-459ºF prospects of bailout - absolute zero!

[UM-Bot]

Phillip Tilley: -459ºF. Prospects of bailout, absolute zero! When Yogi Berra was asked by his coach, “Are you stupid or just ignorant”, he responded with , “I don’t know and I don’t care”. That is funny, but it is also the attitude of most Americans concerning the economy. It reminds me of the movie “Network” where Howard Beal says, “Just let us have our color TV, our radial tires and I want to be left alone and I’ll be happy!”

A lot of people are pinning their hopes of a better economy on a new President that promised change. It would have been nice to see real change, but since our new President has chosen Timothy Geithner, the former president of the New York branch of the Federal Reserve as the new Treasury Secretary, we will be getting more of the same. Having chosen anyone outside the Federal Reserve would have been real change. Now we will have the Federal Reserve running the Treasury instead of the other way around.

They started the Federal Reserve with nothing and they still have most of it left, and there is plenty more nothing where that came from. We will have none of that. In fact, I will have none of that too, and make mine a double. You know what I always say, double my nothing or nothing. For those of you not familiar with me, in the past I proved there is no money, so money equals nothing. We like to think we have money, earn money and spend money, while in reality we live in a money matrix where we have nothing, earn nothing and spend nothing all to our ignorant delight!

The Federal Reserve will keep feeding us the same dope to keep us in a stupor. Eat your Soilent Green, take the blue pill to stay where you are like a Clockwork Orange and remain in a purple haze. We are all either stupid or ignorant on credit, cash and currency to believe anyone can fix the economy with the same cronies in charge, those monied elite.

I recently asked a group of engineers if everyone on the Titanic had a bucket and bailed water, would it have kept the ship afloat? The answer was no. Nothing would have prevented it from sinking as damaged as it was. Nothing, no one, and no bail out can prevent our economy from sinking.

It takes an average freight train a mile and a half to come to a complete stop from 70 miles per hour, if the brakes work. This economy is a run away train with no brakes. If Ayn Rand were alive today, she would witness the machine grinding to a halt as she predicted in her book “Atlas Shrugged”. What happens when an unstoppable force (the monied elite) meets an immovable object (the economy at absolute zero)? That will be something to see.

Absolute Zero is the point at which all molecular motion stops. At least that is what most scientists believe although no one has observed it or if they did they did not remember it because they would have stopped as well. That is where our economy is headed, a complete seize-up. More lay-offs and plant closings and bank failures and foreclosures, welcome to the Tribulation.

Do not expect any financial advice books to save you. Every other author spews the same crap based on conventional thinking. Conventional thinking is thinking inside the box. If so much as a single get rich quick book worked, we would all be rich. Since we are not all rich that means not one, not a single one works. They keep talking advice about a money system that went extinct in 1964. We do not use money anymore, we use Federal Reserve Note debt currency.

These people keep making buggy whips in an age of autos. There is as much difference in a horse and the horse power under your hood as there is between real money and debt currency. You can keep whipping your car hood and wondering why your car does not go any faster, but that would be stupid or ignorant.

Our prospects of an economic bail out are slim and none, and Slim just left town with my buggy whip. That means our real prospects for change are Absolute Zero. Wake up people, the money matrix has you.

Phillip Tilley is author of The Money Matrix of the New World Order and other articles.

[ROGER]

You know I read this a couple of times wondering if I had missed the point. The author dose not seemed to have any real reason for writing except to promote the Doom and Gloom of the Worlds financial problems. I think most people by now have figured out we as a nation are in trouble. He dose not support any of the "Bail Outs" but didn't give HIS version of a Plan-B. So whats the point! What as a nation can WE DO?

[MID]

You know I read this a couple of times wondering if I had missed the point. The author dose not seemed to have any real reason for writing except to promote the Doom and Gloom of the Worlds financial problems. I think most people by now have figured out we as a nation are in trouble. He dose not support any of the "Bail Outs" but didn't give HIS version of a Plan-B. So whats the point! What as a nation can WE DO?

Bingo, ROGER!

You are absolutely correct.

Doom and gloom have become the buzzwords for the present financial situation, which, although pretty low, is not, in any way, the most dire crisis since the great depression.

