin and Maurice Gibb, Paul Frost and Kenny Horrocks, they were one of the many skiffle bands that were formed in the United Kingdom in the 1950s.

With a cast of band mates like that, I don't see you venturing into "Disco".

A band of brothers that learn to sing. Sing harmonies, play a few instruments. Play for change on the sidewalks, sing for there boat passage back to England. Writing songs people want to play like Otis Redding. Songs covered by many artists including The Flying Burrito Brothers, Rod Stewart, Bonnie Tyler, Janis Joplin, The Animals, Gary Puckett and the Union Gap, Nina Simone, Jimmy Somerville, Billy Corgan, and Michael Bolton.

That Skiffle band background always gets me.

You mention Australia and I know the Bee Gees were in and out and around Australia. Knowing I maybe opening a can of worms the chance to show there was actually musicianship in the brothers is something I hope anyone who takes a moment learns some songs and a little history.

It certainly shows how important a community can be. "Friends tell you what you need to hear, not what you want to hear".

Skiffle is a type of popular music with jazz, blues, folk, and roots influences, usually using homemade or improvised instruments. Originating as a term in the United States in the first half of the twentieth century, it became popular again in the UK in the 1950s.

It certainly shows how important a community can be. "Friends tell you what you need to hear, not what you want to here". Some of us have a guitar, some a horn. Gotta washboard, hey, lets play. We try to remember history, stay focused. The MSM tells us we need to play like this and sound like that. We are truth seekers and some of have lots of questions. I do think some would've at least told what the spoon on the necklaces was for.

One last song from a talented group.

It's been fun researching-
Thank You
Earl




Jeff, one for you. You seemed to really enjoy it the first time. It still amazes me to see these clips.






Thank You
Earl
08:03 PM
4 days ago
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: Musical musings... in the forums.
Earl, to me the Bee Gees (along with John Travolta) were the poster-boys for the short-lived "disco craze" of the 1970's. I don't know exactly where you are in the age totem-pole, but for my age-cohort you were either "rock 'n roll" or "disco". Indeed, some knuckle-dragger at a party once wanted to have a fight with me, simply for saying "disco sucks".



So being rabidly anti-disco, it was/is inevitable that I also became Bee Gee-phobic. Before they turned "disco" they seemed to possess some musical talent (lol), so I don't want to attempt to nay-say your own post.

But for me; the Bee Gees are like scratching a chalk-board with a nail...

04:19 PM
DayOwl wrote:
Interesting stats:

www.fhwa.dot.gov/highwaytrustfund/

Scroll down to the table and note how tax receipts have fallen by more than 50% compared to last October. It relates to Jeff's commentary about the drop in gasoline demand nationwide.


DayOwl, I'm no accountant, so it's certainly possible I might have misconstrued something, but I find it hard to draw conclusions of any sort from the data (and chart) on that page. Also note that this entire "crisis" is totally surreal. We're talking about less than $1 BILLION (in the current fiscal year) with a government which claims to take-in over $3 TRILLION per year in revenues.

Thus this crisis represents 0.03% of annual spending. So the mere pretense that this is a "highways crisis" is just more theater from the Puppet Clowns. But that's just the start of this nonsense.

With respect to the chart of the "account balance" of the highway fund over the past four, fiscal years; again this is just accounting chicanery. The account balance was actually at its lowest point back in 2010. Then it suddenly quadrupled in size, representing nothing but more accounting gimmickry. A government which doesn't have any money "transferred" $15 billion or so into the highway fund (lol).

You're right in noting that the balance has eroded between 2010 and 2014, yet in the latest accounting below, we're told that "revenues" are supposedly up 6.6% over the past year. So why is there (suddenly) a "funding crisis"?

Again, this seems like simply more accounting gimmickry. We're told that this gimmick will produce a paper-gain of roughly $600 million per year. However, the reason why the "highways fund" suddenly needs this money "or it will go bust" is because nearly $900 million was transferred out of the highways account, and into the mass-transit account.

Thus not only are the Puppet Clowns making "a mountain of a mole-hill" as they do again and again and again, in order to provide trivial/distracting theater for the Sheep, but the mole-hill itself was artificially created through simply a paper-shuffle from one account to another.



At least that's how I read this...

04:04 PM
5 days ago
Earl replied to the topic Re: Musical musings... in the forums.
Jeff,

I remembered posting Midnight Oil "Bed are Burning". I remembered it had a neat story behind the song and it was actually in the lyrics.

But while scanning down"Musical muings" page 26, I noticed three youtubes were vanished. Then I remembered google and youtubes recent threats of world domination-

bullionbullscanada.com/bulletin-boards/6...k-indie-labels#31062

Two Bob Marley and the Wailers songs, and a U2. I'm going to say, I'm already a bit troubled with this google world domination format.

To take down "No Woman No Cry", they've just gone too far.

When I feel a little better, I'll replace the same songs with approved "youtubes".


I'm going to stick to my Australian theme today-

Thank You
Earl

The Bee Gees were a pop music group that was formed in 1958.
Born on the Isle of Man to English parents,they lived in Chorlton, Manchester, England, until the late 1950s. The family then moved to Cribb Island, in Queensland, Australia.

