Money from the Sky

I think so called "helicopter money," whereby monetary stimulus is directed into the economy, bypassing T-bills and expanding the debt is a superior approach. First of all, it gets more immediate stimulus traction. Up till now, much of the stimulus has not reached the segment of the money supply which circulates in the economy, creating jobs, and spurring jobs and expansion. Second, instead of that stimulus being on the balance sheet of the treasury and an obligation of the treasury, thus tax payers (our children and grandchildren), it goes on to the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve, off the budget. Thirdly, it is less likely to be used for governmental operations, thereby discouraging growth of our government. The Federal Reserve has a greater opportunity to direct those funds to where they will do the most good. Most previous Fed's stimulus has primarily driven down interest rates and forced investors to chase yield in riskier assets. This has resulted in greater income inequality.

Some friends know I've been hoping for this approach for a long time! If BoE and follows the BoJ lead we may find out if I was right. I have trouble imagining our Fed will get on board. But maybe in some ways they way. At this point our economy is moving forward, but one has to wonder if "helicopter stimulus" could have introduced earlier in the Great Recession for the better.

We Can Be Strong For A Lot Less

While I happen to agree with Trump on many issues including reducing and leveling out corporate taxes, reducing regulation, negotiating better trade agreements which protect American intellectual property, better border control, and other items, I also disagree with him on many things too including his plans to “strengthen our military.”

One area that I find appealing about the Libertarian positions of Gary Johnson, is their plans to reduce the excessive cost of supporting foreign military bases and personnel -- Money that could go to great use in America.  I seriously question whether America would be any less safe.

I believe it is high time for our allies to foot the bill financially and with troops.  There is massive youth unemployment in Europe and those young men & women could learn valuable lessons defending their country and supporting the NATO alliance!

Consider these facts and figures …

The United States has more foreign military bases than any other people, nation, or empire in history.  We have a presence in over 156 countries with approximately 730 bases and over 300K personnel. In Europe, for example, there are some 110K plus US military personnel including 75K in Germany alone.  We don’t just support the people – there are nearly 850K buildings and equipment covering a land area of nearly 30 million acres.

According to one expert calculation, we spend at least $85 billion a year to support this, which is more than discretionary budget of every government agency except for the Defense Department.

Scholar and former CIA consultant Chalmers Johnson described the situation this way in 2004, “As distinct from other peoples, most Americans do not recognize—or do not want to recognize—that the United States dominates the world through its military power. Due to government secrecy, our citizens are often ignorant of the fact that our garrisons encircle the planet.”

Interestingly, while we consider the situation normal and accept that US military installations exist in staggering numbers in other countries, on other peoples’ land, the idea that there would be foreign bases on US soil is unthinkable.

But it’s not just the direct costs.  There is a human toll that comes along with all this expense. According to Chalmers Johnson, “The families of military personnel are among those who suffer from the spread of overseas bases given the strain of distant deployments, family separations, and frequent moves. Overseas bases also contribute to the shocking rates of sexual assault in the military: an estimated 30% of servicewomen are victimized during their time in the military and a disproportionate number of these crimes happen at bases abroad. Outside the base gates, in places like South Korea, one often finds exploitative prostitution industries geared to US military personnel.

And, worldwide, bases have caused widespread environmental damage because of toxic leaks, accidents, and in some cases the deliberate dumping of hazardous materials. GI crime has long angered locals. In Okinawa and elsewhere, US troops have repeatedly committed horrific acts of rape against local women. From Greenland to the tropical island of Diego Garcia, the military has displaced local peoples from their lands to build its bases.

In contrast to frequently invoked rhetoric about spreading democracy, the military has shown a preference for establishing bases in undemocratic and often despotic states like Qatar and Bahrain. In Iraq, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia, US bases have created fertile breeding grounds for radicalism and anti-Americanism. The presence of bases near Muslim holy sites in Saudi Arabia was a major recruiting tool for al-Qaeda and part of Osama bin Laden’s professed motivation for the September 11, 2001, attacks.

Although this kind of perpetual turmoil is little noticed at home, bases abroad have all too often generate grievances, protest, and antagonistic relationships. Although few here recognize it, our bases are a major part of the image the United States presents to the world—and they often show us in an extremely unflattering light.”

Another area of savings is to reduce cost overruns and simply scale back on new projects.  As the first new carrier design in 40 years, the USS Gerald R. Ford incorporates new technology and operational systems that will allow it to have a higher aircraft launch and recovery rate, reduced manning, and improved survivability against projected threats. The problem is that those things don't work and delivery is years behind schedule and tens of billions over budget!! So, which Presidential candidate do you think would have better handled the situation? So let's see who got the most lobbying money from defense contractors.

First of all, Northrup Grumman, lead contractor on the project, was the # 2 contributor. But how did the 2015-16 money breakouts?

