text:
Professor Samuelson has, in this case, misinterpreted an insufficiently small set of data to arrive at conclusions that square only with his own personal value judgments. He claims that his intellectual opponents (F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman) give bad advice when they promote laissez-faire. FULL ARTICLE
Professor Samuelson on Income and Tolerance
{ 50 comments }
- December 30, 2008 at 9:09 am
I admit to being baffled by how someone as intelligent as Samuelson can engage in the same silly errors and confusion as the economic layperson. Still, he's unlikely to change his mind about it. Someone's already suggested a book about Paul Krugman and his ideas-perhaps a better idea wouuld be a book that criticizes several modern mainstream economists and their ideas and theories, including Samuelson and not just Krugman in particular. It's just possible that by engaging the mainstream in this way, and by pointing out the deficiencies in mainstream theory, people more open to different ideas on economics will discover and appreciate Austrian economics.
- December 30, 2008 at 9:10 am
And it was Sameulson's textbook I used as an economics major! It's time to learn from the Austrian School.
- December 30, 2008 at 9:28 am
Samuelson: "If America turns protectionist, blame past Republican deregulating — a fine instance of the Law of the Unintended Consequences.â€
Of course, he refuses to mention that a Democrat, Jimmy Carter, started the ball rolling on deregulation, and the another Democrat, Bill Clinton, furthered it, or that the very tiny sums of deregulation that has happened in the past 30 years followed a socialist takeover of the economy under Hoover and Roosevelt. Under "deregulation†the US went from a fully socialist economy (German style, not Soviet) to socialist light. Apparently, Samuelson has dementia which causes him to forget most of the past.
Of course, Samuelson was speaking to a European audience that craves regular fixes of anti-Americanism, especially if it comes from an American. All Samuelson said was that Americans should be more like Europeans. What Europeans refuse to see is how much we are like them and growing more so every day. The state does everything it can to destroy the manufacturing base of the country through high taxes, inflation and regulation. Europe hasn't created a new job since 1950 and the US is desperately trying to imitate it.
What Samuelson knows, but conveniently forgets, is that economies can't grow without capital accumulation by businesses and that state regulation, taxation and inflation destroy capital accumulation. And if economies don't grow, then population growth causes unemployment. High levels of unemployment cause social unrest as people fight each other for the remaining jobs. That's why Europe has slightly more social unrest than does the US. Unemployment is a for more serious evil than inequality.
- December 30, 2008 at 9:42 am
I admit, that i used to think that the theory of the invisible hand was possible, but i don't think it anymore.
If you let a bunch o people in an island, at the end of the day, there will be a leader that will make the rules.
For the Economy, it's the same. You cannot hope there will be an invisible hand, that will keep everything properly working. You have to watch the market to avoid unfairness or you will soon have a Rockefeller (or a Wall Street) that will take advantage of the situation and build a monopoly.
Any market left out of control, leads to a monopolistic market. For example internet or software (the more similar markets we can call "liberal market")
- December 30, 2008 at 9:56 am
Any government left out of control, leads to a monopolistic market.* Yes. IP is a government privilege, FYI.
Samuelson is an idiot, and a shallow one at that, it seems.
- December 30, 2008 at 10:14 am
Check out the inside front cover of Samuelson's Principles book from the early 1980′s. It shows soviet income on a clear path to overtaking US income–just before the Soviet Union collapsed.
- December 30, 2008 at 10:33 am
J. Ortega said: I admit, that i used to think that the theory of the invisible hand was possible, but i don't think it anymore.
If you let a bunch o people in an island, at the end of the day, there will be a leader that will make the rules.
It's a good thing then that we have a committee and congress to construct the english language we speak in, otherwise we'd all be without words.
Oh wait, there is no centralized authority at all.
And there doesn't need to be one. It was the invisible hand, the thing that helped facilitate human exchange. People, left alone, will come to their own conclusions as to what is beneficial to them. They don't need to be treated as children. This is the same in language as it is the same in commerce.
Also, if you put a bunch of people on the island, it is more likely they would work out law themselves, without a leader.
For the Economy, it's the same. You cannot hope there will be an invisible hand, that will keep everything properly working. You have to watch the market to avoid unfairness or you will soon have a Rockefeller (or a Wall Street) that will take advantage of the situation and build a monopoly.
Any market left out of control, leads to a monopolistic market. For example internet or software (the more similar markets we can call "liberal market")
People like Rockefeller can only take advantage of things if it is granted power from the government. In a market that is unrestricted and open to anybody freely entering in, there can be no monopoly.
The internet is a hugely decentralized system, where no one entity has complete control. That's the point. Software is the same. Usually if there's any problems in the process, it is, again, due to government controls. Patents are a good example of government controls that destroy market processes.
It's important to keep in mind that the current market in the US is NOT FREE. It is a highly restricted mixed economy. There exists enough of a free market for some to rise up and prosper, but many magnitudes less than there would normally be. The market, and as a consequence the prosperity of the populous, is greatly hampered by government.
In fact, here is a quick (incomplete) list of the offices, agencies, government bureaus, government corporations, boards, policies and laws that distort the market in huge proportions:
Office of Tax Policy, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Community Development Investment Fund, Office of Thrift Supervision, Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, Office of Financial Institutions, Office of International Trade, Office of Banking and Securities, Office of Trade Finance, Office of International Monetary Policy, Office of Financial Stability, Import-Export Bank, Exchange Stabilization Fund, Working Group on Financial Markets, Plunge Protection Team, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO)
Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Revenue Act of 1913, Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Banking Act of 1935, Trust Indenture Act of 1939, Investment Company Act of 1940, Investment Advisors Act of 1940, Employment Act of 1946, Federal Reserve-Treasury Department Accord of 1951, Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, 1970, Commodity Exchange Act of 1970, Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975, Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, Financial Institutions Regulatory and Interest Rate Control Act of 1978, International Banking Act of 1978, Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978, Monetary Control Act of 1980, Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982, Plaza Accord of 1985, Lourve Accord of 1987, Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999, Regulation Fair Disclosure Rule of 2000, Uniform Securities Act of 1956, 1985, 1988 and 2002, Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, Regulation National Market System Rule of 2005, Community Re-Investment Act of 1994
And the main cultprit, responsible for every boom in and bust in the US since 1913: The Federal Reserve System
This is not counting federal labor and environmental legislation which also reduce competition and distort the market. Keep in mind, there are also state, county and local laws and agencies on top of this.
A large portion of this is in place to keep markets closed to competitors. Certain business interests don't want to compete, want a restricted market and then successfully lobby the government to kill competition.
You don't need any of these. The only laws that are necessary are ones that protect against fraud.
- December 30, 2008 at 10:46 am
For Saku:
Interesting debate. What about google or microsoft?
Any big company is always trying to put barriers to avoid the others to enter its kingdom. I would do the same and there is no invisible hand that can avoid that.
About the idea of "liberalism", even Adam Smith wanted to put rules to protect competition and avoid monopolies.
What is the difference between Anarchy and your Liberalism?
Kind regards
- December 30, 2008 at 10:49 am
I frigging love when Sproul's here.
- December 30, 2008 at 11:07 am
Any big company is always trying to put barriers to avoid the others to enter its kingdom. I would do the same and there is no invisible hand that can avoid that.
Ah, but there is a big difference between what someone wants to do and what they are actually able to do. Government regulation and enforcement is the easiest way for corporations to put up barriers to competition, because politicians and bureaucrats are influenced by comparatively small amounts of money and rhetoric that shows they are doing their jobs, even if it's wrong. With a very restricted government, or better yet without government, the corporations would have to do the dirty work themselves, which would be expensive, difficult, time-consuming, and ultimately futile, eating at their bottom line because they couldn't socialize the costs onto taxpayers.
For a historical example, look at Standard Oil and John D. Rockefeller from about 1858 till 1890. Yes, Standard had gained most of the business through improved productivity, but were unable to forcibly restrict their competition. They tried buying up their competitors, but as long as there were opportunities for high profits, more competitors would pop up out of the woodwork. Standard was unable to actually achieve a monopoly, in spite of their high market share, much less maintain it.
- December 30, 2008 at 11:08 am
Any big company is always trying to put barriers to avoid the others to enter its kingdom. I would do the same and there is no invisible hand that can avoid that.
Ah, but there is a big difference between what someone wants to do and what they are actually able to do. Government regulation and enforcement is the easiest way for corporations to put up barriers to competition, because politicians and bureaucrats are influenced by comparatively small amounts of money and rhetoric that shows they are doing their jobs, even if it's wrong. With a very restricted government, or better yet without government, the corporations would have to do the dirty work themselves, which would be expensive, difficult, time-consuming, and ultimately futile, eating at their bottom line because they couldn't socialize the costs onto taxpayers.
For a historical example, look at Standard Oil and John D. Rockefeller from about 1858 till 1890. Yes, Standard had gained most of the business through improved productivity, but were unable to forcibly restrict their competition. They tried buying up their competitors, but as long as there were opportunities for high profits, more competitors would pop up out of the woodwork. Standard was unable to actually achieve a monopoly, in spite of their high market share, much less maintain it.
- December 30, 2008 at 11:22 am
J. Ortega ,
"The invisible hand works" when violence is prohibited. In a system that protects private property and individual rights, it is only the "invisible hand" that will prevail. you are assuming a chaotic scenerio, where aggressors are free to use physical force. If Government was to do it's proper and only legitimate task of protecting our rights, instead of violating them, then the "invisible hand" of a system based on voluntary exchange (free market) would always work.
- December 30, 2008 at 11:28 am
Interesting debate. What about google or microsoft?
See what I said about patents. What are patents but government granted monopolies?
For the case against intellectual property see Stephan Kinsella, on this site.
Or go here for Michele Boldrin's and David Levine's writings on the subject: http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm
Any big company is always trying to put barriers to avoid the others to enter its kingdom. I would do the same and there is no invisible hand that can avoid that.
The way to avoid it is a less restrictive market without government intervention based on classical liberalism. Governments that have no control over market processes (including money) and are only there to act as enforcers of contracts to protect against fraud.
Or, if you read some of what is on this site, a anarcho-capitalistic society with no state or federal government at all. But to really understand the basics of that takes some reading. (A lot of reading actually.)
About the idea of "liberalism", even Adam Smith wanted to put rules to protect competition and avoid monopolies.
He has some good things to say, but in this case, Adam Smith was wrong. Unfortunately, many people wrongly cite him to be the end all be all of economics.
- December 30, 2008 at 11:31 am
Sorry for double post – I got a submission error the first time and thought it didn't go through.
- December 30, 2008 at 12:08 pm
The high pay of CEO's is because they produce results. The question is HOW do they do this today?
What has changed to cause the higher salaries for CEO's? I maintain it's the ability to get benefits for their companies from government. Since this often requires great skill, there are fewer CEO's that can hit the home run ball and so command the greater salaries.
One can laboriously build up a company, the old fashioned way, by selling things people want, or one can use the force of government to protect your markets and harm your competition.
As in most cases, it's simply supply and demand. Like a gifted baseball player, only a few can hit home runs consistently, and they get paid the most.
In our not-so-free market, only a few CEO's are well enough connected to the politicians to get the regulations written to their benefit over their competition. The average CEO simply works hard to earn his company an honest buck. But like in baseball, if you can cheat, and not get caught, you can make the big bucks.
Using force is the quick way to make a buck. And as long as you don't get caught, crime pays. Crime that's made into law pays the best.
This likely explains the large increase in the ratio of salaries of CEO's to the workforce. After all, if you can sell cars at a loss of $4,000 each, and still stay in business through a few connections, then you're worth a big salary.
- December 30, 2008 at 2:56 pm
One of the things that I love most about Austrian economics is its epistemology; that its epistemology is not empirical in nature and thus not self-refuting. It understands that all reasoning begins with a set of presuppositions and logically deduces conclusions from them, and as long as the assumptions are correct, the conclusions will also be correct—provided the laws of logic were properly used.
What is so interesting about "empirical science" is the lack of epistemological understanding of its adherents. Empiricism cannot prove a single thing to be absolutely true, and its method is a clear example of the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Even worse, empirical scientists don't even realize that their methods have no power whatsoever in value judgments. That is what bothers me about modern "scientists", they use the prestige of science to influence morality, when in science is amoral. The term "intolerable inequality" is a perfect example of such abuse. What is meant by the terms inequality and intolerable? What empirical evidence exists to say inequality is intolerable? Empirical science will never be able to answer that question; and the sad thing is these scientists abuse their position to influence value judgment all the time and the media parrots them.
- December 30, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Excellent article. Such a sad state of affairs that a theorist of the stature of Mr. Samuelson can posit such arguments and be held to no general account for the fallacies contained therein. There seems to be so much confusion and lack of understanding of cause and effect in economics.
Per Mr. Railey's point, this stems in my opinion from a better understanding of epistemology and thus what does and does not constitute "scientific understanding".
- December 30, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Correction: I meant to attribute the widespread confusion in economics as to causes and effects to LACK OF a better understanding of epistemology.
- December 30, 2008 at 3:45 pm
ignorant central government planner here -
I know it's just me, but I don't really see any point to the criticism that is being offered, admittedly without having read Prof. Samuelson's article, though I have read a couple of his books.
Mac: Samuelson cannot be correct because his analysis is not based on a condition of laissez-faire.
Given that no such thing as a perfect absence of economic regulation has ever existed, it appears unworkable to ascribe any value to any observations on the effects of deregulation on income distribution and society.
So, what's the point?
