Source: European Treaties Bearing on the History of the United States
So, this appears to be the earliest contemporaneous date I can find. Before this time, documents were dated according to the year of the king's reign.
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Treaty of Tordesillas
The Treaty of Tordesillas has a date on it: July 2, 1494.
Source: European Treaties Bearing on the History of the United States
So, this appears to be the earliest contemporaneous date I can find. Before this time, documents were dated according to the year of the king's reign.
Source: European Treaties Bearing on the History of the United States
So, this appears to be the earliest contemporaneous date I can find. Before this time, documents were dated according to the year of the king's reign.
Dudum siquidem
Dudum_siquidem was a Papal Bull giving the Catholic monarchs Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon ownership of lands discovered in the New World or in India. For my purpose, I am interested in the date on the document:
Datum Rome apud Sanctum Petrum, anno Incarnationis Dominice millesimo quadringentesimo nonagesimo tertio, sexto kalendas Octobris, pontificatus nostri anno secundo.
https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Dudum_siquidem
I don't know any Latin but this is easily recognizable as October 6, 1493. The English translation says 26 September 1493, so obviously the date has been retrofitted to our current calendar.
However, there is some doubt to its authenticity:
According to the American historian Frances Gardiner Davenport, no copy of this bull has been found in the records of the Vatican, but in the General Archive of the Indies in Seville two original manuscripts of it survive, both with the papal lead seal attached, although not marked "Registrata", as is usual. Until these originals of the bull were revealed during the 20th century, there was some doubt about the authenticity of what had been quoted from it. [Wikipedia]
I think there is some chance that this was a forgery. Why would copies be found in Seville but not in Rome? So I'm still looking for a document with an old date.
Datum Rome apud Sanctum Petrum, anno Incarnationis Dominice millesimo quadringentesimo nonagesimo tertio, sexto kalendas Octobris, pontificatus nostri anno secundo.
https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Dudum_siquidem
I don't know any Latin but this is easily recognizable as October 6, 1493. The English translation says 26 September 1493, so obviously the date has been retrofitted to our current calendar.
However, there is some doubt to its authenticity:
According to the American historian Frances Gardiner Davenport, no copy of this bull has been found in the records of the Vatican, but in the General Archive of the Indies in Seville two original manuscripts of it survive, both with the papal lead seal attached, although not marked "Registrata", as is usual. Until these originals of the bull were revealed during the 20th century, there was some doubt about the authenticity of what had been quoted from it. [Wikipedia]
I think there is some chance that this was a forgery. Why would copies be found in Seville but not in Rome? So I'm still looking for a document with an old date.
Bess of Hardwick
Source: https://www.bessofhardwick.org/letter.jsp?letter=171
Here is a date (November 4, 1570) that appears to be contemporaneously written. This is from a series of letters written by and to Bess of Hardwick (a notable figure of Elizabethan English society). For my purposes, she is interesting because she wrote a number of letters (about 250) that have been scanned and are available on the internet. This particular letter has much better handwriting than the others and is the clearest example of an old date. It was written by Gilbert Talbot, 7th Earl of Shrewsbury, in Padua, Italy.
So I put forward a theory and answered it. Yes there are older dates. The dating of course would be on the Julian calendar. (Are there any written dates older than this?)
Now for the rest of the story which I dug up while trying to research who Gilbert Talbot was.
Bess of Hardwick's 4th husband was George Talbot, the 6th Earl of Shrewsbury. Gilbert was his son and later became the 7th Earl of Shrewsbury. Bess of Hardwick (aka Elizabeth Cavendish) married George Talbot sometime in 1568. On February 9 1568, Gilbert (age 16) married Mary Cavendish (age 12), daughter of Bess in a double ceremony along with Sir Henry Cavendish (age 18), son of Bess who married Lady Grace Talbot (age 8), daughter of Gilbert. What? So stepsons marrying stepdaughters. Henry Cavendish hated his wife and had no legitimate children, but had eight (!) illegitimate children, and had the reputation of being a libertine. He apparently tried to seduce Arbella Stuart, his niece. Arbella may have been the inspiration for Ophelia, in Hamlet.
What was the question again?
Fomenko's New Chronology
This is a very interesting video, in Russian with English subtitles, that explains Anatoly Fomenko's theory.
Any date prior to September 14, 1752 is speculative
See: The British Switch to the Gregorian Calendar
The year of 1752 began on March 25th and ended with December 31, 1752, thus the earlier days of 1752 never existed, as the deleted days of September 2--13 also never existed.
