German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that multiculturalism has “utterly failed,” adding that it was an illusion to think Germans and foreign workers could “live happily side by side.” The failure of multiculturalism is also seen in Denmark, Sweden, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and other European countries. Immigrants coming from Africa and the Middle East refuse to assimilate and instead seek to import the failed cultures they fled.
Leftist diversity advocates and multiculturalists are right to argue that people of all races, religions and cultures should be equal in the eyes of the law. But their argument borders on idiocy when they argue that one set of cultural values cannot be judged superior to another and that to do so is Eurocentrism.
According to the Express, “London, Paris, Stockholm and Berlin are among the major European cities that feature on a bombshell list of 900 lawless zones with large immigrant populations” (http://tinyurl.com/hubbxuw).
Both in Europe and in the U.S., multiculturalism is a leftist elitist vision with its roots in academia. The intellectual elite, courts and government agencies push an agenda that is anything but a defense of individual rights, freedom from the conformity and a live-and-let-live philosophy. Instead, multiculturalism/diversity is an agenda for all kinds of conformity — conformity in ideas, actions and speech. It calls for re-education programs where diversity managers indoctrinate students, faculty members, employees, managers and executives on what’s politically correct thinking. Part of that lesson is nonjudgmentalism, where one is taught that one lifestyle is just as worthy as another and all cultures and their values are morally equivalent.
Western values are superior to all others. But one need not be a Westerner to hold Western values. A person can be Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, African or Arab and hold Western values. By the way, it is no accident that Western values of reason and individual rights have produced unprecedented health, life expectancy, wealth and comfort for the ordinary person. There’s an indisputable positive relationship between liberty and standards of living. There is also indisputable evidence that we in the West are unwilling to defend ourselves from barbarians. Just look at our response to the recent Orlando massacre, in which we’ve focused our energies on guns rather than on terrorists.
A burning stomach, or a burning sensation in the stomach, can cause pain, fatigue, and stress to the stomach. Burning stomach is becoming a growing and common problem as a result of indigestible food, health problems, infections, overuse of antibiotics, and chlorinated water, to name a few causes.
The stomach is a muscular sack between the esophagus and small intestine. The stomach is responsible for digesting food before it enters the intestines to be broken down further. If food is not properly broken down in the stomach, it can cause a clog along the intestines, resulting in indigestion or heartburn.
The stomach breaks down food with enzymes and acids. The food is mixed with water and gastric juices to break down into what is known as chyme. Chyme then moves into the intestines and breaks down further until it exits the colon.
- Binge drinking
- Shrinking of the gastric lining due to alcoholism
- Chronic alcohol consumption
- Inflammation of the pancreas due to alcohol consumption
- Gallbladder disease triggered by the alcohol
- Liver damage resulting from alcohol consumption
Stomach burning after drinking soda
Soda is a bubbly beverage, so right off the bat, drinking carbonated beverages can increase gas, which can contribute to stomach burning. Many soda varieties also contain aspartame, an artificial sweetener. Although this type of sweetener can reduce calorie count in your beverage, many people are intolerant to aspartame, which can also add to burning stomach.
If you have been diagnosed with IBS, soda can further lead to stomach irritations and promote diarrhea as well.
Stomach burning after drinking water
Water is known to be the number one health beverage you can consume, but it can lead to burning sensation in the stomach, too. Drinking too much water can lead to a condition known as hyponatremia, which is characterized by abnormally low sodium levels. The main symptoms of hyponatremia are discomfort, vomiting, confusion, fatigue, and even convulsions.
Consuming too much water can also negatively impact the kidneys. Our kidneys are able to filter through 1,000 ml of water an hour. Drinking more than this amount can overwork your kidneys, and if you have kidney disease you are at an even greater risk of complications of excessive water intake.