Mac admits that there is no accepted proof that economic deregulation does or does not lead to income inequality. So, there is no proof in existence that Samuelson's observations are just plain wrong.
Prof. Samuelson is weighing in on a recent decade of economic history with perhaps insufficient data to support his conclusion, which the writer claims support Samuelson's own theory of economic justice.
ummmm, what do the Mises people do in this regard? Do they not regularly on this site use recent economic trends to justify their school of economic thought?
And then the little retort that Sarbanes is good for accountants, (or the tax acts are good for lawyers) seems just childish.
I don't think the point is that the people CANNOT accept, or tolerate, greater income inequality under financial deregulation, so much as that people shouldn't have to, and would not, if they had the choice.
We live in an imperfect world.
We debate the consequences of our actions, both before and after they are taken.
There is no doubt that the past years of financial deregulation have resulted in greater income disparity – the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.
Let those who think this is a good thing say why so.
I promise not to comment that there is insufficient data because we never had perfect regulation, or that the comments are only based on preconceived notions about regulation.
- December 30, 2008 at 4:08 pm
"I admit, that i used to think that the theory of the invisible hand was possible, but i don't think it anymore … You cannot hope there will be an invisible hand, that will keep everything properly working. You have to watch the market to avoid unfairness"
Who is to do this watching and who defines what and and is not "fair"? What forces regulate those who regulate? I find the idea that government either self regulates or can be regulated far less plausible than the idea that markets can self regulate. Am I wrong? Please explain why, if you can.
DWM PhD
- December 30, 2008 at 6:31 pm
to eric/joebhed:
i do not believe that ceo productivity alone is responsible for the ballooning executive salaries. just look how the remuneration packages are structured: base salary is typically modest, the huge windfalls have been in option and other equity-payoffs. the massive equity boom driven by the fed's inflation has privileged asset traders (ie ceo's) over mere wage-earners.
so i wouldn't praise ceo's for their productivity, nor would i condemn them for arranging their affairs to maximize benefits (via share buy-backs etc). they take advantage of the monetary disorder, but they do not originate it.
- December 30, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I am curious as to Prof. Samuelson's income, and if he considers his higher-than-average income to be "intolerable."
- December 30, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Good point Bill.
Sorta like how Al gore uses more electricity than dozens of average families.
What the collectivists preach never applies to themselves.
- December 30, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Doctor Mac,
Isn't this just about our opinions of government?
The more or less plausibility of the statement is what is in question.
This is not something that can be proven nor disproven.
The answer is, obviously, it depends.
I suggest we stick with this point for discussion.
You cannot be wrong in believing that the free market can self-regulate.
You have the added advantage of there never having been a free market.
At least not in our lifetimes.
And, for most of us, that is all we know and care about.
That, and the future.
That raises the question of whether government can be regulated, by itself, or by its people.
Of course it can.
We are free, sovereign people with a democratic control of our government.
Under ideal circumstances, it is at least theoretically possible for the people to be in control of their government.
That's all the regulation I need.
The rest is self-governance.
Neither can that opinion be proved wrong.
So, under ideal circumstances, which we have never seen, free markets can self-regulate.
At the same time, under ideal circumstances, those being that the people are actually in control of their government, which we have also never seen, government is capable of self regulation through the will of its free, sovereign people.
So, under all ideal circumstances, why would free markets self regulate, and why is free market self-regulation more plausible than democratic government self-regulation?
as usual, cgph.
- December 30, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Does professor Samuelson think George Bush believes in libertarianism? Bush has increased the size and scope of government immeasurably. Obama will do the same. Both believe more government makes more prosperity. Bush used and Obama will use the power of the presidency to enrich their constituencies. The federal government will grow at the expense of the private citizen. Professor Samuelson has his head in the clouds when he speaks of a limited centrist state. Our constitution was supposed to give us a limited state. Democrats and Republicans have trashed the constitution and made the federal government omnipotent. Left and right are both the same. Neither want balanced budgets or limited government power.
There is no force that will stop the growth of government spending. It will continue until there is total economic collapse. When the government takes more than half of the wealth generated by productive private citizens, why will citizens increase productivity? I am not speaking about the few hundred billionaires heading large corporations. Many of them can be easily replaced without making much difference. I am referring to the innovators and entrepreneurs who are the foundation of American prosperity. The American people, left, right and center, are headed for a long period of self imposed economic decline.
- December 31, 2008 at 6:39 am
"Isn't this just about our opinions of government?
The more or less plausibility of the statement is what is in question. This is not something that can be proven nor disproven"
Economics tells us much about the relative merits of private and public sector institutions. On the theory side there is little reason to expect government to outperform the market in matters of commerce. It is easy to show that markets fall short of perfection (i.e. imperfect competition, imperfect information), but public institutions have far more serious problems (i.e. collective action failures, political ignorance, undifined collective preferences).
On the history/data side there are good examples of private and public sector institutions to compare and contrast. Contrary to what CGPH wrote there is enough variation between different nations and different time periods to look for clues from data. See economic freedom indexes
- December 31, 2008 at 8:02 am
joebhed, everyone's entitled to their opinions, including Dr. Samuelson, IF he states that he is making an opinion, and not a fact of economic science. Instead he's claiming as an economist that something is wrong without sufficient proof. At best, he's being misleading. He either needs to label his opinions as opinions, or he needs to make a better case for his argument.
- December 31, 2008 at 9:26 am
This was not an economics textbook nor a classroom lecture.
This was an opinion piece in Der Spiegel.
Several other financial/economics experts also expressed their opinions.
Economist may, and do, have opinions.
There is always room for making a better case for his argument.
"contrary to what cgph wrote…."
Actually, what I wrote, is what you wrote.
There are endless volumes of time and locationally differentiated facts and data available, but, as you said, there is no proof of any general conclusion.
Thus, there is only opinion.
I repeat my question:
Why would free markets self-regulate (corollary – why haven't they?), and why isn't government capable of being well-governed?
In particular, as to your earlier comment, why is the latter "far less plausible" than the former?
I have never said, and I have never thought, there was any "reason to expect government to outperform the market in matters of commerce."
But, in truth, the performance of the imperfectly free markets we have now leave me with little confidence that even greater market freedoms during the period of Prof. Samuelson's observations would have resulted in a better outcome than we now observe.
- December 31, 2008 at 9:34 am
This was an opinion piece in Der Spiegel.
You're quite right. My apologies.
- December 31, 2008 at 10:47 am
Why would free markets self-regulate (corollary – why haven't they?), and why isn't government capable of being well-governed?"
The answer is, they have self-regulated. Look at economic history. In the past, there have been single industries that have been without government regulation and their markets worked very well. Any time problems have arisen, it is, an overwhelming majority of the time, due to government intervention.
So why have they? Because it is in their best interest to do so. The competition and profit motive are very powerful and keep individuals and firms in check. Also, if you are a firm routinely engaged in fraud or theft, in addition to the legal troubles, soon no one will work with you and you will be without income.
The less restricted the market, the more participants and therefore more competition. The more competition, the better the service/product between single providers, as it is in each firm/individual's best interest to provide value or otherwise lose income to other competitors. This is what keeps markets in check.
Why isn't government capable of being well-governed?
Because the very nature of it is based on coercion. Most in politicians know this. That's why they became politicians in the first place. Sure, there might be a few genuine believers here and there, but for the most part, the majority are there to enrich themselves at the expense of others.
Calling the current situation the fault of capitalism and unregulated markets is akin to George Bush getting on an aircraft carrier and proclaiming "Mission Accomplished." It is a statement that is either a total lie or delusionally misinformed.
Even if you agreed with everyone here that the markets were, in fact, severely restricted, that does not mean that unrestricted markets would perform the same at all.
Let's do a thought experiment.
Consider the english language. It has been hammered out over centuries. There are many accents, dialects, local vocabularies and strains, but generally, they are understood by all who speak it. This is an example of free exchange. People, of their own free will, engaging in converse. Over the many years of that process, what we call english has been created.
Say there was a government agency that regulated how people spoke english. There was a mandate that only 10 words could be spoken per sentence, that there was to be a standard vocal pitch to be used by all, that certain word combinations were illegal and the rate of speed people spoke was slower by half. Say this agency, also decided that 30% of the existing vocabulary was inefficient and decreed those words were now against the law.
Would the subsequent english, which would be horrible, stunted and hard to use, be an example of why english is terrible and needs more regulation?
I realize my thought experiment is a bit dramatic but I think it illustrates my point.
How do we know what would happen in an unregulated market? We know based on logical common sense and the historical precedents I mentioned previously.
- December 31, 2008 at 11:21 am
Joebhed: "Why would free markets self-regulate (corollary – why haven't they?)…"
As Adam Smith wrote, the baker and cobbler don't produce bread and shoes out of the goodness of their hearts and love for mankind. They do it because it's in their best interest to do so if they want to make a living for their families. The free market punishes greed, laziness, fraud and many other societal evils. Sustainable develop takes place when all lending comes from savings. Savings acts as the regulator of how quickly the economy grows. It quits working that way when the state steps in to enforce its own sense of morality. Booms and busts happen when the state tries to speed up economic growth by artificially increasing the money supply above the amount supplied by savings.
Joebhed: "…and why isn't government capable of being well-governed?â€
You would have to read public choice literature to get the full answer, but in brief the state in not capable of being well-governed because of the mismatch between goals and incentives. The incentives in politics are the opposite of those in the market. The market pays people to supply good service and quality goods at a reasonable price and it pays well. Politics doesn't pay politicians for doing well; they get their regular salary and that's it. But being a corrupt politician pays extremely well. That's why the major campaign contributors determine policy.
- December 31, 2008 at 12:09 pm
"Actually, what I wrote, is what you wrote"
Actually, I quoted you, and then disagreed. Available theory and evidence indicate that marekts outperform government. This is not mere opinion, but the product of carefully reasoned theoretical and empirical study.
"the performance of the imperfectly free markets we have now leave me with little confidence…"
We do not have free markets, and the Federal Government has its fingerprints all over this crisis. The case for government failure is therefore stronger than ever. The massive failures of the Federal Reserve and other authorities leading into and during this crisis go further to prove the incapability of government regulation in improving economic conditions.
- December 31, 2008 at 12:10 pm
I agree with Eric. Take the cases of Bear Stearns and Lehman, both bankrupt. In the first case CEO James Cayne decided that the best course of action was to kiss Hank Paulsen's ass. Bear was sold to JP and he walked away with $50 million, and the shareholders got about $4 a share. John Fuld was not prepared to Kow Tow and as a result Lehman was allowed to fail, and the shareholders got nothing.
I think Newson has it spot on. Also, do not forget that it was Bill Clinton who decided that it was a good idea to link CEO pay to performance. This led to formulaic compensation packages linked to stock prices. Also, the multi-million dollar bonuses paid to traders are also a "percentage of the action". The big criticism of these pay outs is that they are "free options". They give a huge payout when things go well and nothing when things go bad. However, they are usually structured so that the payouts on a five year deal are paid out year by year, so that there is always a huge up-front payout in the early years. This payout does not get returned when the deals go sour in later years.
- December 31, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Last post.
Ok. Ok. Ok.
Markets outperform government in commerce.
I still don't see the significance of this statement.
In order to "outperform", there must be competition in performance.
So, I just don't get the significance of this point.
I thought we were discussing the preponderance of the evidence that it was far less plausible that governments can be regulated(managed) as opposed to free markets self-regulating.
And, I repeat, I never said government outperforms markets – in commerce.
So, we're going somewhat in circles.
And I'll get off here.
You say the government has its fingers all over this crisis.
Ummm, yeah, in so far as it failed to prevent the crisis by first placing the free-market capitalists in charge of the nation's money supply(FED), and then by failing to regulate the operation of the money system to meet the needs of the country and its people.
So, I am a big believer in the failures of government, and would maybe put it differently in that the government failure was to not have its fingerprints all over this crisis.
I noticed, but haven't fully read, a recent Misesblog posting clarifying Greenspan's idiotic deregulated free-market philosophy being responsible for the crisis.
For some reason, Austros conflagrate the private banking cartel known as the FED as being the federal government, but it is not.
That is not just my opinion.
That is the finding of every court case in which the FED's independence has been an issue.
And it is today, (Bloomberg v. FED) in that the FED says it does not need to provide information on its brokeback loans to everybody in the world because it is not subject to the USFOIA as it is not part of the government.
So, the notion that the FED's failures reflect on the GOVUS is not something that gets any traction, to my way of thinking.
Ever upward.
- December 31, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Samuelson doesn't like inequality. This makes him a Marxist ideologist, not a scientist. Science begins in observation of the concrete,material universe and logically induces from there to a rationally systematic understanding. Science does not begin in arbitrary ideals. See Aristotle and Rand, not Plato, Kant and Popper.
- December 31, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Could the FED do what it did without government backing? It's only a cartel because the government gave it such powers. Therefore, it is essentially a government entity.
- January 1, 2009 at 6:07 am
The Federal Reserve Bank was created by an act of congress in 1913. It has legal-Federal granted monopoly on creating new bank reserves of dollars. You will not find shares of FRB stock on any exchange, so its stock price is undefined. Actual control of monetary policy lies with the Federal Reserve Chairman and the Federal Reserve Board, and these persons are presidential appointees. Member banks cannot select or remove these persosns, so control over total bank reserves is a matter of government policy set by government appointees.
