Petitions circulating to SECEDE FROM UNION -- this is going viral (!)

[gingerale]

Do you not understand that the vast majority of people have realized that voting is useless? Even if you vote in the man you want, the fucking electronic voting machines are rigged to vote for the other guy anyway, and the party conventions are rigged too and there is no way to get in. Yes you can argue to folks about voting third party blah blah blah....but all you get is blank stares, or "I don't want to waste my vote", or other B.S. And where did that B.S. come from.....? It was fed to them hook line and sinker by the media. The very same media that has been purposely lying to people for years.

Now we have reached a situation where just about everything everybody believes, on both "sides", is a lie, thanks in large part to this very same government/media conspiracy. Why do you think lying aka "bearing false witness" has been considered a sin for thousands of years at least? Because it leads to situations exactly like this, where everyone is paranoid and hates everyone else. When people have so poisoned the political discourse to such an extent that rational arguments never change a fucking thing, because the other side just laughs and calls you a "child", then why are you surprised that these problems don't go away, and the anger doesn't go away? It builds and builds and eventually comes to a head like right now, with everyone being out for blood for no rationally explainable reason. Everyone is fucking pissed about various legitimate things, but their heads are so full of lies by design that of course nobody can articulate exactly why they're so pissed.

 

[gingerale]

In fiscal 2009, the IRS collected about $163 billion from Texans and the state received about $224 billion, for a net gain of $61 billion. Federal spending in Texas also exceeded tax payments in 2008 by $8 billion. It was the other way around in 2006 and 2007, when tax payments by Texans exceeded federal spending by a total of about $47 billion.

In 2009, most states — there were 45, including Texas — received more than residents paid in taxes.

Really? So what you're saying is, there are five states subsidizing the entire rest of the country? How in the world could that be possible? Name those states for me, please. And how much debt are those states in??? This smells of BULLSHIT.

 

[unspoken]

You think the only place the federal govt gets money from is the states? You really think that?

 

[unspoken]

Yes it's all lies. Secede and welcome your new overlord.

What is it...Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

 

[gingerale]

Yes, that's exactly what I think, because it's true. Every dollar of money that goes into the State or Federal government ultimately comes out of the People's pocket, whether it's through a direct tax or a hidden under one of a billion other ways one hides a tax. (Fines, fees, laws, regulations, mandates, red tape, etc.) The government is not the originator of money. The PEOPLE make the money! All the government makes is currency....which it manipulates heavy handedly, completely distorting the market, which is exactly why were are in this situation of some states subsidizing others. Remove their BULLSHIT and guess what? A hell of a lot of things correct themselves!

 

[gingerale]

If a state secedes from the Union no that doesn't mean all its problems are automatically solved. What it DOES mean is that each and every individual in that state now has 50x as much power and say in over how things are run in that state.

If you really believe five states are propping up the entire United States of America and that the 45 other states are just dead weight who couldn't possibly fend for themselves (or in smaller alliances), rather than being part of the utterly invincible and powerful Federal Government which magically solves all problems, you are deluded.

Do you not understand that five states having to prop up the rest of them just makes the argument even stronger in favor of secession? Why should five states pay everyone else's way? How could they possibly even do that? It's utterly ridiculous.

For the record: where the hell do you live? My wild guess: some big city somewhere.

 

[BrnCow]

There's is another petition to remove the citizenship of anyone signing these petitions and exiling them out of the country...

 

[gingerale]

^ Over my dead body will that happen. Sounds like some pieces of shit need to read the U.S. Constitution.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Spastic gramps, my degree is in MICRO economics, so bare with me here, as you seem to be well versed in macro issues. The way I understand the bond yield is as a supply and demand issue (duh). So, with a very low yield, that would imply that US government debt is in high demand, and that the US govt is now borrowing money for next to nothing. On the other hand, a country like Greece has a bond yield closer to 17% because no one wants to buy greek debt. I see the low yield as an indicator that investors are scared of buying foreign debt, and still see US debt as a safe investment. As for business (back in my area of study, hopefully I didn't say anything too stupid above) this acts much in the same way as I think it does for the government. Cheap borrowing. Meaning businesses can borrow more easily and cheaper, providing a stimulus to the economy. Ok, now tell me why I'm an idiot.