Stomach burning after drinking milk
A common reason for stomach burning after drinking milk is lactose intolerance. Lactose intolerance is a condition in which your body doesn’t have the right enzymes to break down lactose, a type of sugar found in milk. Because your body is unable to break down lactose, it can have negative side effects including abdominal pain, constipation, diarrhea, and burning stomach.
Once again, if you have IBS, you may notice an increase in burning stomach after consuming dairy. Overall, dairy is a common and known irritant in IBS, and it is often recommended that IBS patients reduce their intake of dairy – especially if they are lactose intolerant.
Reprinted with permission from Bel Marra Health.
It can be argued that no people are more important in English history than the Anglo-Saxons. This loose confederation of Germanic tribes not only gave Britain its language but also its first and most enduring literary hero—the Geat warrior-king Beowulf. The Anglo-Saxons also bequeathed a culture of dispersed power and widespread liberty, which is still evident all throughout the Anglophone world.
Despite this incredible legacy, there are certain facts about the Anglo-Saxons that many people overlook today. The following ten items are but a mere sampling of this forgotten history.
10 They May Have Built An ‘Apartheid’ Society
In 2006, a team of scientists from the Royal Society published a paper outlining their theory as to why modern England has such a high number of Germanic male-line ancestors. Specifically, their research concluded that in
On that date, the English king Aethelred the Unready, whose brother had been murdered years before inside Corfe Castle, issued orders that every Danish settler in England was to be killed. In what would come to be known as the St. Brice’s Day Massacre, Anglo-Saxon citizens attacked their Danish neighbors in droves, especially in Southern England, where Danelaw was weakest. Although the number of deaths has never been determined, it’s likely that hundreds if not thousands of Danish individuals were massacred. In one instance, Anglo-Saxon villagers burned several Danish families alive after setting fire to St. Frideswide’s Church. Two years later, in 1004, King Aethelred issued another order calling for “a just extermination” of all English Danes.
King Aethelred’s actions earned him the everlasting hatred of the Danish crown. By 1013, King Sweyn I of Denmark had been named king of England after Aethelred had fled to Normandy. Less than a year later, Sweyn was dead, and Aethelred’s advisers were seeking his return as king. However, thanks to the bad blood and enmity caused by King Aethelred, Canute, King Sweyn’s son, was busy destroying the Anglo-Saxon countryside in a pogrom of his own.
The fall of the USSR was the greatest victory. It came in the final week of December 1991.
Brexit came in less than one day.
The USSR had looked shaky in the second half of 1991. Britain’s position in the EU looked solid until after the initial voting results trickled in.
The New World Order has suffered its greatest defeat, ever. They tried everything in the book to scare the voters from voting for an exit. They failed.
There will be lots of explanations offered. But this one is the big one: national sovereignty still trumps globalism. People are committed to their nations. They are committed emotionally. They are not committed emotionally to international bureaucracies. But this is all the NWO can offer the masses: international bureaucracies that super-rich people know how to milk.
The Brexit vote is a wake-up call to these people. Their days of wine and roses are over.
The magnitude of this reversal is staggering. The world’s capital markets had all discounted a Brexit victory. The Dow Jones Industrial Average had risen 230 the day before: 18011. The pound was up 1%. There was no hint of the massive defeat that was about to hit the plans of the establishments of the world. They had no clue.
David Cameron did not have to call this vote. But he did. It was his undoing. It was also the undoing of the NWO. The unraveling process has begun.
That is why June 23 was what Nigel Farage said it was early on June 24: Independence Day.
The Bank of England went into panic mode. The pound was down 11% at one point. Central bankers refuse to let market forces establish the exchange value of national currencies. They feel compelled to announce something. It never does any good. The market is unstoppable.
In 1985, I was planning to go to England for a visit: the 500th anniversary of Bosworth field, where Richard III lost to Henry VII. I bought British pounds at $1.10. That was the absolute bottom. By the time I was in Britain, it was $1.30. I spent it all on used books. Because I did not convert the pounds into dollars, there was no taxable event for the IRS. What a great week!