The Fed is organized to look like a corporation, but it is not a private agency, especially where monetary policy is concerned. As for Greenspan being a free marketeer, he set price controls in credit markets (i.e. interest rates) as Fed Chairman. This is what financed the subprime boom. This talk of free markets and deregulation in recent years simply is not true. Only the Congress and President can repeal federal regulations, and Bush signed a grand total of zero acts of deregulation in to law.
Greenspan lacked authority to pass deregulation. Grenspan did control certain short run interest rates. He also influenced long term rates. This is not what I call a free market. This is government regulation, and it has failed.
DWM PhD
- January 1, 2009 at 9:53 pm
It was going to be my last post, but now we are on the FED. Sorry.
"You will not find shares of FRB stock on any exchange, so its stock price is undefined.â€
Please. More private corporations exist that are not traded on any exchange than are traded on ALL exchanges. Its stock price is irrelevant, even to its membership.
For some reason, you didn't say that the FED was not a private corporation of private corporations.
It is a self-serving, private, money-creating cartel answerable to no one but itself.
As I said, and which you ignored, in every legal case it has been established that the Federal Reserve Banking System is a private system and is not part of the government.
Those "quasi†government qualities are the things that make people think that it is part of the government, but it is not.
Yes, it was created by the government, an act that proves that the powers that were conveyed to the private banking cartel resided with the government and the sovereign people of this country.
The FED is not part of the government. When it comes to the money power, the FED has usurped the government.
"control over total bank reserves is a matter of government policy set by government appointees.â€
In fact, control of total bank reserves is a matter of a select group of private bankers who, under the Act, are given the broadest task of managing price stability and full employment in the American economy.
Of course this same group of private bankers are the folks that nominate people to be appointed to the positions on their Board. The terms of appointed Board Members exceed any Congressional, Senatorial or Presidential terms.
Your choice, Senator: Larry, Curly or Mo.
All Federal Reserve Bank employees are not federal employees.
The private Federal Reserve Banking corporations are NOT part of the federal government.
I know it's convenient, though incorrect, to equate the FED with the government simply because the FED bankers issue what are referred to as US dollars. But which, upon closer inspection, are Federal Reserve Notes.
"Greenspan lacked authority to pass deregulation.â€
Please, have a little respect. We understand the role of the FED Chair well enough. As I said, being in charge of the overall economy means it is your job to recommend the proper policy to accomplish the very broad objectives under the Act.
To not have the correct policies is the definition of Greenspan's failure.
Greenspan advocated greater freedom and innovation, which came about through the actions of Clinton and Gramm to "deregulate" the separations of businesses by banks and the maintenance of a sustainable capital structure within the financial services industry.
That was only one aspect of the deregulation of financial services, i.e. a freeing of the capital markets. Am I correct that you expect people to believe that GREATER deregulation of all financial services is what is going to restore confidence in the economy and our political processes.
I'm sorry, but to me, this is where the faith in the invisible hand goes blind.
"This talk of free markets and deregulation in recent years is not trueâ€.
Dear Dr. D.: Trading in energy futures, at the CFTC, or the trading in financial exotica mostly under the SIV rubric, in the financial/credit markets, and many other future-derived examples, represent not only the deregulation of the financial services industry, but also a move to self-regulation of that industry.
If it gets any freer than self-regulation with other people's money, give me a call.
The Federal Reserve Banking System is a private banking cartel, established through immense political pressure brought about by the banking interests in this country. I thought this was something that libertarians agreed with.
- January 2, 2009 at 7:49 am
1. The Federal reserve Board effectively controls open market operations, and this board consists of presidential appointees. Ben Bernanke is the key figure in determining changes in bank reserves through open market operations. This is a well established fact that proves my point that Federal reserve policy is removed from the market test. The powers that be (mainly Bernanke) at the Fed cannot be installed or removed by the alleged private owners of the Fed. So bank reserves are determined by political appointees- 7 out of 12 members of the Federal Open Market Committee, including the chair and vice chair. If you do not understand these simple facts, then you should give up trying to understand these issues.
2. To say simply that judges have ruled that the Fed is private is argument by authority, which is a classic fallacy. I am not going to accept this proposition uncritically. Judges are fallable and seldom understand economics. How do they justify this claim that the Fed is private? Where is their proof? The fact remains that Bernanke and his Board cannot be removed by member banks, and there is no possibility of a takeover through the market.
3. There is no clear reason to expect the Gramm-Clinton deregulation to create a housing bubble. Some on the left have actually pointed to the Carter-Reagan deregulation as the source of these problems! You are mired in the Post Hoc Fallacy, plain and simple. Explain a causal connection or give up.
4. There are very clear reasons to expect the agrressive enforcement of the Commnity Reinvestment Act by Andrew Cuomo and his successors to create bias towards an unsustainable housing boom. You would be correct that I see greater deregulation, specifically an end to the CRA, as key to restoring financial stability. Both Clinton and Bush promoted an 'ownership society' whereby banks were pressured to extend mortages to persons who were bad risks. I suppose you could argue that banks would have given out risky mortages anyway, because they love risk and abhor profits. You could also blame this on trilaterlalists in black helicopters or on space aliens.
- January 2, 2009 at 8:41 am
We've been over this before, but you just don't want to admit it. The Fed is "private" organization, all right, but one that has been granted a government-enforced monopoly that would not and could not exist in a free market. My local electric and gas companies have similar monopolies, but on a smaller scale. I agree that my electric company is not a government entity, but due to the monopoly privilege, it is still a government-protected entity, just as the Fed is.
Yes, they could pass another law and end the monopoly, or more likely, simply give that monopoly back to the U.S. Treasury, but the problem, as we've pointed out before, is not that the power is in private hands, but that the power is a monopoly power. If the Treasury were exercising that power, there's no reason to believe they would do better than the Fed, and if anything, the Treasury would be more susceptible to the desires of the political administration, not less so. Then the business cycle would most likely be timed to the election cycle, as presidents jockey to "fix the economy" in time for re-election and pass off the bust to the next president.
As for the "deregulation", any such deregulation was a series of government actions, with government backing and support if things go wrong, not the result of a free market. In a free market, freedom and responsibility go hand-in-hand. A business that makes bad business decisions suffers losses and has to decide to revise their business policies or risk going out of business. A business that can socialize their losses onto taxpayers or other entities obviously has to worry less about profitability and more about currying political favor.
- January 2, 2009 at 8:57 am
a very funny "private" company indeed, one that devolves all net earnings to treasury; where all board members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.
if something quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and swims like a duck, chances are it is a duck.
- January 2, 2009 at 9:40 am
Michael A. Clem: The Fed is not private. It is public.
DW MacKenzie and newson gave examples as to why this is true.
Just consider it another government bureau that is secretive and rarely answers for its mistakes (think SEC, IRS, DOD, DEA, ATF, CIA, etc.)
- January 2, 2009 at 10:16 am
"Then the business cycle would most likely be timed to the election cycle, as presidents jockey to "fix the economy" in time for re-election and pass off the bust to the next president"
Alberto Alesina (Harvard U) published a book demostrating that the business cycle does follow the election cycle. Why? Because monetary policy is determined by presidential appointees.
This is why I often find it hard to take the left seriously. You guys keep insisting that the Fed is private despite evidence to the contrary, and desptite your own inability to provide valid evidence of your own.
Bernake and his board are Presidential appointees. They control the monetary base and strongly influence total bank reserves. These are objective facts, and should not be debated. You are in denial of reality.
- January 2, 2009 at 2:04 pm
To Dr. D.
Let's be realistic.
Neither of us can prove the negative. Let's keep that in mind.
The appointments again.
To paraphrase baron Rothchild: 'Allow me to create and control the nation's money, and I care not who makes the laws governing appointments.'
All of the members of the Board and FOMC are private bankers, plain and simple, who have moved up through the ranks.
We agree on who sets bank reserves policies, those noble appointees.
But I thought we also agreed that the whole fractional RESERVE system was fallacious, inherently inflationary and should be outlawed.
No. 2
Ummm – the classic fallacy of argument by authority? it is because it is.
We are talking about whether the FED is part of the government, which is a legal authority question. In several final legal decisions, the findings of the courts, interestingly enough, is that the government does not exercise legal control of the federal reserve banks. For instance:
"Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation…, whether the government is involved in the entity's finances…. and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States… Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.†(Lewis v. US)
"It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks..â€
".. the Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks. Unlike typical federal agencies, each bank is empowered to hire and fire employees at will. Bank employees do not participate in the Civil Service Retirement System. They are covered by worker's compensation insurance, purchased by the Bank, rather than the Federal Employees Compensation Act. Employees traveling on Bank business are not subject to federal travel regulations and do not receive government employee discounts on lodging and services.â€
"The Banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations under 31 U.S.C. § 846 nor as "mixed ownership" corporations under 31 U.S.C. § 856, … For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgment of the district court.â€
Please excuse me for relying on legal authority to determine a legal question.
Gramm-Clinton deregulation and the financial services bust.
I never mentioned the housing bubble – it's just another sympton.
The failure was the establishment of the 'B' in MBS.
That 'backing†was exactly the financial innovation that Greenspan blessed as the basis for our newfound prosperity. The mixture of real mortgages with junk bonds. The creativity of deregulated financial services. Again, I thought we agreed on that crap.
I am ultimately disappointed that your discussion resorts to hang the financial crisis on the CRA, that ludicrous charge being refuted by another Mises blogger as we speak. I think you know perfectly well that the reason bankers lent funds for these risky mortgages was because everyone else in the deregulated financial services industry was doing it, and no CEO was going to miss out on getting the 'points' and the fees for rolling this fiasco a little further down the road. Jeezum crow.
- January 2, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Michael –
Para 1
Let's see. You agree, at least, that the FED is a private banking cartel – not part of the government, but operating as a financial monopoly with the power to indebt the American people by creating all money as a debt, repayable with interest, which it does not create.
To me, THAT is the problem.
If you do not refer to your monopolistic investor-owned electric utility as the government, why do so with the FED?
I think we agree that we want to end that monopolistic power – abolish the FED.
Para 2
After agreeing we could turn over monetary policy to the Treasury, for some reason there is no consideration given to the fact that, and I thought we agreed on this, the Treasury would be operating strictly as a money-issue agency, and not under a fractional-reserve bank lending system. As Friedman opined, properly operating under a strict quantity-theory based issue system, we could remove the ability of the government to have either congressional or presidential influenced money expansion policies, and their boom-bust cycles.
Para 3
I don't disagree. I never said the banking or financial services industry was a free-market. It is all regulated to provide protections for consumers of those services. As it is in the rest of the world. As long as it is legal for people to collectively organize their political power, I am convinced that if there were zero regulation in financial services, there would soon be a call for, and there would soon be, a resort to financial regulation.
We both have the advantage that there has never been a free market here, but that's my opinion.
- January 2, 2009 at 2:51 pm
…the Treasury would be operating strictly as a money-issue agency, and not under a fractional-reserve bank lending system. As Friedman opined, properly operating under a strict quantity-theory based issue system, we could remove the ability of the government to have either congressional or presidential influenced money expansion policies, and their boom-bust cycles.
I fail to see why the Treasury would operate on such a strict system, or how they could be held accountable to it. Nor do I see how giving this power to the Treasury would end fractional reserve banking. It seems to me that that's an issue separate from the actual issuing of money.
Furthermore, the Treasury would still need a mechanism for introducing new money into the economy, and it would most likely be something similar to what the Fed does. So how does that solve anything?
The government couldn't be stopped from creating the Fed, so why should we expect that a purely government bureaucracy is going to be more controllable, more restricted?
- January 2, 2009 at 3:57 pm
1. This is really absurd. Ben Bernanke was an economics professor at Princeton prior to his appointment as Fed chair (and the FOMC). He was not a private banker. Rice was at Berkely and Cornell, Krozner was a the U of C, and the NBER… So your contention that they are from the banking community is not generally true. Volcker was once employed by Citibank, but only a conspiracy theorist would attribute significance to this fact.
2. Your evidence- "It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks".
All this means is that the president appoints a board to manage daily changes in reserves. Benanke does not answer to private bankers. Obama will decide if he gets another term. You do not understand your own evidence.
3. Any competent bank CEO would steer clear of highly leveraged loans from risky borrowers. Arnold Kling was at Freddie Mac and he traces the practice of accepting highly leveraged loans there. Your use of the term ludicrous with respect to the CRA is an empty and unsupported assertion.
- January 2, 2009 at 3:58 pm
1. This is really absurd. Ben Bernanke was an economics professor at Princeton prior to his appointment as Fed chair (and the FOMC). He was not a private banker. Rice was at Berkely and Cornell, Krozner was a the U of C, and the NBER… So your contention that they are from the banking community is not generally true. Volcker was once employed by Citibank, but only a conspiracy theorist would attribute significance to this fact.
2. Your evidence- "It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks".
All this means is that the president appoints a board to manage daily changes in reserves. Benanke does not answer to private bankers. Obama will decide if he gets another term. You do not understand your own evidence.
3. Any competent bank CEO would steer clear of highly leveraged loans from risky borrowers. Arnold Kling was at Freddie Mac and he traces the practice of accepting highly leveraged loans there. Your use of the term ludicrous with respect to the CRA is an empty and unsupported assertion.
- January 4, 2009 at 8:00 am
end of discussion.
- January 4, 2009 at 11:27 am
The thrift council does not determine open market operations. It merely advises The Board of Governors on the needs of the thrift industry. You are making a fool of yourself.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Previous post: So this is how things work
Next post: Uncivil War: Detroit Blames the South