In August 1958 the Gibb family, including infant brother Andy, emigrated to Redcliffe, just north-east of Brisbane in Queensland, Australia. The young brothers began performing to raise pocket money.

"Spicks and Specks" is a song by the Bee Gees, It was written by Barry Gibb. The song was released in September 1966.





"Town of Tuxley Toymaker, Part One" is a song written by Barry, Robin and Maurice Gibb in Australia in 1966. It was recorded by Jon Blanchfield in 1966. The song was recorded at St. Clair Studio, Hurstville in Australia






"New York Mining Disaster 1941", their second British single (their first-issued UK 45 rpm was "Spicks and Specks"), was issued to radio stations with a blank white label listing only the song title. Some DJs immediately assumed this was a new single by The Beatles and started playing the song in heavy rotation. This helped the song climb into the Top 20 in both the UK and US.




No such chicanery was needed to boost The Bee Gees' second single, "To Love Somebody", into the US Top 20. Originally written for Otis Redding, "To Love Somebody", a soulful ballad sung by Barry, has since become a pop standard covered by many artists including The Flying Burrito Brothers, Rod Stewart, Bonnie Tyler, Janis Joplin, The Animals, Gary Puckett and the Union Gap, Nina Simone, Jimmy Somerville, Billy Corgan, and Michael Bolton.


"To Love Somebody" is a song written by Barry and Robin Gibb.



Lyrics


Spicks and Specks
www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bee+gees/spicks+specks_20015566.html

Town of Tuxley Toymaker Part 1
www.lyrics5.com/lyric7650.town.of.tuxley.toymaker.pt1.html

New York Mining Disaster 1941
www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/beegees/newyorkminingdisaster1941.html

To Love Somebody
www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bee+gees/to+love+somebody_20015739.html
07:54 PM
Jeff Nielson, agau121 replied to the topic Re: Israel escalates latest Gaza invasion in the forums.
agau121 wrote:
Relevant interview with Glenn Greenwald on Democracy Now this morning about this situation and the MSM coverage of it.

www.democracynow.org/2014/7/18/glenn_greenwald_why_did_nbc_pull



Thanks for the post AgAu.

More and more; the pretense of a "free press" in the Fascist States of America (Little Israel?) vanishes.

It's ironic, because the way that the U.S. government sucks-up to Israel and plays the role of its dutiful lap-dog is nearly identical to how Harper behaves toward the U.S.

04:37 PM
Earl created a new topic The Highway Trust Funds "Pension Smoothing" Plan in the forums.
To the Community,

I came across this AP article on page six of our daily city newspaper. It was sandwiched between some "block on a bill on contraception coverage" and "new sanctions on Russia".

The original article-

INSIDE WASHINGTON: Bogus cash pays for roads

bigstory.ap.org/article/lawmakers-embrac...immick-fund-highways

WASHINGTON (AP) — If there's anything that can unite Democrats and Republicans in the partisan swamp of Capitol Hill, it's free money.

The latest example of free money in Washington is a retread proposal called "pension smoothing" that raises money but doesn't increase anyone's taxes. To some people's way of thinking, that's a win-win situation. But others say lose-lose is more like it, arguing that it's budget fakery at its worst and that it could undermine pension security for millions of workers.

Lawmakers reprised the pension provision Tuesday to help find money for a government fund that finances highway construction projects, with both Democrats and Republicans getting into the act. The highway bill passed by a sweeping 367-55 vote.

Here's how it works: The pension measure would allow companies to reduce the amount that they contribute to their pension funds now and make up for it later. Since pension contributions are tax deductible, companies would owe more tax revenue in the next few years as more of their earnings are taxed. But in the later years, they would be able to claim higher deductions from larger contributions to their pension funds.

Over time, the pension measure doesn't raise revenue. But over the next 10 years — the time frame used to estimate the cost of legislation — it does.

This has budget experts crying foul. Just as using the pension changes as a painless budget "offset" is backed by both liberals and conservatives, think tanks from the left, right and political middle all oppose it as a gimmick. And they warn it could cost taxpayers in the long run because taxpayers could be on the hook if an insured pension plan can't meet its obligations and has to turn to the government's Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. for help.

"It pretends to raise revenue. It doesn't. It'll lose as much money, plus interest, in the future as it gains in the short term," says Len Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the left-of-center Brookings Institution and Urban Institute. "And it undermines the pension security of American workers. Aside from that, it's a great idea. It's outrageous."

A plan by Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, would raise almost $19 billion over the next six years by extending for another five years a pension smoothing plan enacted to help pay for the 2012 highway bill. But over the final four years of the budget window, roughly two-thirds of that revenue gain is taken back as companies take higher tax deductions from larger pension contributions in the longer term. So the 10-year revenue gain is $6.4 billion, though it'll continue to cost revenues after 2024.

The Senate's version raises less short-term cash, with a three-year extension of the tactic. Critics shouldn't take heart: The Senate is saving the other two years to "pay for" other must-do legislation such as Forest Service payments to rural schools, underfunded coal miner pensions, and a trust fund for reclamation of abandoned mines.

Some companies argue that they again need relief from the current pension funding formula, which requires higher contributions when interest rates are low, as they are now. And they say the cash freed up by lower pension contributions in the short term would boost investment and therefore the economy.