The pound is lower than it has been since 1985. But not when I bought.
The globalists shouted “Wolf!” They said that if Britain left the EU, Britain will suffer a recession. They said the whole EU system will go into crisis. Donald Tusk, one of the EU’s four presidents, said this:
“As a historian I fear that Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also of western political civilisation in its entirety.”
Tusk was correct in a perverse sort of way. He thinks of the EU as a western political civilisation in its entirety. He is a consummate globalist apparatchik. He can comprehend no other world. That world has now begun to unravel.
Armageddon has arrived. Now we will hear about how it is all OK, that the EU’s security mechanisms are in place. No problem!
This has already begun. Within hours, Tusk said this:
‘There’s no way of predicting all the political consequences of this event, especially for the UK. But for sure this is not a moment for hysterical reactions. I want to reassure everyone that we are prepared also for this negative scenario. As you know the EU is not only a fair-weather project.’Today, on behalf of the twenty seven leaders I can say that we are determined to keep our unity as 27. For all of us, the union is the framework for our common future. I would also like to reassure you that there will be no legal vacuum.’
He had used hysterical rhetoric regarding Brexit. It has now backfired.
BALTIMORE – Last Thursday, the Brits said auf Wiedersehen and au revoir to the European Union.
On Friday, the Dow sold off 611 points – a roughly 3.5% slump.
What’s going on?
In Europe and the U.S., the masses are getting restless.
Mr. Guy Wroble of Denver, Colorado, explained why in a short letter to the Financial Times:
The old liberal world order is dying because the cost-benefit ratio for the average person in the Western world is now negative.
The welfare state depends on three things: population growth, productivity growth, and credit growth. All three are either slowing… or are already negative. As a result, economies can no longer keep up with the costs imposed by the Deep State and its cronies.
The “Deep State” is shorthand for the many people, in and out of government – the “foxes,” as Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto called them – who control policy decisions and use them to tilt the playing field in their direction….
Taxes, regulations, and wars are not for the benefit of the electorate, but simply to pay off one special interest group or another.
People vs. Politicians
The “foxes” are expensive.
For instance, the median house nationwide sells for $180,000. In Washington, D.C., it’s more than $500,000. On Wall Street, the average bonus last year was $172,000 – six times the total median compensation of workers nationwide.
More important, the foxes set up a financial system that was fraudulent, pernicious, and bound to blow up.
Using credit instead of commodity-backed money, they distorted the entire economy, curtailed real capital investment, pinched off productivity, stopped income growth for 90% of the people, and slowed economic growth for everybody.
Now, the economy isn’t growing enough to make good on the politicians’ promises. After you factor in inflation, the average working man in the U.S. earns no more today than he did 40 years ago.
Almost all income growth in the last 10 years has gone to the rich. So, the only way the average voter could possibly benefit from the welfare state would be if he were able to tap into the income of the very rich.
And that isn’t going to happen, for one very obvious reason. That top 1%? Those are the foxes that control the system!
Vive la Revolution!
The appeal of the welfare state ceases when people get less welfare than they pay for.
The more wealth and power the elite sucks out of a stagnant system, the more the typical citizen feels trapped and robbed.
The Brexit vote was an attempt to escape.
And in the U.S., many see a vote for Donald Trump as another way to get parasites off the backs of the common people.
Mr. Trump has pledged as much. The presidential election this November, he says, will determine whether the U.S. will be “ruled by the people or the politicians.”
“I will end the special interest monopoly in Washington,” he promises.
The situation is not completely unlike France in the 1780s.
So many foxes had burrowed into the privileged, elite classes that it became impossible to get them out.
They lived on “rents” – such as the right to collect taxes, or tolls, or a percentage of harvests. They were 18th-century cronies, not productive members of the economy. And generally, they were even exempt from paying taxes. This left the typical French royal subject with a chip on his shoulder.