No idiot, just confused.

Near 0 interest rates in the US are a definite indicator that institutional investors view our bonds as the "safer" investment. Safer is the operative word. Market money has to flow somewhere and when the world economy is a melting ice cube it flows to the core. Until the core melts and then..... Anyway, the analogy used by money managers such as PIMCO's Bill Gross and the CNBC clown crew is we are the "cleanest dirty shirt" or the "safest bad neighborhood" to park money.

Interest rates are primarily controlled by the Federal Reserve. Just because they drop interest rates to next to nothing doesn't indicate "safeness". They do so for the reason you stated above. To artificially stimulate the economy with cheap credit. Like was done with the cheap easy credit lending that fueled the housing boom. And after that blew up in their face they dropped rates even lower. Some people would call this blowing economic bubbles and we all know what happens to bubbles.

Not only this, but the FED started monetizing bonds (backstopping government debt with printed currency) in part due to decrease in demand for our debt from foreign governments. Institutional investors know as long as the FED is printing money to backstop our debt the price of bonds (inversely related to yield) will likely keep going up or at least never go down........ just like housing prices were never going to go down.....oh wait......bubbles again. They work until they don't. Have you heard of the greater fool analogy?

Here is how Reuters explains the Keynesian paper shell game....... excuse me Large Scale Asset Purchases or Quantitative Easing.

To buy bonds, the Fed essentially creates money from nothing, paying for its purchases by crediting the accounts of banks from which it buys the bonds. That's a clue as to how it works -- as money piles up in their Fed accounts, earning the paltry quarter-of-a-percentage point in interest that the Fed pays, banks may be keener to lend to companies and people. If companies use that money to buy equipment, and households use it to buy homes and cars, the economy gets a jump.

Fed bond-buying also helps the economy by pushing down borrowing costs. Massive buying of any asset tends to push up the prices, and because of the way the bond market works, rising prices forces yields down. Because the Fed is buying mortgage-backed bonds, the purchases act to directly lower the cost of borrowing to buy a home. In addition, some investors, put off by the rising price of the bonds that the Fed is buying, turn to other assets, like corporate bonds - which, in turn, pushes up corporate bond prices and lowers those yields, making it cheaper for companies to borrow - and spend.

Just like you said right? Your degree is in Keynesian economics. Yes.

Quantitative Easing 1, 2, 2.5, and Operation Twist1 and 2 as well as LTRO 1 and 2 from the ECB are all heralded as saving the world economy. They have artificially helped fuel the stock market rally from 2009 as much of this printed money eventually finds its way into world equity market via the Primary FED Dealers (Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc basically the big club that me and you aren't part of). This has created the "wealth effect" that's talked about so much. Trillions of dollars sloshing around has made the 1% very happy over the last few years. All of these previous "printings" had limits though and the 9 trillion (? I lost count a few trillion ago) did little to effect the real economy. In fact they worked so well and the economy is doing so great the FED and ECB has stated that they are going to print unlimited amounts of money until it does work this time. What's the definition of insanity again?

Let me ask you this. If money is so cheap to borrow why is no one borrowing? If money is the cheapest it's ever been in the history of the world (0%), should that stimulus not coincide with one of the largest expansions in the world? Cheap rates led to the greatest housing and construction boom ever shouldn't cheaper rates now fuel an even bigger boom? It obviously hasn't. The linear relationship between cheap credit and economic activity that is the cornerstone of Keynesian economics doesn't seem to be working out to well.

It's because advanced economies have reached the point of debt saturation. In other words all the free easy cheap money in the world isn't creating very much positive GDP growth anymore and no matter how many trillions upon trillions of bonds are monetized and free money is available the micro consumer and the macro sovereign in advanced economies is tapped out and now must deleverage. The once fairly linear relationship is now completely broken. Trillions have to be created to eek out barely positive growth and this relationship continues to breakdown exponentially the longer the shell game goes on. You have reached the Keynesian Endpoint.