text:
New Times' Best of Miami 2013 issue arrives June 13. To celebrate, Short Order is serving up the top 30 tastemakers in the 305. These people have helped shape the Miami food scene into what it is today. We began with number 30 and will lead up to the county's number one. A Q&A session is included in ... More >>
Thousands of superheros, vampires, zombies, and sexy pirates walked Lincoln Road last night for Miami's biggest Halloween celebration. Restaurants were decked out in black streamers and spider webs, with some putting skeletons in charge of the hostess stands. Not an empty table could be found, as de ... More >>
Chef Ze Carlos Jimenez was behind the burner last evening as we walked into The MexZican Gourmet in South Miami last evening around 9 p.m.Still too cold to sit at one of the outside tables, we walked inside. The small, candlelit space is painted in citrus color and decorated with Mexican folk art ... More >>
As Lee Klein reported earlier today, chef Norman Van Aken's new restaurant, Norman's 180, will open in Coral Gables tonight. It's a homecoming of sorts for Van Aken, whose return to the neighborhood has been highly anticipated. And he's very happy to be back. Short Order got a peek of the restaur ... More >>
The divine Ms. Amos is back and bringing her sinful attractions to the Fillmore Miami Beach.
Riptide has been noticing lots of weird little trends during Basel week. Which is quite easy considering the sheer amount of art gracing the city right now. The real feat would be finding a piece so unique it is essentially peerless. But the artists responsible for the latest trend we've noticed cle ... More >>
Pay the green for Silents, Please!
Jacob Katel Donna Sdraiata, Fernando Botero StreetWorks is usually a graffiti blog. Starting today, as long as I'm shooting, it'll document all forms of publicly displayed art, from the gutter to the gallery. With that in mind, this week's feature is the Gary Nader Sculpture Park featuring bronze ... More >>
Celebrate Cinco de MiMo all along Biscayne!
The images of "Lente Latino" linger, but the show won't.
Eduardo Michaelsen paints in obscurity far from his Cuban roots
The tale of a lion killer, million-dollar art, and a fat priest
Current shows
Meet the wise and wonderful Astrid Hadad
Actors' Playhouse serves up a five-course feast
When it comes to good alternative fusion, funk and Latin go hand in hand
Tangled tale of intrigue unfolds at the Frost
The festival disappoints slightly, MIAMIntelligence tanks, Aquabooty continues to rock
Dont be a handsome woman
Presidential advisor Karen Hughes draws a crowd at Books & Books, a very, very divided crowd
Down-to-earth vocalist Lila Downs is a rising star on the world music scene
Casa de los Babys (Hybrid)
Save on style at Luminaire
Hollywood's hits fill Havana's movie theaters. Just don't ask how they got there.
On location with Lil Jon, Trick, hootchies, and director mamas
Whew, what a fair
Julie Taymor and Salma Hayek paint a spectacular portrait of Frida Kahlo
Oh, that bluesy, jazzy, Oaxacan sound of Lila Downs
Holiday Gift Guide 2001
Renée Zellweger and Morgan Freeman stalk their dreams in Nurse Betty
The story of jazz and its men sounds right

