Paychecks from private business shrank to their smallest share of personal income in U.S. history during the first quarter of this year, a USA TODAY analysis of government data finds.
At the same time, government-provided benefits — from Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other programs — rose to a record high during the first three months of 2010.
Those records reflect a long-term trend accelerated by the recession and the federal stimulus program to counteract the downturn. The result is a major shift in the source of personal income from private wages to government programs.
So what's the deal? How's that hope and change thing working out for everyone?
Not so good huh...... Apparently the socialist in chief is feeling the pain a little bit too. His approval rating is down to 42% according to the polls this morning.
But there is more bad news on the horizon this morning that could affect both of those points today. The news is that the DOW will open down as word of worsening economic crisis in Europe (and a double dip recession) continues and the rumor of war is in the air concerning the Korean peninsula and the little lunatic Kim Jong.
2 comments:
Hi. I watched the video you posted about Clark and Dawes and I wanted to get you comments on my questions/thoughts with this multi-national debt crisis.
As a service member, I was stationed at Fort Huachuca and I recall sitting in a briefing about safety, etc, and I recall being stunned at the 100s of thousands of illegal crossings of our borders each year. Before being stationed there, I didn't realize the huge problem it was. (this was in 2007) Common sense told me that of course we could stop such a thing if we wanted to. But why then didn't we want to? I determined that we must then have forces on the border to give an appearance of security and/or only to try and stop the unwanted crossers (I thought this would be the crossers with criminal intent. Now I'm not sure if the intent is to stop criminals at all, Federally speaking) I remember telling my daughter, "if you consider something and it makes no sense, the reality is that it does make sense. We just don't have all the information. I'm inclined now to believe the allowing of crossing is to usher in a regional government system and to inflame unrest until events seem to provide the justification for a new way of doing things in America. Maybe also a way to keep the unwanted in power polically by providing the illegals with citizenship and voting rights. I also believe there's still more to it that I don't get.
That was a big mouthful but this whole thing with many well developed nations being grossly in debt and just continuing on and on with it all is another issue I still look at just like I once did with this whole "inability" to stop the hundreds of thousands of illegal crossings each year. I'd like to see what your "big picture" explanation is for all of the gross indebtedness of the major nations and how it just keeps on and keeps on as if no one seems to know better and is powerless to stop it. I've come to believe that like immigration, we can stop and we would stop if the motives to do otherwise were clear and also honest. But they are not, I think. Just like I said to my daughter before "if it doesn't seem to make any sense, it actually does make sense, but we don't have all of the information yet." So, one thought I had was that all these developed nations are plunging deeper into debt in a larger plan to eventually equalize the spending power for the currencies of all nations globally. Once that's the case (developed nations "dumb" down their currencies while third-world countries work to improve the value of theirs) until they meet in the middle. That makes way for switching to a one world currency for all nations without radically shocking any current, national living standards at once. Is this it or what do you think?
James
Hello James. I have two thoughts on what you are asking and what you propose. Actually I have more than two, but there are two prime ones that best address your question.
Firstly.....you are on the right track as it concerns one world government and one world currency. That is the goal and that is the objective without a doubt in my opinion.
Do do some googling on "RFID" tags and what that will represent as far as establishing a non currency means of commerce globally.
And as it will concern immediate tracking of all transactions and payments made ,globally from individual to individual to the multinational level of corporations and governments.
Truly mark of the beast stuff if you ask me.
The second point is this.
Read this as one example of the thinking involved in these plans.
http://www.newint.org/issue320/tobin.htm
Also read this.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/162/27971.html
Simply stated, after WWII, the movers and shakers globally, decided to tie all economies together and thus create an atmosphere where global wars could not exist or even be born if their theory was correct.
They would allow these little banana republic wars to continue globally, along with the super powers waging surrogate wars as in Korea and Vietnam and now in the middle east, but the simple fact would remain, that no major country could ever afford to go to war with another major country. Else they would damage and destroy their own economy in the process.
At least that was the theory. I believe the jury remains out on the actual effect of the practice as it would seem that we are perilously close to global meltdown as opposed to either individual or regional meltdown of economies. And as a result, global war could easily erupt once again IMO.
Post a Comment