A new manifesto to revise prevailing history and chronology
The French Revolution from 1788/89 might just be the first historical narrative that is credible. But any historical events before this time are impossible to confirm. Any attempt to set up and describe a year such as 1700 in historical terms is absurd. The creation of historical forgeries and fabrications has always gone hand in hand. Before the beginning of the 19th century nobody was interested in writing true history.
In this post, I state a theory, which should be able to be proven or disproven, not something I believe in 100%. Are there any original documents (e.g. a letter from a king) that have a written date prior to 1752?
Obviously, people and documents and events existed prior to this date, but the dates at which they lived were assigned after this time by historians and archaeologists and such. When did "reliable contemporaneous written history" begin? There probably are such documents prior to 1752, but how far back?
WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE IS A DISTINCTLY DEFINED BOUNDARY IN HISTORY – THE FIRST HALF OF THE XVII CENTURY. We know more or less what happened after this point, i.e. closer to our time. In any case, beginning with the end of the XVIII century. But we have a very poor knowledge of what took place prior to the middle of the XVII century [i.e. 1650]. This border line appeared artificially. It is not a result of the natural forgetting the information. It separates the accurate chronology from the incorrect one. http://chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/preface.html
The first comprehensive English dictionary was "A Dictionary of the English Language" prepared by Samuel Johnson. It was published on 4 April 1755.
Update: The first version of the Encylopedia Britannica was published in 1768 in Edinburgh, Scotland.
There was a world war lasting between 1754 and 1763 called the Seven Years War in Europe and the French and Indian War in the New World.
King George II of Great Britain, who was king from 1727 to 1760, was born in Germany.
In Russia, Pugachev's Rebellion occurred in 1773-1775. It was really a civil war against Catherine the Great, who was Empress from 1762 to 1796 and had a dubious claim to the throne, and who was born in Germany.
Update 2: A massive earthquake, tsunamai and fire on November 1, 1755 destroyed Lisbon, Portugal. This was seen as punishment by God and it was a major factor in the downfall of the Portuguese Empire (which however didn't finally end until giving Macau to China in 1999).
Update 3: The War of the Austrian Succession (German: Österreichischer Erbfolgekrieg, 1740–1748) involved most of the powers of Europe over the issue of Archduchess Maria Theresa's succession to the Habsburg Monarchy. The war included peripheral events such as King George's War in British America, the War of Jenkins' Ear (which formally began on 23 October 1739), the First Carnatic War in India, the Jacobite rising of 1745 in Scotland, and the First and Second Silesian Wars.
The year of 1752 began on March 25th and ended with December 31, 1752, thus the earlier days of 1752 never existed, as the deleted days of September 2--13 also never existed.
A new manifesto to revise prevailing history and chronology
The French Revolution from 1788/89 might just be the first historical narrative that is credible. But any historical events before this time are impossible to confirm. Any attempt to set up and describe a year such as 1700 in historical terms is absurd. The creation of historical forgeries and fabrications has always gone hand in hand. Before the beginning of the 19th century nobody was interested in writing true history.
In this post, I state a theory, which should be able to be proven or disproven, not something I believe in 100%. Are there any original documents (e.g. a letter from a king) that have a written date prior to 1752?
Obviously, people and documents and events existed prior to this date, but the dates at which they lived were assigned after this time by historians and archaeologists and such. When did "reliable contemporaneous written history" begin? There probably are such documents prior to 1752, but how far back?
WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE IS A DISTINCTLY DEFINED BOUNDARY IN HISTORY – THE FIRST HALF OF THE XVII CENTURY. We know more or less what happened after this point, i.e. closer to our time. In any case, beginning with the end of the XVIII century. But we have a very poor knowledge of what took place prior to the middle of the XVII century [i.e. 1650]. This border line appeared artificially. It is not a result of the natural forgetting the information. It separates the accurate chronology from the incorrect one. http://chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/preface.html
The first comprehensive English dictionary was "A Dictionary of the English Language" prepared by Samuel Johnson. It was published on 4 April 1755.
Update: The first version of the Encylopedia Britannica was published in 1768 in Edinburgh, Scotland.
There was a world war lasting between 1754 and 1763 called the Seven Years War in Europe and the French and Indian War in the New World.
King George II of Great Britain, who was king from 1727 to 1760, was born in Germany.
In Russia, Pugachev's Rebellion occurred in 1773-1775. It was really a civil war against Catherine the Great, who was Empress from 1762 to 1796 and had a dubious claim to the throne, and who was born in Germany.