So while negative bond rates may be a Keynesian wet dream they are also destroying the wealth and savings of fixed income people and the middle class. All of which will later lead to less GDP growth.

So, yes we are the "cleanest dirty shirt" that money is rolled into. US bonds are the "fear trade" and never was this more evident when the US was downgraded and bond yields dropped sharply instead of rising. Where else is there to go. Nowhere and FED has it backstopped. What could go wrong?

When rates do go up as they must we will be forced to pay interest on all this trillions of trillions of debt we've recently created. With our balance sheet worse than Greece's we will learn what it looks like when all the greater bond market fools try to exit at once and the Federal Reserve is left holding the bag.

 

[unspoken]

They all have the choice now to leave on their own accord. I wouldn't want the govt to make them leave because then I would be screwing with their life the same way that they think is a good idea to do with mine. Yes, china "owns us" with all of the money they got from US citizen's tax dollars.

 

[unspoken]

No idiot, just confused.

Near 0 interest rates in the US are a definite indicator that institutional investors view our bonds as the "safer" investment. Safer is the operative word. Market money has to flow somewhere and when the world economy is a melting ice cube it flows to the core. Until the core melts and then..... Anyway, the analogy used by money managers such as PIMCO's Bill Gross and the CNBC clown crew is we are the "cleanest dirty shirt" or the "safest bad neighborhood" to park money.

Interest rates are primarily controlled by the Federal Reserve. Just because they drop interest rates to next to nothing doesn't indicate "safeness". They do so for the reason you stated above. To artificially stimulate the economy with cheap credit. Like was done with the cheap easy credit lending that fueled the housing boom. And after that blew up in their face they dropped rates even lower. Some people would call this blowing economic bubbles and we all know what happens to bubbles.

Not only this, but the FED started monetizing bonds (backstopping government debt with printed currency) in part due to decrease in demand for our debt from foreign governments. Institutional investors know as long as the FED is printing money to backstop our debt the price of bonds (inversely related to yield) will likely keep going up or at least never go down........ just like housing prices were never going to go down.....oh wait......bubbles again. They work until they don't. Have you heard of the greater fool analogy?

Here is how Reuters explains the Keynesian paper shell game....... excuse me Large Scale Asset Purchases or Quantitative Easing.Just like you said right? Your degree is in Keynesian economics. Yes.

Quantitative Easing 1, 2, 2.5, and Operation Twist1 and 2 as well as LTRO 1 and 2 from the ECB are all heralded as saving the world economy. They have artificially helped fuel the stock market rally from 2009 as much of this printed money eventually finds its way into world equity market via the Primary FED Dealers (Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc basically the big club that me and you aren't part of). This has created the "wealth effect" that's talked about so much. Trillions of dollars sloshing around has made the 1% very happy over the last few years. All of these previous "printings" had limits though and the 9 trillion (? I lost count a few trillion ago) did little to effect the real economy. In fact they worked so well and the economy is doing so great the FED and ECB has stated that they are going to print unlimited amounts of money until it does work this time. What's the definition of insanity again?

Let me ask you this. If money is so cheap to borrow why is no one borrowing? If money is the cheapest it's ever been in the history of the world (0%), should that stimulus not coincide with one of the largest expansions in the world? Cheap rates led to the greatest housing and construction boom ever shouldn't cheaper rates now fuel an even bigger boom? It obviously hasn't. The linear relationship between cheap credit and economic activity that is the cornerstone of Keynesian economics doesn't seem to be working out to well.

It's because advanced economies have reached the point of debt saturation. In other words all the free easy cheap money in the world isn't creating very much positive GDP growth anymore and no matter how many trillions upon trillions of bonds are monetized and free money is available the micro consumer and the macro sovereign in advanced economies is tapped out and now must deleverage. The once fairly linear relationship is now completely broken. Trillions have to be created to eek out barely positive growth and this relationship continues to breakdown exponentially the longer the shell game goes on. You have reached the Keynesian Endpoint.