"It seems like a win-win. Congress gets extra revenue that they can then use ... to say, 'Oh, we're paying for this additional highway spending.' And they also get to claim they're helping out these companies," said Romina Boccia, a senior policy analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "Meanwhile, the taxpayer is on the hook for a potential bailout of these private pensions down the road."

Both political parties embrace the tactic. It was used in 2010 to help forestall a cut in payments to Medicare doctors, which prompted Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to warn that "these savings are likely to be more than offset by greater federal obligations that will appear outside the 10-year window we use to enforce the budget."

And in an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office released last week, the nonpartisan scorekeeper said the pension provision "would increase the amount of underfunding" in single-employer, defined benefit pension plans and "would probably cause some plans to be terminated more quickly."

"This is pretty bad, not only because it doesn't produce any real savings but it creates a risk of actually worsening our fiscal outlook if the reduced pension contributions result in more pension plans being underfunded and the government having to bail them out," said Ed Lorenzen, a senior analyst at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates for lower budget deficits.

"We're in a difficult position because the Republicans don't want to look at anything else," said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich. "And you can't let the highway fund go bust."

There is other budget fakery in the measure as well, including using $3.5 billion in so-called Customs user fees that won't arrive until 2024 to pay for spending now.

Asked Tuesday to respond to criticism of the pension idea, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, gave only a halfhearted endorsement of the measure. Camp, the Ways and Means chairman, said it was too late to try anything else.

"Then why would the president be supporting our bill to fix the highway funding over the next year? Why would Democrats be supporting it in both the House and the Senate?" Boehner said. "Listen, these are difficult decisions in difficult times in an election year."

I still had a few questions so I did a search and found this article. It had a few extra details, so I wanted to include it-


heritageaction.com/2014/07/highway-trust-fund-qa/

Highway Trust Fund: Questions and Answers

Background: In 1956, the federal highway program was created to build a coast-to-coast 42,000-mile network of interstate highways to connect all major cities in the country. To pay for this program the government instituted a “user fee” in the form of a federal gas tax. Once the network was completed in the mid-1980s, the highways and the fuel tax were to be handed over to the states to manage. Congress, however, grew accustomed to the influx of revenue and the spending it enabled. The program has since been periodically reauthorized through highway bills, expanding on each occasion, and today, the fuel taxes motorists, truckers, and bus drivers pay are spent on a variety of measures well beyond the scope of roads and bridges, very few of which address the actual problems facing motorists.

Status: The Highway Trust Fund has been depleted and lawmakers are now seeking $10 billion to bail it out to continue transportation spending at current unsustainable levels.

What is the Highway Trust Fund (HTF)?

The Highway Trust Fund is a federal transportation fund filled with revenue collected from federal fuel taxes—18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel fuel—and related fees. Congress draws from the HTF to fund a multitude of spending measures, from highways and bridges to a series of local “livability” programs to mass transit such as buses and subways.

Why is another highway bill coming up right now?

At the end of fiscal year 2014, the current federal highway bill will expire. In the meantime, however, spending out of the HTF is so disproportionate to what drivers contribute in fuel taxes that Congress is faced with having to ratchet back spending or bail out the fund at taxpayer expense. Congress is considering a $10 billion bailout that will refill the HTF temporarily and extend all transportation programs into 2015.

Why is the HTF out of money?

The current law governing the federal highway and transit programs, set in effect by the last highway bill, is called MAP-21: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century. MAP-21 authorizes annual spending well above the revenue the HTF will collect and funds a host of parochial projects that have no business being handled at the federal level. This practice has allowed HTF expenditures to far eclipse the amount of revenue collected from fuel taxes.

One example of a trust fund spending diversion is mass transit. Transit use, which is mainly concentrated in just six cities (the municipalities of Washington, D.C., New York, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco), received 17 percent of total federal user fees in 2010, even though its share of the nation’s surface travel amounted to roughly 1 percent and transit users pay nothing into the HTF. Other diversions included programs such as nature trails and landscaping, environmental study and mitigation efforts, community preservation, ferry boats, and bicycle paths.

The lack of spending prioritization, coupled with egregious federal intervention into local community projects, has drained the HTF to the point of insolvency. (Past transfers from the General Fund of the Treasury have totaled over $50 billion since 2008.)

What are the current proposals to refill the HTF? Will they work?

Senators Bob Corker (R–TN) and Chris Murphy (D–CT) have proposed hiking federal gas taxes by 12 cents per gallon. This would raise the gas tax to 30.4 cents per gallon of gasoline and 36.4 cents per gallon on diesel (on top of state fuel taxes).

In the House, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp has unveiled a $10.9 billion plan to extend transportation funding through May, 2015 that would refill the HTF through a three-fold approach:

Raise $6.4 billion over the next decade through “pension smoothing”—allowing companies to cut back on their payments to employees’ pension funds, thereby subjecting more profits to taxation
Raise $3.5 billion in 2024 by extending customs and user fees by another year (a scorekeeping gimmick that was already used in the flawed Ryan-Murray budget agreement)
Raise $1 billion transferring it from a fund used to clean up leaking underground storage tanks to the HTF

Neither of these proposals would make any real reforms to the way tax dollars are allocated under the current federal highway program. The Corker-Murphy gas tax hike would perpetuate a broken system at greater expense to motorists. The Camp proposal would achieve the same effect to the detriment of taxpayers in general, employing routine Congressional budget gimmicks to offset irresponsible spending measures. Finding more money for bureaucrats to waste on our behalf is not a solution.