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Architects in Bangalore witness churn with steady growth in realtyNov 23, 2012, 07:04PM IST
Featured Today
With Bangalore experiencing steady growth in realty in the high-end and customised constructions segment, the architect community is witnessing dramatic changes. With developers cashing in on galloping real estate creations in gated communities and sustainable homes a new buzz word, architects, with exclusive skills have come to be much in demand.
Salaries have jumped almost three times in the last one year for architects. This has been especially true for those who have specialised in areas like sustainable construction, innovative technologies and performance tools for green buildings. This in spite of the fact that some of them have little work experience
"I have hired two architects fresh out of college, with very little work experience, for a salary that I would normally have paid to someone with over ten years experience, primarily because they are familiar with advanced solutions like Microstation which the market today requires," said Abhinav Manjappa, of Custcreat Architecture Consultancy.
Complicating the market further is rampant poaching within the community with attractive salary hikes.
"The market has witnessed a sudden demand for architects even with a few years experience. Several senior personnel from mid-level architectural firms have been approached by leading MNCs with tempting offers that are difficult to match," claims Manjappa.
Specialised architectural firms like Srishti Group and Meubels have had close calls wherein they almost lost some of their key personnel mid-project. To offset this trend several players have come up with incentive schemes.
"The growing pains of Indian architectural and consultancy firms in the past and the global scenario with changes experienced in many markets around the world in similar boom cycles has trained us well," observes R Jyostna of Meubel Architects and Developers, who focuses on sustainable constructions. "We have introduced a scheme in our office wherein junior architects get paid incentives every time they bring to the table innovative cost saving construction or methodologies, like air-circulation technology to substitute for air conditioning, which is a huge cost saver."
Clearly the days of the designer-architects has arrived.
Kanchana Dwarakanath, MagicBricks.com Bureau