I think most people understand what we can do to fix it, and that has nothing to do with bailouts, and has nothing to do with the government, which of course Obama just this week shocked many a conservative by clearly stating that only the government could provide the relief necessary...

Aaaaahhhh....

[Oen Anderson]

You know I read this a couple of times wondering if I had missed the point. The author dose not seemed to have any real reason for writing except to promote the Doom and Gloom of the Worlds financial problems. I think most people by now have figured out we as a nation are in trouble. He dose not support any of the "Bail Outs" but didn't give HIS version of a Plan-B. So whats the point! What as a nation can WE DO?

He stated in the article nobody can fix the crisis and our odds are absolute zero, so if he gave a version of a Plan-B, wouldn't that contradict the premise of the article that there is no fix? In the first article Tilley wrote on this site titled "There Is No Money" he stated he can't save us all, hopefully he can wake some of us up so we can save ourselves! But I think we should pay attention to what he has to say because he has been scary accurate so far. In his article of January 08, he stated the implosion point was near. He was right. In his article "It's The Economy Stupid" he stated the economic stimulus package would fail. He was right. He stated in his article "2012 and the Economy" that this is a planed failure of the economy and it will end in 2012. I'm watching closely on that one, but if he is right, nothing done between now and then will stop the inevitable. Whatever we do, we must think for ourselves and do for ourselves, that I believe is the point. Stop waiting for someone else to save you, save yourself!

[MID]

He stated in the article nobody can fix the crisis and our odds are absolute zero, so if he gave a version of a Plan-B, wouldn't that contradict the premise of the article that there is no fix?

You're right.

The only problem with it is that he's wrong in his position.

There's always a solution. The situation is no where near as dire as he paints it and anyone who says that no one can fix the crisis, or that there's an absolute zero chance is spewing nonsense. We have these cycles regularly, and it's always corrected. We know how this works. We've seen it before, and it appears that people forget.

In the first article Tilley wrote on this site titled "There Is No Money" he stated he can't save us all, hopefully he can wake some of us up so we can save ourselves!

If we can save ourselves, then there's certainly more than an absolute zero chance that things can be saved.

But I think we should pay attention to what he has to say because he has been scary accurate so far. In his article of January 08, he stated the implosion point was near. He was right. In his article "It's The Economy Stupid" he stated the economic stimulus package would fail.

Lots of people were accurate. It wasn't that hard to predict given the situation that existed. Congressional Republicans, in a rare recent move to assert principals they seemed to have abandoned for years, voiced dire concerns over the mortgage banking situation long ago. Their warning wasn't heeded, of course...and they were right. It's also not a long step to conclude that stimulus packages don't work. It's been seen before as well.

We also...well, many of us...know what works: free market solutions and an abject lack of government influence.

He was right. He stated in his article "2012 and the Economy" that this is a planed failure of the economy and it will end in 2012. I'm watching closely on that one, but if he is right, nothing done between now and then will stop the inevitable. Whatever we do, we must think for ourselves and do for ourselves, that I believe is the point. Stop waiting for someone else to save you, save yourself!

I will say that based on the actions of Congress, it appears to be planned in certain repsects, with a decided agenda in mind. It's also not a huge piece of reasoning to realize that if Obama does what he intends, and it proceeds unchecked, it will indeed end in 2012...and so will he.

You keep saying, 'save yourselves'. I seek to find the method in your admonition.

I have a suggestion:

Demand that Congress and the President act appropriately. Contact Congressmen and Senators. Tell them to quit interfering and allow the free markets to flourish, get off the fatal tax proposals, dis-approve a trillion dollar defecits and quit talking doom and gloom and allow the American people to fix it. The system allows for this to occur naturally. But with excess government interference, there's no way it's going to happen.

Insist on investigation into the people who allowed this situation to occur: Barney Frank, Charles Schumer, Chris Dodd, et. al. Those people should be before Congressional comittees testifying...not oil company executives.

And use your best fix in the next Congressional go-around...your vote, for the right people.

You'll have to look hard for them, because 90% of incumbents don't qualify.