What happens if the HTF runs out of money? Won’t the U.S. face a transportation crisis?

Gas tax revenues will still flow into the HTF and be paid out for transportation projects. The U.S. Department of Transportation would simply have to slow down payments to the states.

Lawmakers are fond of sounding the alarm bells about what will happen to the national transportation infrastructure if states have to face a reduction in federal funding. Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx has said states will see on average a 28 percent cut in funding from the HTF. This figure is shockingly misleading, however, as the overwhelming majority of highway funding comes from state and local governments, not the federal government. The 28 percent figure is missing context. The “crisis” reduction Obama and many Congressmen are threatening about amounts to a 7 percent cut in overall transportation spending. This will not devastate the country’s surface transportation, and states will reserve autonomy to prioritize which projects are essential and which have been forced on them by the federal government.

If Congress does not act, will the federal interstate shut down?

No. The federal interstate will be open for travel, and construction will largely continue although plans for some additional projects may be scaled back.

President Obama says reauthorization is simple: “We’re just building roads and bridges like we’ve been doing for the last, I don’t know, 50, 100 years.” What is the problem with Washington helping states with transportation decisions?

Heritage Foundation Policy Analyst Emily Goff hits the nail on the head:

Spending priorities are determined more by politicians appeasing special interests than local needs or consumer choices. And the federal regulatory burden delays projects and smothers state and private-sector innovation.

When car and truck drivers pay the 18.4 cents per gallon federal gas tax (24.4 cents per gallon for diesel) at the pump, they expect better roads and less traffic congestion in return. Instead, Washington diverts more than 25% of that money to subways, streetcars, buses, bicycle and nature paths, and landscaping, at the expense of road and bridge projects.

This cycle of DC-centric policy choices is bad for the country’s infrastructure and abusive to the U.S. taxpayer.

Is there any opportunity for real reform?

Yes. To take away the need for periodic highway bills completely, Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) have introduced a new way forward in theTransportation Empowerment Act (H.R. 3486/S. 1702). This bill would return the highway program to local control, empower local and state governments to carry out projects that best serve their interests, and enhance the efficiency of how money is spent on the nation’s transportation.

The federal fuel tax would be reduced from 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline to 3.7 cents, and from 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel to 5 cents, over a five-year period—limiting the user fee to fund only appropriate federal activities and forcing an end to governmental waste and ineptitude.

States and localities would be free to set whatever transportation policies they deem necessary and pay for projects in a way that works best for them without the costly and cumbersome hurdles imposed by the federal government.
03:46 PM
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: The Daily Grind in the forums.
It's Friday July 16th, and with little in the news today other than more, murderous atrocities, I'm going to refer back to a post on the Forum from Wednesday, and an article by Ellen Brown:

Big Banks being sued for $250 BILLION

I didn't say much about this article with my original post as I knew I would be wanting to cover this news in more detail -- and very possibly in a commentary as well. The importance of this cannot be overstated.

Regular readers around here will recall that I've been saying for years (and writing in commentaries) that "a tidal-wave of litigation" was one of the most-likely "causes of death" for what we now know to be the One Bank. This conclusion is based on a combination of reasons, and since I haven't gotten into these issues for quite a while I'll review all of these arguments now.

To begin with; there is the simple multitude of Victims of the One Bank, and countless $TRILLIONS in losses suffered. This means (in turn) countless $BILLIONS in potential legal fees for the equally rapacious lawyers to sink their fangs into: Sharks versus Blood-Suckers.

Then we have the fact that the Banksters have been immune to any criminal prosecution for decades. There are two important points to make here. First of all, when it comes to "guilt", most criminals always focus on the CRIMINAL STANDARD for guilt: "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

So not only is the "bar" set very high to convict these Criminals, but the Criminals themselves know that they are protected by the proverbial Friends in High Places. This has given the Criminals a false sense of security -- and made them extremely arrogant/careless.

We see their obvious frauds around us on a daily basis -- with so much evidence lying around that a child could conduct the investigation.(Criminally) no one ever does such "investigating". However, all of that evidence is available to be used in civil law suits, bringing me to the other important factor.

In civil proceedings (in contrast to criminal proceedings) there is a MUCH LOWER BURDEN OF PROOF. The standard is merely "proof on the balance of probabilities". Expressed more simply, the question is simply "is it more likely that the Defendant is guilty or innocent?"

Anyone even looking at these smug Vultures sitting at the Defendants' table is going to consider them "more likely" to have committed virtually any sort of transgression: kicking puppies, stealing candy from babies, knocking the canes out from under the elderly. They are prototypical Villains.



So, assuming the U.S.'s fascist government doesn't simply shut-down its courts (and reveal itself for what it really is), finding these Villains guilty (and liable) for damages to their multitude of Victims would seem to be a slam-dunk. This brings us to the numbers involved.