Update 2: A massive earthquake, tsunamai and fire on November 1, 1755 destroyed Lisbon, Portugal. This was seen as punishment by God and it was a major factor in the downfall of the Portuguese Empire (which however didn't finally end until giving Macau to China in 1999).
Update 3: The War of the Austrian Succession (German: Österreichischer Erbfolgekrieg, 1740–1748) involved most of the powers of Europe over the issue of Archduchess Maria Theresa's succession to the Habsburg Monarchy. The war included peripheral events such as King George's War in British America, the War of Jenkins' Ear (which formally began on 23 October 1739), the First Carnatic War in India, the Jacobite rising of 1745 in Scotland, and the First and Second Silesian Wars.
Monday, March 25, 2019
Was the New Zealand shooting a false flag?
See: http://mileswmathis.com/xchurch.pdf
So the reason this hoax event took place in New Zealand appears to be threefold. First of all, the use of an Australian committing a terrorist act in New Zealand creates the perfect blood libel for the whole of the anglosphere outposts of the Pacific. In one fell swoop the stable peaceful white culture of both countries is likened to Nazi Germany in the public’s perception.
This was done in the approved classical Lee Harvey Oswald way, with an agent from the Families painted as a right winger. The manifesto of the alleged shooter overplayed the hand by a large margin, but with social media in lockdown this is now a familiar exercise in propaganda by the compliant press. And besides, NZSIS was bored.
Secondly, the south island of New Zealand where this occurred is becoming infested by Jewish billionaires building bunkers for the anticipated worldwide disruptions and wars.
Thirdly and finally, this event was the next and probably final test of the Boston Bombing instant-grow fascism. Remember how the witless people of Boston applauded the unconstitutional invasion of their city by paramilitary and soldiers in armored cars? Remember them cheering as their rights to be protected from illegal stop and search, invasion of their homes and illegal seizures of weapons took place on live television? New Zealand’s phony shooting event is the final test to see if the frogs have been boiled alive yet.
I suppose a fourth objective, one doomed from the outset, was to somehow make still homogeneous local white societies in New Zealand and Australia feel sympathy for the Islamic invaders in their midst. On this score it has been a dismal failure.
Update:
John Podesta, ... was in New Zealand the week before for a big spook conference, where he warned of upcoming tragic events. As they do. . . constantly. He left the day before the event.
So the reason this hoax event took place in New Zealand appears to be threefold. First of all, the use of an Australian committing a terrorist act in New Zealand creates the perfect blood libel for the whole of the anglosphere outposts of the Pacific. In one fell swoop the stable peaceful white culture of both countries is likened to Nazi Germany in the public’s perception.
This was done in the approved classical Lee Harvey Oswald way, with an agent from the Families painted as a right winger. The manifesto of the alleged shooter overplayed the hand by a large margin, but with social media in lockdown this is now a familiar exercise in propaganda by the compliant press. And besides, NZSIS was bored.
Secondly, the south island of New Zealand where this occurred is becoming infested by Jewish billionaires building bunkers for the anticipated worldwide disruptions and wars.
Thirdly and finally, this event was the next and probably final test of the Boston Bombing instant-grow fascism. Remember how the witless people of Boston applauded the unconstitutional invasion of their city by paramilitary and soldiers in armored cars? Remember them cheering as their rights to be protected from illegal stop and search, invasion of their homes and illegal seizures of weapons took place on live television? New Zealand’s phony shooting event is the final test to see if the frogs have been boiled alive yet.
I suppose a fourth objective, one doomed from the outset, was to somehow make still homogeneous local white societies in New Zealand and Australia feel sympathy for the Islamic invaders in their midst. On this score it has been a dismal failure.
Update:
John Podesta, ... was in New Zealand the week before for a big spook conference, where he warned of upcoming tragic events. As they do. . . constantly. He left the day before the event.
Sunday, March 24, 2019
The Fed's alarm clock just went off
Rick Santelli is always interesting.
My thought, unrelated to this video, is when will the Fed cut? The current betting seems to be on mid-June 2020.
Saturday, March 23, 2019
Burn Rate
Since the debt limit has been frozen on March 2 and this will continue until about October 1, when it is expected to be raised, we can't look at the Debt Held by the Public to see how the economic situation is deteriorating. So instead I will use a new, easy to calculate number I call the Burn Rate. This is made up of two numbers, Medicare Expenditures and Net Interest.