[ROGER]

Whatever we do, we must think for ourselves and do for ourselves, that I believe is the point. Stop waiting for someone else to save you, save yourself!

Ah, thanks for boiling it down a little. As a member of the "Not socially Elite" I had started financial down sizing years ago. I have NO credit cards! My mortgage was already LOCKED IN at a reasonable rate, and is one My wife and I can afford. And any "EXTRA" money's are put in to Cash Dividends with one to five year maturity.

As for the U.S. and World economies, the people in charge of Corporations and Stock market commodities Buying and selling, and Banking need to change some of THIER practises before WE the common people see a let up.

Thou if the New President WANTS to send me a little EXTRA money, yes I will take it!

[Oen Anderson]

You're right.

The only problem with it is that he's wrong in his position.

There's always a solution. The situation is no where near as dire as he paints it and anyone who says that no one can fix the crisis, or that there's an absolute zero chance is spewing nonsense. We have these cycles regularly, and it's always corrected. We know how this works. We've seen it before, and it appears that people forget.

If we can save ourselves, then there's certainly more than an absolute zero chance that things can be saved.

Lots of people were accurate. It wasn't that hard to predict given the situation that existed. Congressional Republicans, in a rare recent move to assert principals they seemed to have abandoned for years, voiced dire concerns over the mortgage banking situation long ago. Their warning wasn't heeded, of course...and they were right. It's also not a long step to conclude that stimulus packages don't work. It's been seen before as well.

We also...well, many of us...know what works: free market solutions and an abject lack of government influence.

I will say that based on the actions of Congress, it appears to be planned in certain repsects, with a decided agenda in mind. It's also not a huge piece of reasoning to realize that if Obama does what he intends, and it proceeds unchecked, it will indeed end in 2012...and so will he.

You keep saying, 'save yourselves'. I seek to find the method in your admonition.

I have a suggestion:

Demand that Congress and the President act appropriately. Contact Congressmen and Senators. Tell them to quit interfering and allow the free markets to flourish, get off the fatal tax proposals, dis-approve a trillion dollar defecits and quit talking doom and gloom and allow the American people to fix it. The system allows for this to occur naturally. But with excess government interference, there's no way it's going to happen.

Insist on investigation into the people who allowed this situation to occur: Barney Frank, Charles Schumer, Chris Dodd, et. al. Those people should be before Congressional comittees testifying...not oil company executives.

And use your best fix in the next Congressional go-around...your vote, for the right people.

You'll have to look hard for them, because 90% of incumbents don't qualify.

Well we've already voted and the Congress and President we elected think they have to fix what as you suggest should be left to the natural cycle of a free market, which would be to let a depression happen. In the natural cycle there will be busts and booms. Most people are so used to the Federal Reserve regulating a constant boom they forget this fact. What I think is more interesting is Tilleys reference to the book "A Clockwork Orange" where the government intervened and made matters worse. Our government will intervene to try to fix something so broken the attempt will fail for the reason you suggest, it should be left to the people to decide which businesses fail or succeed based on how they compete in a true free market. Those that can't compete will go out of business. Yet the plan is to prop up and reward those failures at the expense of everyone.

[Pinky Floyd]

You know I read this a couple of times wondering if I had missed the point. The author dose not seemed to have any real reason for writing except to promote the Doom and Gloom of the Worlds financial problems. I think most people by now have figured out we as a nation are in trouble. He dose not support any of the "Bail Outs" but didn't give HIS version of a Plan-B. So whats the point! What as a nation can WE DO?

This is all this writer is capable of..Gloom and doom with little hope for any..All he spouts is prattle about 'The Money Matrix' conspiracy crap...Nothing but hyperbolic jibber.

/it was a waste of time reading it...

Edited January 11, 2009 by Pinky Floyd

[Lt_Ripley]

We also...well, many of us...know what works: free market solutions and an abject lack of government influence

MMMMMMM no that doesn't work. lack of regulation doesn't work. that started with Reagan and we've been going down hill ever since.

you can't build a house from the top floor down. it's from the bottom up. and that's not what is being done.