So while negative bond rates may be a Keynesian wet dream they are also destroying the wealth and savings of fixed income people and the middle class. All of which will later lead to less GDP growth.

So, yes we are the "cleanest dirty shirt" that money is rolled into. US bonds are the "fear trade" and never was this more evident when the US was downgraded and bond yields dropped sharply instead of rising. Where else is there to go. Nowhere and FED has it backstopped. What could go wrong?

When rates do go up as they must we will be forced to pay interest on all this trillions of trillions of debt we've recently created. With our balance sheet worse than Greece's we will learn what it looks like when all the greater bond market fools try to exit at once and the Federal Reserve is left holding the bag.

I really genuinely appreciate that response gramps. I'm going to spend some time with it and see how I really feel about your analysis. You make some good points right off the bat. Also, this is how I imagine you, only smoking a joint, and different accent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCrT96QJBfQ

 

[SpasticGramps]

Bill Gross head of PIMCO the world's largest bond fund.....

Bill Gross Explains The Fed's Bubble "Merry-Go-Round" In One Tweet

Bill Gross has become quite the expert at explaining the Fed's flawed, ruinous and destructive "policies" in 140 characters or less. Today is no exception.

Gross: Fed merry-go-round: inflate stocks til 2000. Then inflate housing til 2007. Then inflate stocks til 2012. Now inflate housing again.

What could possibly go wrong? The Keynesian voodoo school of economics has served us so well so far......

 

[gingerale]

When rates do go up as they must we will be forced to pay interest on all this trillions of trillions of debt we've recently created. With our balance sheet worse than Greece's we will learn what it looks like when all the greater bond market fools try to exit at once and the Federal Reserve is left holding the bag.

Holy shit, this has to be the most insightful and informative post ever posted to ICMag. Well done Gramps. You basically nailed it.

 

[gingerale]

The key problem with Keynesian economics is they think the government is the source of the economy. It's not. The PEOPLE and their collective work are the economy. The reason nobody is borrowing right now despite the cheap credit is because nobody is expanding or opening businesses. They are not expanding or opening businesses because they are really damn worried about the direction this country is headed in.

That's why the news media has been working so hard to keep the real problems under wraps, with a steady stream of "oh yeah the economy is juuuuust fine bro, housing is growing, we only lost 1,000 jobs last month (best in 5 years!), everything's cool bro, go back to sleep. PS: now's a great time to buy a house!" "news articles." They are trying to make the people feel more confident and spend their money, by lying to them and telling them everything is OK when it really isn't.

And they would have got away with it too, if it weren't for us pesky kids! You know what has totally fucked up their plans? The Internet. This forum. Other forums. Facebook and Twitter.

Sorry assholes--the jig's up! Everyone is becoming aware of just how corrupt and broken our government really is!

All hell can't stop us now.

 

[pearlemae]

Heard on the redio that some folks(repub) were talking about moving to Canada. Guess they don't under stand that Canada has all the things the right hate. universal health care, gay marriage. I hope all the dis gruntled fools take the walk. They won't be missed.
As for secession it ain't gonna happen we took care of that 150 years ago or doesn't anyone remember the Civil War, those that wished to secede lost or am I forgeting my basic history.

One last note if you don't like America any more then why don;t you fucking leave. I served in the Military for way to many years for this kinda B.S.

 

[gingerale]

As for session it ain't gonna happen we took care of that 150 years ago or doesn't anyone remember the Civil War, those that wished to secede lost or am I forgeting my basic history

Do you think the United States might be different or have changed in any way, say in population, industries, size, scope, government size, political beliefs, etc etc, since those events of 150 years ago? If we agree this is completely true, then on what basis could you possibly argue that the failure of one group of people 150 years ago has any bearing on the potential success of another totally different people in completely different circumstances 150 years later?