The federal budget mostly pays for itself except for these categories and they are the ones that will cause the most problem in the future.
October 2018:
Medicare $53B, Net Interest $32B, Total $85B.
November 2018:
Medicare $77B, Net Interest $33B, Total $110B.
December 2018:
Medicare $24B, Net Interest $34B, Total $58B.
January 2019:
Medicare $51B, Net Interest $29B, Total $80B.
February 2019:
Medicare $52B, Net Interest $25B, Total $77B.
Obviously there were some timing differences in November and December and the total is about $80 billion per month.
Update:
March 2019:
Medicare $53B, Net Interest $37B, Total $90B
Source: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts0319.pdf
Net interest is projected to be $383B for the fiscal year, or about $32B per month, so any month that exceeds that (like March) is a warning sign.
The federal budget mostly pays for itself except for these categories and they are the ones that will cause the most problem in the future.
October 2018:
Medicare $53B, Net Interest $32B, Total $85B.
November 2018:
Medicare $77B, Net Interest $33B, Total $110B.
December 2018:
Medicare $24B, Net Interest $34B, Total $58B.
January 2019:
Medicare $51B, Net Interest $29B, Total $80B.
February 2019:
Medicare $52B, Net Interest $25B, Total $77B.
Obviously there were some timing differences in November and December and the total is about $80 billion per month.
Update:
March 2019:
Medicare $53B, Net Interest $37B, Total $90B
Source: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts0319.pdf
Net interest is projected to be $383B for the fiscal year, or about $32B per month, so any month that exceeds that (like March) is a warning sign.
Friday, March 22, 2019
Wilhelm Kammeier and the Falsification of History
Yet another bizarre conspiracy theory which is related to the Mudflood conspiracy. Wilhelm Kammeier (link in German) lived from 1889-1959 in Germany. Kammeier believed that all history prior to about 1350 was based on false documents. He concluded that all German manuscripts from that period were false. He also believed that the papacy was a new religion that started in Avignon, France, and it hadn't existed in Rome prior to 1376.
Evidence in support of this:
1. The Vatican library wasn't established until 1475, and doesn't have any books or records prior to Pope Innocent III (1198-1216), except for bible manuscripts.
2. The Decretals of Isidore (supposedly dating from 775-785) and the Donation of Constantine are known forgeries.
3. Note that "more than 95% of all living Catholic bishops" trace their episcopal lineage to Cardinal Scipione Rebiba (1504-1577) and no one knows who ordained him or even if he was ordained. So any list of "unbroken apostolic succession" ends with him.
4. The Gregorian Calendar, which started in 1582, was a major break in dating events.
5. Our understanding of ancient chronology is largely based on the theories of Joseph Justus Scaliger (1540-1609) which have been heavily criticized. See http://chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/09.html.
I have no idea if this is true (and it probably isn't), but I find it fascinating.
Update: See also the theories of Anatoly Fomenko and the New Chronology.
Evidence in support of this:
1. The Vatican library wasn't established until 1475, and doesn't have any books or records prior to Pope Innocent III (1198-1216), except for bible manuscripts.
2. The Decretals of Isidore (supposedly dating from 775-785) and the Donation of Constantine are known forgeries.
3. Note that "more than 95% of all living Catholic bishops" trace their episcopal lineage to Cardinal Scipione Rebiba (1504-1577) and no one knows who ordained him or even if he was ordained. So any list of "unbroken apostolic succession" ends with him.
4. The Gregorian Calendar, which started in 1582, was a major break in dating events.
5. Our understanding of ancient chronology is largely based on the theories of Joseph Justus Scaliger (1540-1609) which have been heavily criticized. See http://chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/09.html.
I have no idea if this is true (and it probably isn't), but I find it fascinating.
Update: See also the theories of Anatoly Fomenko and the New Chronology.
Yield curve inversion means a recession in 1-2 years
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=yield
The above is a screenshort from Treasury showing the daily treasury yields. The columns are 1 month, 2 month, 3 month, 6 month, 1 year, 2 year, 3 year, 5 year, 7 year, 10 year, and 20 year. I didn't include the column headers because I don't want to spend time editing it and I don't want to have too much data. The important thing to notice is that today the 1-year yield dropped only from 2.48 to 2.45 whereas the 2-year yield dropped from 2.41 to 2.31. So the yield is 0.14 less on the 2-year than the 1-year. Also the 3-year yield is even lower.