text:
Financial Aid
Looking for some financial help to make it through college? More than 50 percent of students who attend RCC receive some sort of financial aid. Many are first-generation college students balancing a job, family life, and education. Rogue Central provides you with information and assistance when applying for financial aid including grants, loans, scholarships and part-time employment at RCC.
Stop by the Rogue Central Service offices and use this website to find the answers to your financial aid questions.
Applying For Financial Aid
All About Financial Aid
Managing My Aid
- Satisfactory academic progress
(scroll to alphabetical listing)
- Dual enrollment
- Buying your books
- Payments to Students


text:
GPLv2 or later
Paid Download
10 October 2013
• Gridsearch empowers every Joomla site with an ultra fast and highly customizable search function.
Editor's Note
- This extension requires registration to download.
• Fluid presentation: Results are presented in the main content container with beautiful styles.
• Animated preview result box
• Highly customizable: There are more than 100.000 animation and style variations possible.
• Integrated: Gridsearch integrates perfectly into every Joomla site.
• Instant response: All searches are done in the browser for ultra fast results.
• Relevancy badge
• 8 Predefined Layouts
• 22 In and Out Animation Types
• Works with mobile devices
• Interactive setup wizard
• Detailed installation instructions


text:
Because who doesn't love a good quickie?
We had some impressive flooding on my block (fortunately no property damage), and Chez Weebles lost power for a week. My blog got pretty soggy, but after running it through the clothes dryer a few times I think it's finally dry. I'll be putting up a proper post once I iron it, because it's hard to type when it's all wrinkled.
Missed you all so much!