For a counter example, look at the UK. Scotland is seceding in 2014 and they will be allowed to leave peacefully. They have been a part of the UK since before the US existed. So why can they leave peacefully with virtually no drama whereas it's complete heresy to contemplate one state leaving this Union?

Don't take my word for it, ask Ron Paul. He answered this question in 2009:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvliy8rEJDQ

One last note if you don't like America any more then why don;t you fucking leave. I served in the Military for way to many years for this kinda B.S.

Well I'm an Air Force veteran who served two tours of duty in Afghanistan, and to this arrogant statement I say fuck you. Try reading the Constitution some time. You did swear to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic. People who are exercising their Constitutional right to freedom of speech and of peacefully petitioning the government for redress of grievances are well within their rights to do so.

 

[trichrider]

Do you think the United States might be different or have changed in any way, say in population, industries, size, scope, government size, political beliefs, etc etc, since those events of 150 years ago? If we agree this is completely true, then on what basis could you possibly argue that the failure of one group of people 150 years ago has any bearing on the potential success of another totally different people in completely different circumstances 150 years later?

For a counter example, look at the UK. Scotland is seceding in 2014 and they will be allowed to leave peacefully. They have been a part of the UK since before the US existed. So why can they leave peacefully with virtually no drama whereas it's complete heresy to contemplate one state leaving this Union?

Don't take my word for it, ask Ron Paul. He answered this question in 2009:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvliy8rEJDQ



Well I'm an Air Force veteran who served two tours of duty in Afghanistan, and to this arrogant statement I say fuck you. Try reading the Constitution some time. You did swear to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic. People who are exercising their Constitutional right to freedom of speech and of peacefully petitioning the government for redress of grievances are well within their rights to do so.

second that.

 

[Space Ghost]

this is an ONLINE petition... a first world problem... we've got a lot to be thankful for, im not saying that is because of the us govt... but day to day life for us is better and easier than most of the folks sharing the planet with us... also, gingerale, there is a great deal of money to be made for the govt in various international dealings... and im not disagreeing with much you have said... just making an observation

 

[unspoken]

Your degree is in Keynesian economics. Yes.

Actually no. Microeconomic theory is different from macro. Did I take a couple classes covering Keynesian(macro) economics? Yes. I also went to university with its share of "good old boy" professors.

As to why people aren't borrowing:
If somebody's thinking about borrowing for a project or a business and is deciding whether to sit on cash or invest it, it makes a big difference whether you think that money you borrow now will be paid in dollars that have less purchasing power than they have now. If you can convince people they can borrow at 2 percent interest right now and the rate will stay at 2 for 10 years, and inflation will be 4 percent, then borrowing becomes a much more attractive proposition than borrowing at 1 percent with 2 percent inflation. This is where the fed is failing big time.

I think you are saying the the world economy is about to totally collapse, right? I can't agree with that.

The major expansion you are asking about actually shouldn't or wouldn't come unless foreign investors lost confidence in American securities. I think based on your comments that you are thinking it will turn out for America like it did for Greece, but it won't. The main reason it won't is that we have our own currency. For us it would not mean soaring interest rates etc, it would mean a devaluing of our currency(expansion).

Also, I will completely admit that it's my belief that Keynesian theory is what has worked in the past, and anything else being suggested is speculation that has mostly been proven wrong in the 80's. You say repeating something and expecting different results is insanity, but if you take the stance that the free market rules, you also have the business cycle to contend with, where you would still have problems in a cyclical fashion. The difference there being that when unemployment rises there is no one advocating for people without jobs. It's, "tough shit, we'll call you when we need you." I shudder to think what this country would look like right now if we'd taken that approach going into this whole ordeal. At the end of the day I think we just have different schools of thought when it comes to the fundamentals, and I know I can defend mine with math, logic, and past evidence. I'm not saying there is a clear cut I'm right and you're wrong answer here, because nothing that clear cut would be this interesting to me. Maybe we should just meet back here in a couple years and see what happened.

 

[FrameOMind]

This happens every election year. People get pissed off because their candidate didn't the election and say they are going to leave the country. Then they sober up, whack off and cry.