What does this mean? I think it is a prediction that the Fed will cut rates by at least 0.25% after April 1, 2020. And further that the Fed will cut rates again by at least 0.25% in 2021. The only reason the Fed would cut rates is if there is an economic slowdown.
So based on this information, when will the recession start? I like to make wildly inaccurate predictions so I predict it will start on July 4, 2020. Just in time to influence the next election.
Note that the 1-year yield should usually be less than the 2-year yield, so watch the 1-year yield. If it drops, that means the recession will happen within a year.
Update: as of 4/1/19, the 2 year rate increased to 2.40%. This is now only 0.04% less than the 1 year, down from 0.14 referred to above. Anything that is 0.05 is less is too close to predict anything. So the recession scheduled to start on July 4, 2020 has been cancelled!
Thursday, March 21, 2019
Interview with Barnabas Nagy
Nagy shows maps of Tartaria, which show it where Siberia is today. It was clearly a separate country from Russia. There was also Chinese Tartaria (also called Manchuria) which was a separate country from China. Tartarian building have a distinct style.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Mudflood and Tartaria Conspiracy Theory
There is another fascinating conspiracy theory I ran across. I don't really understand it, but it goes something like this: There was an advanced civilization that was spread across Russia and North America called Tartaria. Something happened to wipe out the people but their vast cities remained. This is sort of like Ancient Aliens, but not as old.
The main website is at StolenHistory.org. I don't believe the theory but I like history and there are lots of old pictures and information about mud floods and fires that seemed to occur in the 1860s. Also it is interesting that people in the 1800s had building techniques that are lost today. For example, at the world's fairs in Chicago in 1893, in Omaha in 1898, and in St Louis in 1904. There are also lots of Youtube videos promoting the theory. I may post some of them.
The main website is at StolenHistory.org. I don't believe the theory but I like history and there are lots of old pictures and information about mud floods and fires that seemed to occur in the 1860s. Also it is interesting that people in the 1800s had building techniques that are lost today. For example, at the world's fairs in Chicago in 1893, in Omaha in 1898, and in St Louis in 1904. There are also lots of Youtube videos promoting the theory. I may post some of them.
Monday, March 11, 2019
Another conspiracy theory
I like bizarre conspiracy theories and here is another one. That the Department of Defense has a secret alternate Central Bank that created $21 trillion in dark money that is hidden in a vast network of secretive off-shore companies and banks, and which pops up from time-to-time to buy U.S. treasury bonds.
First, as background, read these articles:
https://usawatchdog.com/massive-secret-money-printing-will-shoot-gold-higher-rob-kirby/
Rob Kirby has spoken about this quite a bit and there are dozens of articles that originate with him. Also search for Catherine Austin Fitts.
https://jacobinmag.com/2018/01/pentagon-budget-government-spending-military
I want to speculate on this for a few minutes. I don't have any inside information. I think that the $21 trillion number is vastly inflated and much of this is just very shoddy accounting by the DoD. But let's say the number is $2 trillion.
How is money created? I've speculated on this before and don't have a clear handle on it, but if a government entity is allowed to overdraft its accounts and have checks clear that should bounce then that surely creates money. The Treasury can't do this - it has to issue Treasury bonds to raise money. But suppose there is an alternate banking system that allows the DoD to do this. The DoD would issue IOUs (instead of bonds) which are really just bookkeeping entries. The money would be used to pay contractors and it would also go into slush funds. I imagine that each of the departments would have its own slush fund with hundreds of billions in it that it could use if its official funding ever got cut and to fund programs for which it doesn't have funding or authorization. For example, the Army supposedly received an extra $800 billion in 2015 to cover past year budget adjustments.
The genius of bankers is that they can create money out of thin air and they get paid the interest on the debt. So as long as interest is paid, the scheme can continue. If the secret debt is $2 trillion, then at 3%, the interest is $60 billion per year, a number that can easily be hid in the DoD budget.
The US is a sovereign nation and can issue its own currency to infinity. I have speculated that the state of California is in the same position to a much lesser extent. What about the Department of Defense? If Congress in a fit of insanity (or sanity) decided to abolish all funding for defense would the DoD cease to exist? Obviously not, national security can not depend on the whims of Congress. So obviously, the DoD is semi-sovereign, somewhat like the Federal Reserve. But since their activities are hidden (and because they have guns), it is only logical to assume they have greater powers.