The economic bang-for-the-buck of bonus depreciation is very modest (see table).[7] Indeed, of all the tax and spending policies considered, it provides the least amount of stimulus. Such incentives offer a limited boost because many businesses have difficulty quickly adjusting long-planned capital budgets. Moreover, most investment is made by businesses with no tax liability in the first place. Investment incentives also complicate matters for financially pressed state governments that base their business taxes on federal tax law.

Extending unemployment insurance and expanding food stamps are the most effective ways to prime the economy’s pump. A $1 increase in UI benefits generates an estimated $1.64 in near-term GDP; increasing food stamp payments by $1 boosts GDP by $1.73 (see table). People who receive these benefits are very hard-pressed and will spend any financial aid they receive within a few weeks. These programs are also already operating, and a benefit increase can be quickly delivered to recipients.

The benefit of extending unemployment insurance goes beyond simply providing financial aid for the jobless, to more broadly shoring up household confidence. Nothing is more psychologically debilitating, even to those still employed, than watching unemployed friends and relatives lose benefits.

Making permanent the current dividend income and capital gain tax rates would also be poor economic stimulus. The current 15% tax rate that most investors currently pay is set to soon expire and tax rates will jump. There is an argument that making them permanent would create some certainty for investors, who are currently uncertain about prospects for the stock and bond markets. But whatever the longer-term benefits, the near-term economic boost would be small. The problems plaguing financial markets are broad and deep and unlikely to be measurably affected by such a policy change. Moreover, even assuming with the most favorable financial markets, the stimulus potential of such a move is small; each $1 in net cost to the Treasury produces only 37 cents worth of GDP, according to our model.

http://www.economy.com/dismal/article_free.asp?cid=102598

so spend a 1$ on increasing food stamps and boost the GDP 1.73 $ . Do the same by increasing tax cuts to corporations and what does the GDP see back ? 30 cents.

which gets the market moving better ? The 'free market' has had a ton of tax breaks yet still lays people off but profits are through the roof ( until like we've seen lately the catch 22 of it all - failure. you can't push a product if people aren't working to afford them)

not to forget all the taxes corporations and the elite don't pay - avoid .

Most U.S. firms paid no taxes over 7-year span

Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

File photo of Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. Associated Press ...

(08-12) 19:48 PDT -- When the taxman cometh, most corporations wave him on by, according to a government study released on Tuesday.

About two-thirds of U.S. companies and foreign firms doing business in this country paid no federal income taxes from 1998 to 2005, according to a study by the Government Accountability Office. Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., called the report "a shocking indictment of the current tax system."

To be sure, many of the nonpayers were small or new companies that probably made no money. But the report said that about a quarter of large corporations - ones that had more than $250 million in assets or $50 million in gross receipts - paid no taxes. In 2005, for instance, 3,565 large U.S. companies and 998 large foreign-owned companies operating here did not pay any income taxes.

The report neither identified any companies nor specified how they avoided tax liability.

There are numerous legal ways a corporation can duck taxes. The most obvious one: If you don't make money, you don't have to pay taxes. Companies also can write off previous years' losses, get tax exemptions for a plethora of expenses, use R&D credits, even wipe out tax liability when their employees exercise stock options.

But corporations can do a lot of creative accounting to "lose" money - and sometimes that can cross the line.....

....In fact, despite its high nominal rate, U.S. corporate taxes as a percentage of gross domestic product are lower than in most other industrialized nations. From 2000 to 2005, revenue from federal and state corporate income tax averaged 2.2 percent of the U.S. GDP, compared to an average of 3.4 percent in 30 of its trading-partner countries, according to the Treasury Department.

Peter R. Merrill, a principal at PricewaterhouseCoopers, wrote an article in the publication Tax Analysts, underscoring this paradox.

Data on corporate tax as a percentage of GDP "present a conundrum," he wrote. "The United States has the second highest combined statutory corporate tax rate among (the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries, yet is tied with Hungary in raising the fourth lowest amount of combined corporate income tax revenue relative to GDP in 2004."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...;type=printable

The rich do this too ... creative accounting , off shore accounts ..ect.. all the things the regular 'Joe' can't afford to pay an expert about , finding those loopholes.

so next time cons cry - play a small violin and hand them some cheese to go with that whine.

the bail outs could work if they went to the right places - building jobs via the government like infrastructure. not padding for banks , investment companies who then say the public has no right knowing what it spent the money on.