text:
Last updated on January 30, 2010 at 9:00 am EDT by in5d Alternative News
* Click HERE to visit our Official Facebook page and be sure to "Like" us!!! (opens in a new window)
* Also visit in5D Connection where you can find your soul mate or join one of our amazing groups. EVERYONE is welcome!
by Gregg Prescott, M.S.
In spiritual and metaphysical conversations, many people are talking about 5d Earth and whether people will get left behind or not. This speculation has caused great controversy among many people within these fields and this article will most likely continue the speculation.
Past life regression hypnotherapist, Dolores Cannon, has received messages from entities, through her clients, about what we can expect as we near the mysterious Mayan calendar end date of December 21, 2012.
Below is an excerpt from her book, Convoluted Universe series, volume II:
According to Cannon, some people will get left behind if they are "still into the negativity", yet Cannon added that you only need to be at least 51% positive make the shift. Cannon additionally stated those who get left behind will "be left with what they created. They'll stay there. They'll work out their karma there. They won't move into the new Earth."
Cannon's message resonates with information from the Law of One, which also states that one needs to be at least 51% "orientation towards service to others" to be part of the 'harvest'.
According to Ra, you do not need to understand the Law of One or have an esoteric or metaphysical knowledge in order to ascend.
In short, no one will get left behind, even nefarious people such as Hitler, Mussolini and every other world leader who has worked against the best interests of humanity. It will just take them a lot longer (and many, many more lifetimes) to reach their next level of spirituality.
Your spiritual journey is exactly that: a journey of spiritual growth. Each time we incarnate, we come to learn specific lessons or to pay back karma from a previous lifetime. Whether we are part of a shift into a different dimension or not is irrelative, because in this writer's opinion, we will all get there eventually. It's only a matter of time, and time is just the blink of an eye in the scope of eternity.
When you are a "service to others" person, you are helping to make this world a better place for all of us! Being a "service to others" person doesn't necessarily mean you have to own a website and a 170-plus videos on YouTube that help other people. It could be as simple as being an introverted empath who absorbs other people's energies. Or it might be a quiet person who brings an amazingly positive energy and simply "exists" without much fanfare or notice. You could be a healer, a tarot card reader or just someone who thinks positive thoughts for other people which could be as simple as mentally telling oncoming traffic, "I love you". All thoughts are energy and are recorded into your Akashic record!
The date of December 21 2012 is irrelevant. It is possible that this shift might happen before December 21st, 2012 or after that date...or not at all. Right NOW is the only time that matters. Everything else will fall into place. In the meanwhile, pay attention to what is going on around you and how it's inevitably tied into the cycles of time, but most importantly, enjoy the ride!
About the Author:
Gregg Prescott, M.S. is the founder and editor of In5D and BodyMindSoulSpirit. He hosts a weekly spiritual show on In5D Radio and promotes spiritual, metaphysical and esoteric conferences in the United States through In5dEvents. Gregg is currently working in collaboration with Michelle Walling, CHLC, in opening a holistic walk-in clinic called Alternative Holistic Healthcare (AHH) in Sarasota, FL with subsequent subsidiaries around the world based upon this model.
Copyright Information: Copyright in5d and Gregg Prescott, M.S.. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in any form.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. in5d.com is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. in5d.com assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.


text:
Weather Links
Humidity 97%
Winds 5.8mph
Sponsored by: Arceneaux Ford
Humidity 97%
Winds 5.8mph
Nov 6, 2012 7:27 PM by Kristen Holloway
Two hours until the polls close in Louisiana where we are watching several close races. Long voting lines seem to be trending across the country. As well as frustrated voters who find out they're waiting in the wrong line hours into their wait. Polling places in Acadiana were no different.
Voters said this is the biggest voter turnout they've ever seen.
"I did want to leave for a second, but then I was like, I waited over an hour already I'm not going to leave then come back," said Lafayette Voter Maisie Racca.
Edgar Martin Middle School had about a two hour wait throughout the day and voters at Ossun Elementary waited up to an hour and 30 minutes.
"It didn't matter how long I would have to wait because once again, I'm here to exercise my right to vote," Lafayette Voter Matthew Narcissee.
Adding to the long wait frustration at some polling sites, over unclear instructions on where voters were supposed to go.
"There is a lot of people who couldn't see the sign on the door and they were standing in the wrong line and they were pretty frustrated once they found out that they were standing in the wrong line," Lafayette Voter Conrad Simoneaux.
The lines could have been longer. Remember a record number of Louisiana voters cast their ballots early, nearly 280,000 votes were taken last week.
That includes 7% of voters in Lafayette Parish alone.
1 day ago


text:
Deloitte Valuation Services professionals are drawn from a multitude of backgrounds and are able to navigate the barriers of time, language, currency and culture to serve our clients. With 44 partners and nearly 600 staff members around the world, we combine an integrated global approach with extensive industry experience and local knowledge to address the complex needs of our clients.
Our primary Valuation Services include:


text:
Main Content
You are a proud member of the El Tri fan community. All of Mexico loves soccer, especially the national football team. Show off the La Verde with the adidas Mexico Tri-Color T-shirt. It features an embroidered team crest on the left chest, a set-in contrast panel on the front and sewn-on white stripes down the back for the ultimate display of Mexican pride. You are devoted to your football club and you can wear their colors to display it!
- 60% Cotton/40% Polyester
- Contrast color accents
- Embroidered twill applique logo
- Imported
- Officially licensed
- Set-in contrast panel on chest
- Sewn-on stripes on back
Mexico Customers also liked:
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
You are here: Home :: Forum Home :: Forums :: Community Discussion :: Thread
Employed for generating sails, group tents, marquees, rucksacks, along with other capabilities exactly where Beats By Dre Tour
sturdiness is elementary, structure is an extremely heavy-duty plain-woven statistics. Stock utilization comes with all kinds of other goods, stretched artwork floors right away springs to sapience, to this day textile bags as properly as footwear is additionally considered to be very hot. The fashion 12 months apropos Beats Dr Dre
This year is no different, and that we embody decided that the pursuing fabric boots are the best selling and so far this pep up:A separate. UGG Lo Pro Button: The stuff of the start is to the nth degree Beats Dr Dre
feeble along with important, the shoes or boots may suffer quite narrower as compared to additional goods from Ugg boot Sydney.


text:
The pilot reported that shortly after takeoff, while in a climb configuration, the airplane's engine began to lose manifold pressure and engine RPM. Concurrent with the loss of engine power, the pilot noted a loss of oil pressure and elected to land the airplane, off-airport, in a wooded area. Post accident examination of the engine revealed that the distal end of the number 5 piston pin was fractured. Further examination revealed that the inner aluminum piston pin insert fractured-off just inboard of where the pin begins to taper outward. The fracture face was flat and perpendicular to the outer surface of the steel housing. Both fracture surfaces (inner and outer) sustained extensive smearing type damage and metal loss so significant that an analysis of the fracture surfaces could not be completed. Heavy scoring was noted to the wall of the number five cylinder assembly and piston. Extensive mechanical damage was observed to the relief area of the piston. The bottom piston ring was seized in place. Removal and examination of the oil sump revealed that the sump contained oil, as well as a large amount of metallic type particles. The oil pickup tube and screen was intact and also contained a significant amount of metallic like particles similar to the material found in the oil sump. The amount of metallic particles in the pickup tube and screen was sufficient enough to restrict the oil flow passage. The metallic particles were non-magnetic.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
Index for Feb2005 | Index of months


text:
Wayne Rooney is raring to go in England's World Cup opener against Italy and revealed Manchester United team-mate Danny Welbeck will be fit for Saturday's encounter.
The United no.10 fielded questions about his colleague, after Welbeck missed training on Wednesday, before explaining why he feels the squad is in better shape than at any time since he exploded onto the international scene.
"Danny will be fine," Rooney told reporters. "I'm sure he will be ready for Saturday. He was just not risking anything in training today. He'll train on Friday and be available, I'm sure.
"The target is to win the tournament. That's what we've prepared ourselves to do. It's obviously a different set-up this time around but, ultimately, the goal is the same - to try to be successful.
"The younger players are bringing a lot of energy and excitement to the team. It's the best squad of players I've been involved with since I've been with England. It's great to be part of and the future for England certainly looks bright.
"I feel 100 per cent fit and ready for this tournament. I'll give everything I can to try to help the team. There is so much ability in the side, it's a joy to be part of. I feel I've still got a massive role to play in this team and I want to do that. I think we can all be really excited."
More: Kagawa: I'm relaxed for Brazil | Nani sparkles for Portugal


text:
Friday, 04 June 2010 00:00
The Citibank located on North Broadway in Hicksville was robbed shortly after 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 1, and according to detectives, the suspect appeared to match a description of an individual who committed a similar robbery less than one week ago in Massapequa.
Detectives stated that the suspect entered the bank, which at the time contained nine employees and six customers, and showed a teller a note demanding money. The suspect then fled the bank via bicycle headed northbound on North Broadway with an unknown amount of money. No injuries were reported at the scene.
The suspect, according to detectives, is described as a white male in his 30s, approximately 6' with a medium build wearing a faded baseball cap and an orange and white long-sleeved shirt and jeans.
Detectives ask anyone with information regarding the crime or the suspect to call Crime Stoppers at 1-800-244-TIPS. All callers will remain anonymous.