So where all this secret dark money hidden? I speculate that it must be through special companies and banks in the Caribbean. What about in Belgium (population 11 million) which has the ability to purchase hundreds of billions in treasury bonds? What if NATO is in effect a country, with its parliament and ambassadors? And what about Euroclear, which is based in Belgium?
This would make a plot for a good science fiction book. I may post some videos from Rob Kirby and Catherine Fitts that explain this dark money more.
===============
Another Link:
https://usawatchdog.com/missing-21-trillion-means-federal-government-is-lawless-dr-mark-skidmore/
Dr Mark Skidmore is an economist at Michigan State University who discovered the $21 trillion missing. This was a cumulative number dating back to 1998.
First, as background, read these articles:
https://usawatchdog.com/massive-secret-money-printing-will-shoot-gold-higher-rob-kirby/
Rob Kirby has spoken about this quite a bit and there are dozens of articles that originate with him. Also search for Catherine Austin Fitts.
https://jacobinmag.com/2018/01/pentagon-budget-government-spending-military
I want to speculate on this for a few minutes. I don't have any inside information. I think that the $21 trillion number is vastly inflated and much of this is just very shoddy accounting by the DoD. But let's say the number is $2 trillion.
How is money created? I've speculated on this before and don't have a clear handle on it, but if a government entity is allowed to overdraft its accounts and have checks clear that should bounce then that surely creates money. The Treasury can't do this - it has to issue Treasury bonds to raise money. But suppose there is an alternate banking system that allows the DoD to do this. The DoD would issue IOUs (instead of bonds) which are really just bookkeeping entries. The money would be used to pay contractors and it would also go into slush funds. I imagine that each of the departments would have its own slush fund with hundreds of billions in it that it could use if its official funding ever got cut and to fund programs for which it doesn't have funding or authorization. For example, the Army supposedly received an extra $800 billion in 2015 to cover past year budget adjustments.
The genius of bankers is that they can create money out of thin air and they get paid the interest on the debt. So as long as interest is paid, the scheme can continue. If the secret debt is $2 trillion, then at 3%, the interest is $60 billion per year, a number that can easily be hid in the DoD budget.
The US is a sovereign nation and can issue its own currency to infinity. I have speculated that the state of California is in the same position to a much lesser extent. What about the Department of Defense? If Congress in a fit of insanity (or sanity) decided to abolish all funding for defense would the DoD cease to exist? Obviously not, national security can not depend on the whims of Congress. So obviously, the DoD is semi-sovereign, somewhat like the Federal Reserve. But since their activities are hidden (and because they have guns), it is only logical to assume they have greater powers.
So where all this secret dark money hidden? I speculate that it must be through special companies and banks in the Caribbean. What about in Belgium (population 11 million) which has the ability to purchase hundreds of billions in treasury bonds? What if NATO is in effect a country, with its parliament and ambassadors? And what about Euroclear, which is based in Belgium?
This would make a plot for a good science fiction book. I may post some videos from Rob Kirby and Catherine Fitts that explain this dark money more.
===============
Another Link:
https://usawatchdog.com/missing-21-trillion-means-federal-government-is-lawless-dr-mark-skidmore/
Dr Mark Skidmore is an economist at Michigan State University who discovered the $21 trillion missing. This was a cumulative number dating back to 1998.
Sunday, March 10, 2019
Friday, March 8, 2019
Fish diet part three
Today I had the Cajun Fish Combo at Popeye's. The cost was $8.67 with tax. This included 3 pieces of breaded fish and about 20 small breaded popcorn shrimp, biscuit, regular cole slaw, and sweet tea (22 oz) with a refill. The nutritional information shows 1087 calories, 42g of fat, 159g of carbs (4g of fiber), and 20g of protein.
If I would have left off the biscuit and had unsweetened tea, it would have had 520 calories, with 49g of carbs.
It was elegant and delicious but I can't recommend it, even on the slimmed down version, because it has entirely too many carbs.
Update: I am terminating the Fish Diet experiment since I was gaining weight on it. Kind of obvious in retrospect, but it was interesting to try for a few days.
If I would have left off the biscuit and had unsweetened tea, it would have had 520 calories, with 49g of carbs.
It was elegant and delicious but I can't recommend it, even on the slimmed down version, because it has entirely too many carbs.
Update: I am terminating the Fish Diet experiment since I was gaining weight on it. Kind of obvious in retrospect, but it was interesting to try for a few days.