With my own writing regularly discussing "$trillions", including the observation that the One Bank now has access to $10's of trillions in free money every year; a mere $250 BILLION (lol!) may not seem like a lot of money. But readers need to understand the enormous Catch-22 here.

The only way in which the One Bank has been able to obtain access to such insane/extreme sums of free money is because "nobody" (i.e. none of the Sheep) knows that it is handing itself $10's of trillions in free money each money. Because if people simply knew that much funny-money was being created then we would have instant hyperinflation -- and all the funny-money would immediately become worthless.

Thus the One Bank can never use more than the tiniest fraction of these mountains of free money publicly -- i.e. paying damages in a law suit. The Banksters were able to mooch (publicly) $750 BILLION following the Crash of '08. But that was based upon the mythology that the crash was an accident, and that thus the Banksters were (at least somewhat) "victims" of the Crash.

No one will tolerate "bailing out" Criminals through paying-off $100's of billions in damages to Victims on their behalf. Thus there is no way for the tentacles of the One Bank to be able to produce the money to pay-off the damages for this one law suit, alone -- and still have its mega-trillion dollar money-printing scam survive.

However, as I have also pointed out; lawyers are notorious for swarming once they smell "blood in the water", like good Sharks. With (ultra-powerful) financial icons like Pimco and Blackrock now suing these Big Banks big-time, this will inevitably embolden more Victims to step forward -- and start hiring their own lawyers.

What we have seen over the past five years is precisely what I predicted five years ago: a steady, relentless rise in the number of litigations against these Criminals as well as the size of these litigations. Don't be surprised if the next, big law suit against the One Bank's tentacles uses the "T-word" when making the claim for damages -- especially in some "class action" law suit, where the Defendants pool their losses.

As powerful as the One Bank is; (at the moment) it has no defense against litigations such as this except to try to buy-off judges one at a time. But trials have appeals, and even crooked judges will only "stick their necks out" so far in prostituting themselves on behalf of criminals.

The (very well-connected) Bernie Madoff was eventually found guilty (and thus made into a Scapegoat) because even a crooked judge couldn't have saved him. The evidence was so obvious, so overwhelming, and so public that if any judge had ruled Madoff "innocent", the judge would have simply been replaced (and impeached) -- and a new trial (and new judge) would be scheduled.

I regularly describe the Banksters as "comic-book Villains" because (as any who recall their comic-book reading days can attest) when mega-psychopaths such as these commit their mega-crimes those crimes are always very, very obvious. It is only the enormously thick facade of the Wonderland Matrix which has allowed these psychopaths to continue to commit their mega-crimes -- and in a totally heedless manner.

Now it's time to "pay the Piper"...




Did the Other Shoe Just Drop? Big Banks Hit with Monster $250 Billion Lawsuit in Housing Crisis

ellenbrown.com/2014/07/16/did-the-other-...lion/comment-page-1/

For years, homeowners have been battling Wall Street in an attempt to recover some portion of their massive losses from the housing Ponzi scheme. But progress has been slow, as they have been outgunned and out-spent by the banking titans.

In June, however, the banks may have met their match, as some equally powerful titans strode onto the stage. Investors led by BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, and PIMCO, the world’s largest bond-fund manager, have sued some of the world’s largest banks for breach of fiduciary duty as trustees of their investment funds. The investors are seeking damages for losses surpassing $250 billion. That is the equivalent of one million homeowners with $250,000 in damages suing at one time.

The defendants are the so-called trust banks that oversee payments and enforce terms on more than $2 trillion in residential mortgage securities. They include units of Deutsche Bank AG, U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, HSBC Holdings PLC, and Bank of New York Mellon Corp. Six nearly identical complaints charge the trust banks with breach of their duty to force lenders and sponsors of the mortgage-backed securities to repurchase defective loans.

Why the investors are only now suing is complicated, but it involves a recent court decision on the statute of limitations. Why the trust banks failed to sue the lenders evidently involves the cozy relationship between lenders and trustees. The trustees also securitized loans in pools where they were not trustees. If they had started filing suit demanding repurchases, they might wind up suedon other deals in retaliation. Better to ignore the repurchase provisions of the pooling and servicing agreements and let the investors take the losses—better, at least, until they sued.

Beyond the legal issues are the implications for the solvency of the banking system itself. Can even the largest banks withstand a $250 billion iceberg? The sum is more than 40 times the $6 billion “London Whale” that shook JPMorganChase to its foundations...
10:46 AM
Jeff Nielson created a new topic Isral escalates latest Gaza invasion in the forums.
Israeli war-crimes against the Palestinian people have once again reached the atrocity-level. Hundreds of Palestinians have been slaughtered in the latest Israeli invasion of the (occupied) Palestinian territories.

For any who still actually take seriously Israeli propaganda: open your eyes! We're told by Israel that the "justification" for the latest invasion/war-crimes is that the Palestinians (supposedly) continue "firing rockets" toward Israel.

However, ALL of these so-called rocket-attacks are perpetrated by Israel (as false-flag attacks). We know this because these "hundreds of rocket attacks" NEVER HIT ANYONE OR ANYTHING. They are simply a phony-pretext for Israel to ramp-up its slow-genocide of the Palestinian people to a more-rapid form of human extermination.