Sanders, Bernie (D) Senate $379,135
Cruz, Ted (R-TX) Senate $360,262
Thornberry, Mac (R-TX) House $354,500
Clinton, Hillary (D) $317,257
Frelinghuysen, Rodney (R-NJ) House $288,000

Lockheed Martin, contractor for the new F35 Joint Strike Fighter Jet, is the #1 Contributor in 2015-16. And, the F35 Project is is $163 billion over budget, seven years behind schedule, and will cost taxpayers about twice as much as sending a man to the moon. The $400 billion dollar project for approx. 2500 planes is the most expensive weapon ever built. It is hard to imagine that we couldn't manage with 1500 plane. But it's easy to imagine the incredible good amount of infrastructure we could do with that money! To give you an idea, the TOTAL Federal Transportation budget for 2016 was $17.2 billion - and that's for roads, rail, air, transit, maritime, safety, and grants!

Read more: http://www.politico.com/…/…/f-35-fighter-plane-costs-103579…

NOBODY OWNS TRUMP OR GARY JOHNSON! We know the establishment in Washington has been wasting tax dollars for generations. Why would anyone believe that the establishment is going to change? They are called the "establishment" for a reason! We need to reduce the size of our Federal government and give more choice and resources back to the states and local leadership. And that includes rethinking and restructuring our defense! We need USA infrastructure more we need the excessive military projects.

Step Back From Politics of Violence for a Deeper Understanding

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36822618

The unthinkable is now a pattern. Killing cops has become the thing to do -- the way one who feels suppressed and victimized by the system expresses their rage at the system.

How did we get here? It is NOT new for cops to shoot black guys in the course of police work, whether rightly or wrongly so. And they are NOT doing it more than the past. And there certainly is NOT more police brutality than there has been historically. Access to rifles is NOT new! So why the rise is people shooting cops?

We've seen what is already happening with radical Islamist terror attacks. What is happening with the police shootings is born of the same phenomenon. I think the more recent rise is linked to the increased prevalence of smart-phones with the ability to watch and capture video images. Video is a far more compelling form of media that print. And it is streaming to one's phone from an endless barrage of sources. Watching a video is also easier to do than reading a long article.

Shooters are being radicalized to hate cops and the system and act in vigilant ways by a combination of self-reinforcing beliefs made possible by cell phone videos posted to the internet in conjunction with hate speech, that is also available online. This is forming a narrative in the minds of the shooters which becomes the imbalanced focus of their attention and scapegoat for the cause of the misery and perceived injustice in their own life. Individuals who go down this path tend to compound their bias by choosing sources that support their views. Once this cycle of brainwashing begins it builds on itself and spirals to the point where the person is consumed by hate and resentment. Needing an outlet for their aggression, without a constructive one, such as sports or psychotherapy or art, they take their inspiration from seeing others like commit acts of terror. Eventually, they may release their pent up hostility on the society and individuals who are the subject and cause in their warped mental narrative.

As authorities have been finding in each case of violence, there is very often a trail of social media on the assailants computer or phone. Case in point is the Baton Rouge copy shootings the weekend of 7/17.

Adding fuel to the fires, is the media coverage of such events which illustrate to any would be shooters hot the world will come to know them. Since the outcome is often that the shooter is killed too, rapidly in a hail of bullets, the shooter has the sense that they will be relieved of their emotion pain. Believing that they may be a martyr only contributes to their motivation, which is why the radical Islamist is a much more dangerous trend. These people are incentivised with promises for a fabulous afterlife experience.

Contributing to the radicalization process are charismatic leaders and spokespeople who reinforce beliefs of injustice and a system designed against the population that they empathize or sympathize with - the tribe they belong to. Watching and or participating in protests, the energy of the crowd of like minds validates their belief and may fuel their desire to demonstrate their support. This has long been the case with some Muslim Imams who preach hate. But much more recently we have BLM and other groups, and opportunistic spokespeople like Reverend Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Access to weapons is the convenient scapegoat for liberal politicians. Rather than offending their political base with notions of taking responsibility within their own communities, it is far more acceptable to point the blame at guns. But as Nice and the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 should have proved to all of us is that the options for destruction exist regardless of whether the assailant has access to assault weapons or not. Recent police shooters have used ordinary rifles.

Lessons From The Last State

As more and more states, and the Federal government as well, take steps like Rhode Island, our economy is going to shift into a higher gear!  Government listening to business and cooperating with a focus on infrastructure, regulatory reform, tax relief, and a business friendly attitude is the formula for robust growth.  Not the practices of the last 8 years which represented the exact opposite!  Is Hillary about the last 8 years?  Or does she represent more of the same?

And if businesses see things turning around and the attitude of uncertainty shifts to one of optimism, they will rush to put their cash to work through acquisition, capital investment, and market expansion.  Then we are really off to the races as wages, labor force participation, and consumer spending kick in!

Keep in mind another huge positive dynamic. We are supplying more and more of our own energy, rather than importing from the middle east and elsewhere.  So growth in the economy and demand for energy will be an enormous stimulus to our energy sector!  That will equal nearly a trillion dollars that was leaving our economy and going overseas and is now being spent here.  Huuggggee!!

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/12/americas-worst-state-for-business-in-2016-takes-aim-at-talent-drain.html