Thursday, March 7, 2019
Fish diet part two
I'm reluctant to post this, but here goes. I ate a 12-inch tuna sandwich at Subway today. The cost, with tax, was $8.14. The nutritional information, according to their website with how I prepared it, is 1250 calories, with 81g of fat, 83g of carbs (6g of fiber), and 47g of protein.
This obviously can't be considered part of a healthy diet. I guess I could have ordered a tuna salad, which would have had 310 calories with 11g of carbs (not including the dressing), but it wouldn't have been nearly as filling and it would have cost more than 5 bucks. And I could have ordered a 6-inch sandwich, but it also would have been more than 5 bucks.
It was tasty but I can't recommend this.
This obviously can't be considered part of a healthy diet. I guess I could have ordered a tuna salad, which would have had 310 calories with 11g of carbs (not including the dressing), but it wouldn't have been nearly as filling and it would have cost more than 5 bucks. And I could have ordered a 6-inch sandwich, but it also would have been more than 5 bucks.
It was tasty but I can't recommend this.
Tuesday, March 5, 2019
History of the Magical Money Tree
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/02/modern-monetary-theory-isnt-helping
This is a very interesting article. MMT has roots in Chartalism, which was a word coined by Georg Friedrich Knapp (1842-1926). Knapp argues that money derives its value from being designated as legal tender and by requiring taxes to be paid in the currency.
Adam Smith made a chartalist observation in The Wealth of Nations: "A prince, who should enact that a certain proportion of his taxes should be paid in a paper money of a certain kind, might thereby give a certain value to this paper money".
In Magic Money Theory, the government doesn't need taxes as a source of revenue: taxes might be useful to tinker with the income distribution, or discourage vices, or to fight inflation by draining purchasing power from the economy. But governments don’t really need the revenue — they can just print the money.
However, proponents of the Marvelous Magnificent Truth don't have a good answer for inflation. Weimar Germany may be an extreme case, but since it’s often brought up by critics of MMT — “won’t all that keystroking lead to inflation, like Argentina or Weimar?” — it’s one for which they need to have a good answer. Wray’s reluctance to face head-on the risks of printing money makes you wonder how confident he really is of his own theory.
This is a very interesting article. MMT has roots in Chartalism, which was a word coined by Georg Friedrich Knapp (1842-1926). Knapp argues that money derives its value from being designated as legal tender and by requiring taxes to be paid in the currency.
Adam Smith made a chartalist observation in The Wealth of Nations: "A prince, who should enact that a certain proportion of his taxes should be paid in a paper money of a certain kind, might thereby give a certain value to this paper money".
In Magic Money Theory, the government doesn't need taxes as a source of revenue: taxes might be useful to tinker with the income distribution, or discourage vices, or to fight inflation by draining purchasing power from the economy. But governments don’t really need the revenue — they can just print the money.
However, proponents of the Marvelous Magnificent Truth don't have a good answer for inflation. Weimar Germany may be an extreme case, but since it’s often brought up by critics of MMT — “won’t all that keystroking lead to inflation, like Argentina or Weimar?” — it’s one for which they need to have a good answer. Wray’s reluctance to face head-on the risks of printing money makes you wonder how confident he really is of his own theory.
Fish Diet part one
I think that fish every day for lunch could be part of a health diet. Fish is filling and has lots of omega-3 oil in it. So I am going to to experiment with different options. This is what I ate today.
McDonald's Double Filet-o-Fish with side salad. The cost was $7.68 with tax. The regular filet-o-fish has 390 calories, with 38g of carbs. Adding another filet adds 120 calories and 9g carbs (from the breading). The side salad has 10 calories and 2g carbs. The ranch dressing added 170 calories and 9g carbs. Total was 690 calories and 58g of carbs.
I'm not concerned about calories, except for carbs. If I didn't eat the bun and didn't add the dressing, I would have saved 27g of carbs for the bun and 9g for the dressing, and reduced the calorie count by 150 for the bun and 170 calories for the dressing. The total would have been 370 calories and 22g carbs, but it wouldn't have been as filling.
It was very tasty and filling. Would order again.
McDonald's Double Filet-o-Fish with side salad. The cost was $7.68 with tax. The regular filet-o-fish has 390 calories, with 38g of carbs. Adding another filet adds 120 calories and 9g carbs (from the breading). The side salad has 10 calories and 2g carbs. The ranch dressing added 170 calories and 9g carbs. Total was 690 calories and 58g of carbs.