This is a pattern which has gone on for two decades. For two decades; Palestinians have supposedly been "firing rockets" at Israeli towns/cities. For two decades; they haven't hit anything. Presumably if anyone had been firing rockets at particular targets for 20 years, they would have acquired the expertise to actually hit something.

When will people see-through this pathetically transparent facade, and see Israel as the murderous, fascist regime that it really is...???


Netanyahu Orders Military to Ready Wider Gaza Incursion


www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-17/israel...as-rockets-fire.html

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he ordered the military to prepare to widen a ground operation against Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip which began after days of aerial bombardment.

Israeli soldiers, backed by tanks, heavy artillery, aircraft and warships, moved into the Hamas-controlled enclave late yesterday after 2,100 air strikes over 10 days failed to quash barrages of rockets fired from Gaza at Israel. Gaza fighters also infiltrated Israel by sea and through what Israel says is a network of tunnels dug under the border...



Ground Operation In Gaza Kills 18 Palestinians, Israeli Soldier

www.kitco.com/news/2014-07-18/Ground-Ope...Israeli-Soldier.html

At least 18 Palestinians and an Israeli soldier were killed as Israel launched a ground offensive on the Gaza strip with the backing of aerial and naval artillery fire.

The invasion came late Thursday after ten days of massive Israeli air and naval bombardments aimed at stopping rocket attacks from Gaza, which claimed the lives of more than 250 Palestinians and wounded nearly 2,000, mostly civilians.

Israeli officials said the ground offensive was not aimed at overthrowing the islamist Hamas Palestinian movement which governs Gaza but at destroying rocket launchers and the network of underground tunnels used by Palestinian militants to infiltrate Israel .

The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) said a 20-year-old soldier had died and two others were wounded, one of them critically, in the northern city of Beit Hanoun amid clashes overnight at the start of the operation.

Israeli Channel 10 reported that an investigation was underway to determine whether the soldier was killed in friendly fire.

Palestinian medical sources told Efe at least 18 Palestinian civilians, including a two-year-old child, were killed during the Israeli ground onslaught...
09:07 AM
6 days ago
Jeff Nielson replied to the topic Re: The Daily Grind in the forums.
It's Thursday July 17th, and (in my eyes) the important (bullion) news of the day came out of India, particularly once we read-between-the-lines. I covered this topic in an earlier post this morning, unfortunately I got so focused on that original post that I "stole my own thunder". I said everything in that post that I had intended to put into today's edition of The Grind.

However, not being too-proud-to-paste (lol), here is that earlier post in its entirety:


An interesting factoid of information emerged today, and (assuming it's reliable) it muddies the water in some areas while shedding a little light in others.

First of all; we're told that Indian gold imports "rose 65% year-on-year last month to $3.12 billion". There are two notable points here. First of all, the first statistic is simply bankster propaganda, since June of last year was when India's government first began blocking gold imports. It's degree of suppression has fluctuated considerably in the months in between (at one point there was a near-total embargo), so month-versus-month comparisons of this nature are totally meaningless.

But also note the second part of the statistic: India's gold imports are expressed in dollar terms, not tonnages. We're told (by the Liars) that "the government doesn’t publish tonnage data". This is, of course, a half-truth (at best).

As we all know; the Indian government used to account for its gold imports in tonnages, since that's what I (and other commentators) were reporting -- right up until the One Bank blackmailed India's government into blocking gold imports. So now India's government has switched from reporting gold imports in tonnages to reporting them in dollar terms. Why?

Again, the Liars tip of off with their half-truths:

...UBS estimates this
[$3.12 billion] to be around 74 metric tons, based on the average gold price for the month.

By only expressing its gold imports in dollar terms rather than tonnages it makes it more difficult for those outside the country from knowing precisely how much gold is being brought into the country. Now which "outsiders" do you think the Indian government is trying to (partially) hide those tonnages from?



For those readers who are still fuzzy on the whole "One Bank blackmail" concept with respect to restrictions on Indian gold imports (since it's somewhat complicated) let me explain it again. We're told (by the Liars) that Indian gold imports were greatly worsening India's "current account deficit" -- which is essentially a currency deficit.

The problem with this lie is that in all international transactions gold is treated as a currency. This is why India's government is required to report its gold imports in the first place, because currency laws require this. So (as a matter of simple logic/economics) it's impossible to create a currency deficit by importing a currency.

In reality, India's serious current account deficit was created when the banksters took down the rupee in global currency markets, even before they attacked the currencies of all the other "Emerging Market" nations. Because India conducts its trade in USD's, when the value of the rupee (versus the dollar) plunged this decreased the value of currency inside the country versus currency outside the country, thus resulting in a currency ("current account") deficit (a somewhat simplified explanation of the economic dynamics).

So what we really see here when we sift through the lies is that India's new government doesn't like the One Bank's blackmail game any more than India's old government did, and so it's doing its best to conceal its gold import numbers from the One Bank. This also likely means it will do its best to suppress the reporting of gold smuggling into India, to further cloud the situation.

Unfortunately the real Victim here is me. Lol!! This cat-and-mouse game between the One Bank and India's government has resulted in even less reliable data being available on which to try to partially gauge what's really transpiring in the global gold market.