Edited January 12, 2009 by Lt_Ripley

[Oen Anderson]

I agree with Lt Ripley. I think this is one of the reasons Tilley calls it the money matrix, nothing is what it seems and everything seems to run backwards from what is logical.

[jbondo]

Hello Socialism, my name is America.

[Caesar]

This Obama plan is the largest ponzi scheme I've seen this year, and there has been alot of them. you would think that we might have learned something from the failed Bush stimulus plan $825 billion. now Obama wants another $819 billion. we bail out Merrill Lynch and they give $4 billion to $5 billion in bonuses in 2008. and layoff thousands.

Why don't they just give the money to the poor and middle class?

I think the auther Phillip Tilley is offering an alternative look at economic issues.

[Godsnmbr1]

MID, just by saying that we've seen something like this before it's evident that you have no idea what's really going on.

[Oen Anderson]

I got to thinking about the bailouts and it did occur to me that perhaps GM did not deserve one. It seems to me a few years ago GM had developed an electric car that they later sent to the scrap yard. If they had of kept making them, which would have been good business, they wouldn't have been in the financial mess they ended up in. They were ahead of the pack and threw it away. They don't deserve a bail out, they deserve to go out of business for making poor decisions in the auto business. That's how capitalism is supposed to work.

[Leonardo]

You're right.

The only problem with it is that he's wrong in his position.

There's always a solution. The situation is no where near as dire as he paints it and anyone who says that no one can fix the crisis, or that there's an absolute zero chance is spewing nonsense. We have these cycles regularly, and it's always corrected. We know how this works. We've seen it before, and it appears that people forget.

If we can save ourselves, then there's certainly more than an absolute zero chance that things can be saved.

Good post, MID. However, the nature of the economic woe (and the probable solution) means that recovery will not be overnight - it will take considerable time. Of course, this leaves time for people like the OP to cry that "things aren't happening, so we have to do things my way!!!"

Mr Anderson,

In the first article Tilley wrote on this site titled "There Is No Money" he stated he can't save us all, hopefully he can wake some of us up so we can save ourselves!

I am always a little skeptical of a person who shouts loudly about money having no value, yet is apparently not too shy about collecting a lot of the stuff himself.

Edited August 7, 2009 by Leonardo

[Oen Anderson]

Good post, MID. However, the nature of the economic woe (and the probable solution) means that recovery will not be overnight - it will take considerable time. Of course, this leaves time for people like the OP to cry that "things aren't happening, so we have to do things my way!!!"

Mr Anderson,

I am always a little skeptical of a person who shouts loudly about money having no value, yet is apparently not too shy about collecting a lot of the stuff himself.

What evidence do you have that the author is collecting a lot of money? That seems a little presumptuous on your part!

[Leonardo]

What evidence do you have that the author is collecting a lot of money? That seems a little presumptuous on your part!

What would be the consequence to Mr Tilley of his economic theories/principles being widely adopted and him and his theories being highly regarded by the majority of international economists?

I am hardly expressing an occurence that would be unlikely, in that event. Mr Tilley is as human as the rest of us.

Edited August 7, 2009 by Leonardo

[Oen Anderson]

What would be the consequence to Mr Tilley of his economic theories/principles being widely adopted and him and his theories being highly regarded by the majority of international economists?

I am hardly expressing an occurence that would be unlikely, in that event. Mr Tilley is as human as the rest of us.

Perhaps a better question would be, what would be the consequence to society as a whole if Mr Tilleys economic theories/principles were widely adopted?

Is it that hard to believe that a person can be altruistic? Perhaps you should not judge everyone by your own actions. From what I have read about rock stars and authors, only the top one half of a percent make any significant amount of money, the rest are also rans. I checked the rank of his book on amazon.com, and if that is any indication it certainly isn't a number one best seller, and the publisher probably never recouped their investment in the project. I see no evidence the author is in it for the money.