I'm not concerned about calories, except for carbs. If I didn't eat the bun and didn't add the dressing, I would have saved 27g of carbs for the bun and 9g for the dressing, and reduced the calorie count by 150 for the bun and 170 calories for the dressing. The total would have been 370 calories and 22g carbs, but it wouldn't have been as filling.
It was very tasty and filling. Would order again.
Sunday, March 3, 2019
The California National Debt
The quasi nation-state of California has a national debt of $1.5 trillion as of June 30, 2017 according to the California Policy Center. This number is increasing about $200 billion per year. More than half of this number, $846 billion, is from unfunded pension liabilities. The state of California has a credit rating of AA- according to Fitch and Standard and Poor's. California has only $83 billion in general obligation bonds as of March 2018 and could easily sell more.
I think that the sovereign national debt of California is a ponzi scheme and will keep going up forever, just like the U.S. national debt. When a pension crisis hits, which is inevitable, the pension funds will be bailed out by the state or by the US, so the unfunded pension liabilities are in effect guaranteed. California can issue more bonds to pay interest on its debts, so there is no limit on how much debt it issues except for self-restraint but its radical socialist leaders will soon do away with that. The Fed could also purchase California G.O. bonds in a crisis.
If push comes to shove, California can just issue its own California dollars. It has done that before in 2009 by issuing "registered warrants".
I think that the sovereign national debt of California is a ponzi scheme and will keep going up forever, just like the U.S. national debt. When a pension crisis hits, which is inevitable, the pension funds will be bailed out by the state or by the US, so the unfunded pension liabilities are in effect guaranteed. California can issue more bonds to pay interest on its debts, so there is no limit on how much debt it issues except for self-restraint but its radical socialist leaders will soon do away with that. The Fed could also purchase California G.O. bonds in a crisis.
If push comes to shove, California can just issue its own California dollars. It has done that before in 2009 by issuing "registered warrants".
Friday, March 1, 2019
Magic Money Tool
You just push a button and it creates money out of thin air.
governments need not tax or borrow in order to spend — they can just create money out of thin air. A few computer keystrokes and everyone gets health insurance, student debt disappears, and we can save the climate too, without all that messy class conflict
https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2019/02/the-incredibly-rapid-and-dangerous.html
Do you believe in the MMT? It is the answer to all the world's problems, at least all the problems involving money. There is an infinite supply of dollars just waiting to be printed, what is stopping us?
Yes it will cause a little inflation, but that's a good thing since it makes it easier to pay back debts and it keeps people from hoarding money. And we know how to keep inflation under control, by jacking up the Fed Funds Rate. In a paper criticizing MMT, the left-Keynesian economist Thomas Palley says he’s heard a “leading” MMTer say inflation less than 40 percent is “costless.”
Seize the money relation! Enlist the aesthetic in money’s expansion! Hail money as the center of caretaking! Declare your dependence on care’s center! Relinquish attachments to thisness! Imagine a boundless public center! Never forsake abstraction for gravity’s attractions! Exalt abstraction as the locus of care! It goes on for over two hundred pages, as Ferguson summons Heidegger and the Eucharist to uncover in this new notion of money endless reservoirs and beauty and tenderness. This develops the utopian potential of MMT in ways that are outside the economist’s standard skillset, but it bears a tenuous relation with earthly reality.
governments need not tax or borrow in order to spend — they can just create money out of thin air. A few computer keystrokes and everyone gets health insurance, student debt disappears, and we can save the climate too, without all that messy class conflict
https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2019/02/the-incredibly-rapid-and-dangerous.html
Do you believe in the MMT? It is the answer to all the world's problems, at least all the problems involving money. There is an infinite supply of dollars just waiting to be printed, what is stopping us?
Yes it will cause a little inflation, but that's a good thing since it makes it easier to pay back debts and it keeps people from hoarding money. And we know how to keep inflation under control, by jacking up the Fed Funds Rate. In a paper criticizing MMT, the left-Keynesian economist Thomas Palley says he’s heard a “leading” MMTer say inflation less than 40 percent is “costless.”
Seize the money relation! Enlist the aesthetic in money’s expansion! Hail money as the center of caretaking! Declare your dependence on care’s center! Relinquish attachments to thisness! Imagine a boundless public center! Never forsake abstraction for gravity’s attractions! Exalt abstraction as the locus of care! It goes on for over two hundred pages, as Ferguson summons Heidegger and the Eucharist to uncover in this new notion of money endless reservoirs and beauty and tenderness. This develops the utopian potential of MMT in ways that are outside the economist’s standard skillset, but it bears a tenuous relation with earthly reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)