Now, unless/until the One Bank simply backs off (unlikely); we will never be able to obtain reliable numbers from India's government on precisely how much gold is being brought into the world's largest gold market. All we know is that (despite the imports) it's still enough to seriously concern the One Bank.

We know this because of the announcement that India's government is now backing-away from further liberalizing gold-import rules, after months of assuring the market that this was essentially a done-deal. Since it was never the Indian government's idea to block gold imports in the first place, clearly what has happened here is that the Banksters have given new orders to keep current restrictions in place.

This also means (apparently) that the One Bank is not as concerned by the explosion in India's silver imports as it previously appeared. Why did the Banksters flip-flop on the gold restrictions, and start allowing gold to be imported into India again at the beginning of this year? Because last year Indian silver imports hit a new, all-time record.

Thus the One Bank now appears to be equally concerned about the gold and silver market. Unfortunately (by itself) that doesn't tell us much. It could be VERY concerned about both markets, or (highly unlikely) only slightly concerned about either.

My assumption is that the concern-level is very high, to the point that it is now resigned to a near-term implosion in one or both markets. That was the hypothesis of my recent commentary:

Silver: The Irresistible Force

As I reasoned previously; this constant flip-flopping with respect to the degree which it suppresses gold versus the degree it suppresses silver does not suggest some all-powerful force, firmly in control of the situation. If it had "firm control" there would be no need for such constant tinkering. It would simply put a long-term strategy in place, and then allow that to play out.

When we see an entity constantly fiddling with its tactics (short-term behavior), this suggests DESPERATION. It is the behavior of the Cornered Rat.




Indian Gold Imports Jump, Could Thwart Hopes For Relaxation Of Restrictions

www.kitco.com/news/2014-07-17/KitcoNewsM...Nuggets-July-17.html

A jump in India’s gold imports during June could deter the government from lifting import restrictions, some analysts say. Government data show gold imports rose 65% year-on-year last month to $3.12 billion. While the government doesn’t publish tonnage data, UBS estimates this to be around 74 metric tons, based on the average gold price for the month. This would be the highest monthly inflow for the year so far, the bank says. The country’s trade deficit, meanwhile, hit an 11-month high. Indian authorities last year imposed restrictions to combat a large current account deficit, and there had been hopes they might start relaxing the rules. However, since authorities have often cited bullion imports as a key cause of a ballooning trade deficit, “the widening of the deficit in June does not offer a compelling reason for the RBI (Reserve Bank of India) to ease restrictions on the gold trade, in our view,” says HSBC. UBS says that “rising gold Indian imports in the months ahead -- pressuring the current account deficit -- could result in a change of strategy from the RBI and the government, from one of gold import easing to further import restrictions.”
11:05 AM
An interesting factoid of information emerged today, and (assuming it's reliable) it muddies the water in some areas while shedding a little light in others.

First of all; we're told that Indian gold imports "rose 65% year-on-year last month to $3.12 billion". There are two notable points here. First of all, the first statistic is simply bankster propaganda, since June of last year was when India's government first began blocking gold imports. It's degree of suppression has fluctuated considerably in the months in between (at one point there was a near-total embargo), so month-versus-month comparisons of this nature are totally meaningless.

But also note the second part of the statistic: India's gold imports are expressed in dollar terms, not tonnages. We're told (by the Liars) that "the government doesn’t publish tonnage data". This is, of course, a half-truth (at best).

As we all know; the Indian government used to account for its gold imports in tonnages, since that's what I (and other commentators) were reporting -- right up until the One Bank blackmailed India's government into blocking gold imports. So now India's government has switched from reporting gold imports in tonnages to reporting them in dollar terms. Why?

Again, the Liars tip of off with their half-truths:

...UBS estimates this
[$3.12 billion] to be around 74 metric tons, based on the average gold price for the month.

By only expressing its gold imports in dollar terms rather than tonnages it makes it more difficult for those outside the country from knowing precisely how much gold is being brought into the country. Now which "outsiders" do you think the Indian government is trying to (partially) hide those tonnages from?



For those readers who are still fuzzy on the whole "One Bank blackmail" concept with respect to restrictions on Indian gold imports (since it's somewhat complicated) let me explain it again. We're told (by the Liars) that Indian gold imports were greatly worsening India's "current account deficit" -- which is essentially a currency deficit.

The problem with this lie is that in all international transactions gold is treated as a currency. This is why India's government is required to report its gold imports in the first place, because currency laws require this. So (as a matter of simple logic/economics) it's impossible to create a currency deficit by importing a currency.

In reality, India's serious current account deficit was created when the banksters took down the rupee in global currency markets, even before they attacked the currencies of all the other "Emerging Market" nations. Because India conducts its trade in USD's, when the value of the rupee (versus the dollar) plunged this decreased the value of currency inside the country versus currency outside the country, thus resulting in a currency ("current account") deficit.

So what we really see here when we sift through the lies is that India's new government doesn't like the One Bank's blackmail game any more than India's old government did, and so it's doing its best to conceal its gold import numbers from the One Bank. This also likely means it will do its best to suppress the reporting of gold smuggling into India, to further cloud the situation.

Unfortunately the real Victim here is me. Lol!! This cat-and-mouse game between the One Bank and India's government has resulted in even less reliable data being available on which to try to partially gauge what's really transpiring in the global gold market.

