Thursday, February 2, 2012

Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 2, 2012


Newsbites can be found within the Comments Section!
Posted by at

2 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://lewrockwell.com/sardi/sardi202.html

What a time for Americans to begin replenishing their savings accounts, at the exact time when they are likely to be penalized for doing so.

For the past 30 years Americans have been saving less and less money and only with the recent economic downturn beginning in 2008 did Americans begin to re-stock their savings accounts.

[S]uddenly savings are on the way up again, up to 4% in December 2011 from 3.5% in November, the highest savings rate increase in five months.

A dramatic upsurge in savings was made possible by a $61.3 billion increase in total personal income in December compared to just $7.4 billion in November.

* HOLIDAY OVERTIME? HOLIDAY BONUSES?

Americans chose to save a great deal of that money rather than spend it.

But the Federal Reserve Bank has just re-launched another round of cheap-money, which is what triggered the economical bubble that burst in 2008...

(*BANGING MY HEAD ON THE DESK*)

While getting into debt may be easier, the yield on savings accounts (~1%) is less than the stated rate of inflation (~3%), and far less than the real rate of inflation (7-10% says ShadowStats.com) when employing 1980 and 1990 methods to determine the cost of goods and services.

* YEP. THE GOVERNMENT SIMPLY LIES ABOUT INFLATION. THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO SAY IT. (*SHRUG*)

Five more years of this policy will nearly halve the value of Americans’ banked money, however the dollar number in their bank accounts will grow slightly, deceiving ["savers"] into believing their money is growing albeit ever so slightly, because there is no comparative measure of inflation next to it.

(*NOD*)

According to one online inflation calculator which offers users the ShadowStats formula for estimating inflation, $1000 in the bank in 2010 would have lost $89.20 in value by 2011 against a 1% gain in bank interest for a net loss in purchasing power of about $79.20.

If that $1000 were placed in an interest-bearing account for 5 years at 1% interest it would erode in value via inflation by $437.34.

(*LITERALLY FEELING SICK TO MY STOMACH*)

Without banks or other sources providing Americans with an estimation of the real purchasing power of their incomes, Americans will continue to be deceived into believing their money is safe in U.S. savings accounts. In fact, if we are to believe ShadowStats, every American needs to go to their employer and demand a 7-10% annual increase in pay just to keep up with the cost of living.

* YEP. THAT'S RIGHT! (THAT SAID, THIS WOULD SIMPLE POUR MORE FUEL ON THE FIRE.)

If the masses only knew how Federal Reserve Bank inflationary policies are covertly eroding their wealth, to the point where most Americans will need to rely upon Food Stamps in five years, there would be public outrage.

* WELL... I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE FOOD STAMP PART... BUT AS THE GROCERY SHOPPER FOR MY HOUSEHOLD I DEFINITELY SEE - EXPERIENCE - THE UNDERLYING TRUTH THE AUTHOR IS POINTING TO.

* WHY JUST YESTERDAY I READ THAT BEEF PRICES HAD GONE UP 10% OVER THE PAST YEAR AND WERE FORECAST - BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT - TO GO UP ANOTHER 5% THIS YEAR. (FOLKS... LOOK AT COLD CUTS!) OH... AND THIS DOESN'T EVEN ACCOUNT FOR THE "INCREDIBLE SHRINKING PACKAGE" PHENOMENON!

* FOLKS... WE'RE IN TROUBLE. GOVERNMENT POLICIES ARE DELIBERATELY STRIKING AT THE HEART OF OUR "DAY BY DAY" STANDARD OF LIVING.

Right now, American savers are unwittingly capitalizing U.S. banks at a loss while bankers are announcing dividends for their stockholders.

* AND BONUSES FOR THEMSELVES!

It is an unconscionable moment in American banking.

Say bye-bye to the American middle class.

* FOLKS... THE AUTHOR IS FAR MORE RIGHT THAN WRONG.

February 2, 2012 at 12:08 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://news.investors.com/Article.aspx?id=599695&p=1&ibdbot=1

The nation was recently treated to a decision by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that certain employers may not require employees to have a high school diploma because it might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

* WTF...?!?!

Clearly, the EEOC has lost its marbles.

* CLEARLY!

February 2, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)