text:
this wiki
The basic abilities triggered while under the effects of Momentum are limited. For melee, only Slice, Dismember, Punish and Sever apparently have a chance of being randomly performed. For ranged, Piercing Shot, Binding Shot, Dazing Shot and Fragmentation Shot are randomly performed. For mage, it appears that only Impact, Wrack, Sonic Wave and Combust are randomly used. The damage of random abilities are not boosted. In addition, any basic abilities in melee or ranged that you meet the requirements for can also be randomly performed. For example, dual wielding two swords enables you to use the ability Havoc. It is worth noting that Momentum will not trigger any basic defence abilities such as Resonance or Anticipate even if a shield is equipped, regardless of combat style.
Momentum was added to the game during the beta stage of the Evolution of Combat in a response to players' need for "a less input-intensive way to grind through long Slayer tasks". It was aimed to give the 'old-style' combat a place after the EoC, yet it must be noted that momentum attacks are notably weaker than ability attacks and are strongly not recommended for PVP.
- 18 March 2013. On 24 February 2014, Momentum was changed into a combat mode, and the ultimate abilities functionality was added.
- Attempting to toggle momentum during a Player-Owned Port random event will give the message "You can't do that while transmogrified into this form."


text:
- News
- Video
- People
Find by writer
- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
- Rebecca Armstrong
- Memphis Barker
- Max Benwell
- Chris Blackhurst
- Ian Burrell
- Andrew Buncombe
- Ben Chu
- Patrick Cockburn
- Mary Dejevsky
- Grace Dent
- Robert Fisk
- Andrew Grice
- Stefano Hatfield
- Lucy Hunter Johnston
- Howard Jacobson
- Alice Jones
- Simon Kelner
- Lisa Markwell
- Michael McCarthy
- Hamish McRae
- Jane Merrick
- James Moore
- Matthew Norman
- Dom Joly
- Amol Rajan
- John Rentoul
- Comment
- Editorials
- Letters
- IV Drip
- Campaigns
- Archive
- Our Voices
- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
- Terence Blacker
- Simon Carr
- Rupert Cornwell
- Sloane Crosley
- Mary Dejevsky
- Robert Fisk
- Andrew Grice
- Adrian Hamilton
- Philip Hensher
- Howard Jacobson
- Dominic Lawson
- John Lichfield
- Campaigns
- Hamish McRae
- Matthew Norman
- Christina Patterson
- John Rentoul
- Columnists
- Democracy 2015
- IV Drip Archive
- Blogs
- Scottish independence
- Save the tiger
- The state of the NHS
- Find by writer
- Sport
- Tech
- Life
- Property
- Arts + Ents
- Travel
- Money
- IndyBest
- Student
- Offers
Alan Jefferson directed the play, which was presented by Judy Montagu, Billy Wallace and Anthony Berry at the Scala Theatre, Charlotte Street, London W1, on 1, 2 and 3 June, 1954, in aid of the Invalid Children's Aid Association.
Princess Margaret gave whole-hearted support to the venture and attended many rehearsals. The presenters and society cast gave their time freely over many weeks to ensure the success of the production and the fund-raising for the ICAA. I was a member of the technical staff.
The Duke of Devonshire, Lord Porchester, the Marchioness of Dufferine and Ava and Viscount and Viscountess Norwich were but a few of Princess Margaret's friends who participated.
Still not sure about the devastating effects of climate change? Then let me tell you what's happening in Honduras right now
The young are the new poor: Sharp increase in number of under-25s living in poverty, while over-65s are better off than ever
Jack Monroe: David Cameron 'uses stories about his dead son as misty-eyed rhetoric' to legitimise NHS privatisation
NHS strike: Government accused of 'lying' about health service pay as nurses, midwives and ambulance staff stage four-hour walkout
Schoolboy Tommie Rose, who made £14,000 selling sweets, now selling Lucozade bottle on eBay
The depressing reality of white male supremacy in the UK has just been mapped out
Government wins power to intervene in schools and colleges to prevent radicalisation
WIN a trip for two to Cuba
Follow Simon Calder's journey in Cuba, and enter our competition to win a trip for two to Cuba
Rainbow list 2014: The LBGT people who make a real difference
Introducing our annual celebration of the lesbian, bisexual, gay, and transgender people who make a real difference
2014 WISE Summit
For the past four years, Qatar Foundation has been awarding an international prize for education each year, the first award of its kind in the world. Find out more...
Build yourself a brighter future
Chartered surveyors will be critical to shaping our new world
Why HD audio will lead to smarter calling
Telecom giant Vodafone is looking to improve voice quality, becoming the latest company to introduce new HD technology.
i100: A single mother on benefits who became one of the world's most successful authors
11 rags-to-riches underdog success stories
Made of London Series
Sir Ranulph Fiennes maintains that a lack of qualifications drove him on to climb Everest , circumnavigate the globe and walk to the South and North Poles.
From medieval to ultramodern
Mons is embracing the future as it prepares for its role as next year's European Capital of Culture, but it's also steeped in intriguing history. Philip Sweeney explores its two sides
Expertly tailored
From sharp cuts to discerning details, an expertly tailored look requires careful curation. Along with a few well-chosen accessories...
Enter the latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Business videos from commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Related Articles
We are not amused: MPs tell Queen to rein in her spending as she reaches final million
Harlequins 20 Leicester Tigers 6 match report: Match ends early as freak hailstorm hits the Twickenham Stoop sending debris onto pitch
Fury's fashion people: Elizabeth I's clothing transformed her into a living, breathing icon
Six Nations Championship: 'Mr Marginal Gains' gears up England's game
Bookmaker suspends betting on Queen Elizabeth's abdication after £200 Windsor bet
iJobs General
Austen Lloyd: Clinical Negligence Solicitor
Highly Competitive Salary: Austen Lloyd: HAMPSHIRE MARKET TOWN - A highly attr...
Ashdown Group: IT Systems Analyst / Application Support Engineer (ERP / SSRS)
£23000 - £30000 per annum + pension, 25days holiday: Ashdown Group: An industr...
Ashdown Group: Junior Reports Developer / Application Support Engineer
£23000 - £30000 per annum + pension, 25days holiday: Ashdown Group: An industr...
Recruitment Genius: Client Support Officer
£10 - £11 per hour: Recruitment Genius: The candidate must be committed, engag...


text:
Humidity 87%
Winds 21.9mph
Humidity 87%
Winds 21.9mph
Feb 17, 2013 10:30 PM
A home in Scott County was destroyed by a fire Sunday afternoon.
It happened on Deer Lake Road in Sadieville just before 5:00.
Firefighters say a neighbor spotted the flames and called for help.
The home was a total loss but there were no injuries.
Neighbors say they tried to help out before firefighters got there.
"I was pulling out this afternoon around 4:30, as I looked over my shoulder I saw a big column of black smoke," says Jim Greer, a neighbor. "A couple of us came back in here, started knocking the leaves back, the fire department got here just as we did."
The cause of the fire is still under investigation.
3 hours ago


text:
- Chris Kellett Department Chair
- Thaswan "Bee" Tangsurat Department Coordinator
Core Faculty
Interim Faculty
Ranked Adjunct & Adjunct Faculty
Lauren Basson
Lauren Basson completed her B.A. at Brown University and received an M.A. in Middle East Studies and a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Washington. In her teaching, Lauren combines creative and social science approaches to investigating key contemporary political and social issues from international perspectives. Before joining the Cornish faculty, she taught interdisciplinary courses about ethnicity, citizenship and national identities as a lecturer in the Department of Politics and Government at Ben Gurion University in Beersheva, Israel. Lauren also held Fulbright, Lady Davis, Golda Meir and Kreitman doctoral and post-doctoral fellowships at Ben Gurion University and Hebrew University in Jerusalem. She is the author of a book entitled White Enough to be American? Race Mixing, Indigenous People and the Boundaries of State and Nation, published by the University of North Carolina Press in 2008.


text:
Isn't there something you'd rather be doing than trying to fit into that wedding dress! Weight loss made simple! Ask us how! Start loosing weight today. (more)
Start your Nevada wedding planning by browsing for local wedding vendors. From photographers in Las Vegas to officiants and disk jockeys in Henderson we have the wedding service providers you need.