Now, unless/until the One Bank simply backs off (unlikely); we will never be able to obtain reliable numbers from India's government on precisely how much gold is being brought into the world's largest gold market. All we know is that (despite the imports) it's still enough to seriously concern the One Bank.

We know this because of the announcement that India's government is now backing-away from further liberalizing gold-import rules, after months of assuring the market that this was essentially a done-deal. Since it was never the Indian government's idea to block gold imports in the first place, clearly what has happened here is that the Banksters have given new orders to keep current restrictions in place.

This also means (apparently) that the One Bank is not as concerned by the explosion in India's silver imports as it previously appeared. Why did the Banksters flip-flop on the gold restrictions, and start allowing gold to be imported again at the beginning of this year? Because last year Indian silver imports hit a new, all-time record.

Thus the One Bank now appears to be equally concerned about the gold and silver market. Unfortunately (by itself) that doesn't tell us much. It could be VERY concerned about both markets, or (highly unlikely) only slightly concerned about them.

My assumption is that the concern-level is very high, to the point that it is now resigned to a near-term implosion in one or both markets. That was the hypothesis of my recent commentary:

Silver: The Irresistible Force

As I reasoned previously; this constant flip-flopping with respect to the degree which it suppresses gold versus the degree it suppresses silver does not suggest some all-powerful force, firmly in control of the situation. If it had "firm control" there would be no need for such constant tinkering. It would simply put a long-term strategy in place, and then allow that to play out.

When we see an entity constantly fiddling with its tactics (short-term behavior), this suggests DESPERATION. It is the behavior of the Cornered Rat.




Indian Gold Imports Jump, Could Thwart Hopes For Relaxation Of Restrictions

www.kitco.com/news/2014-07-17/KitcoNewsM...Nuggets-July-17.html

A jump in India’s gold imports during June could deter the government from lifting import restrictions, some analysts say. Government data show gold imports rose 65% year-on-year last month to $3.12 billion. While the government doesn’t publish tonnage data, UBS estimates this to be around 74 metric tons, based on the average gold price for the month. This would be the highest monthly inflow for the year so far, the bank says. The country’s trade deficit, meanwhile, hit an 11-month high. Indian authorities last year imposed restrictions to combat a large current account deficit, and there had been hopes they might start relaxing the rules. However, since authorities have often cited bullion imports as a key cause of a ballooning trade deficit, “the widening of the deficit in June does not offer a compelling reason for the RBI (Reserve Bank of India) to ease restrictions on the gold trade, in our view,” says HSBC. UBS says that “rising gold Indian imports in the months ahead -- pressuring the current account deficit -- could result in a change of strategy from the RBI and the government, from one of gold import easing to further import restrictions.”
10:53 AM

Groups

No group joined by the user yet.

JomComment

2014-07-14 08:37:53
[quote]I wonder what the mathematics of a partial .....
2014-07-14 07:17:24
[quote]It seems that these 'Games' can just go on .....
2014-07-11 05:02:28
[quote]Nice article Jeff! I would say that it won' .....
2014-07-01 04:02:58
Thanks for the comments! Owatica: the thought of .....
2014-06-18 03:31:20
[quote]I would imagine that real figures already d .....

Latest Photo

No photos uploaded yet.

My Articles

Sunday, 20 July 2014 14:10

Tuesday, 15 July 2014 12:41

Monday, 30 June 2014 14:08

Thursday, 26 June 2014 13:04

Sunday, 22 June 2014 10:04

Sunday, 15 June 2014 12:09

Thursday, 12 June 2014 12:01

Thursday, 05 June 2014 11:53

Monday, 02 June 2014 15:25

Wednesday, 28 May 2014 13:34

MyBlog

[Editor's note: Contrary to the listed "author" .....

My twitter updates

Twitter access is not allowed yet.

My kunena updates

Wall

dgierl
Jeff, Did you see this?
http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National Office/2012/04/Big Banks Big Secret.pdf
Monday, 15 July 2013 15:10
 
Brian Boutilier
HIYO Jeff. Got your e-mail. G-day to ya.
Tuesday, 13 July 2010 13:12
 
Hank Harrington
I agree, looks good.
Tuesday, 10 November 2009 12:18
 
Brian Boutilier
Nice new Avatar
Tuesday, 10 November 2009 06:30
 
Brian Boutilier
Pardon me, but does a your dooogga biiite?
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 16:30
 
Brian Boutilier
Drink beer and prosper! Nice to see the avatar up Jeff!
Thursday, 30 July 2009 19:51
 
Brian Boutilier
Will you be, will you be, will you be my neighbor?
Wednesday, 22 July 2009 13:33
 
Brian Boutilier
Y'all need an Avatar facelift Jeff
Tuesday, 14 July 2009 06:49
 

Latest Comments

Disclaimer:

BullionBullsCanada.com is not a registered investment advisor - Stock information is for educational purposes ONLY. Bullion Bulls Canada does not make "buy" or "sell" recommendations for any company. Rather, we seek to find and identify Canadian companies who we see as having good growth potential. It is up to individual investors to do their own "due diligence" or to consult with their financial advisor - to determine whether any particular company is a suitable investment for themselves.

Login Form