Several efforts were made at reform. Assemblies were called. “Parliaments” were convened. Elections were held. But the rich foxes wouldn’t give an inch. It took a bloody revolution to change things.
Similarly, today, the foxes have a sweet deal. Their money system gives them an almost bottomless source of credit. (Thanks to negative interest rates on bonds, many governments around the world now get paid to borrow money.) And they use this credit to fund their programs… their bonuses… their stock buyback schemes…
Naturally, they are desperate to keep it going. Bloomberg:
Central banks across the world offered the financial system fresh funds and intervened in currency markets, in an effort to reassure investors sent into panic by Britain’s vote to leave the European Union.
After a majority of Britons voted to end their 43-year membership of the EU in a referendum, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan issued statements stressing the availability of liquidity to keep the banking system running.
But there’s a problem…
The Deep State can control Congress. It can control the state bureaucracy… Wall Street… and Big Business. It can even – usually – control the voters.
But it can’t control the credit cycle.
Reprinted with permission from Bonner & Partners.
I took a long walk on the boardwalk with my wife and mother last night, after a long day of packing, doctor appointments, travel, unpacking, food shopping and buying enough liquor to get me through the next week. I was confident the oligarchs had the Brexit vote rigged in their favor. I went to bed exhausted at 10:00.
I wake up this morning to global pandemonium. I just wanted to ride my bike on the boardwalk in peace, but Noooo. First it was raining, so I have to wait for the showers to end. Then I flip on the radio and hear about stock markets around the world crashing because the British people grew some balls and told their keepers to fuck off.
My first thought upon hearing the news was “Fourth Turning”. It’s all about the mood of the people in these countries. The establishment is constantly baffled during Fourth Turnings because they think their old methods of propaganda, fear and control will continue to work. They don’t realize the cyclical nature of history and how the current generational configuration will lead to earth shattering change and a complete destruction of the existing social order. Brexit is just another brick in the wall.
I also find it interesting that over the last month or so some of the most renowned investing billionaires in the world have announced their bearishness and had placed large bets on such an outcome. George Soros is the perfect example. He switched his position to shorting the market recently. Then he constantly blathered in the press about what a disaster Brexit would be for global markets. Then the captured legacy media convinced the world Brexit would never happen. When it “shockingly” happened last night, stock markets around the world crashed. Soros and his billionaire cronies made hundreds of millions in profits. Meanwhile, the poor schmuck with his 401k gets clobbered again.
Since I was 100% wrong in my prediction regarding Brexit, you can take my following observations with a grain of salt. But this is what I see:
- This further cements the coming showdown between the people and the establishment (politicians, bankers, mainstream media).
- The EU is dead. France, Italy and other EU countries will push for the same referendum and the people will vote out.
- The insolvent banks across Europe were never fixed. The central bankers just extended, pretended, and printed more debt. Bank failures will trigger further economic strife.
- The credibility of central bankers around the globe will completely disintegrate as their one trick pony method of easy money has proven to be an immense failure for the people.
- With the disintegration of the EU, the possibility of civil chaos and war with Russia goes up dramatically.
- It will be interesting to see if the Fed and their Wall Street banker puppeteers can stop the stock market from dropping by its destined 30% to 50%. The overvaluation is drastic and this could be the Lehman moment, or at least the Bear Stearns moment.
- The credibility of the corporate mainstream media has further disintegrated as they again have been revealed as nothing but propaganda mouthpieces for the establishment. Their anti-Brexit poll numbers were fake. They are not journalists, but cheerleaders for their corporate sponsors.
- The constant media bashing of Trump and cheerleading for Clinton will be disregarded by the silent majority in the U.S. Their polls and opinions can be completely ignored and dismissed. The people of this country who don’t live in NYC, DC, LA, or SF are pissed off. Their mood is dark. They want change. The only person who will give them change is Trump.
- I’m more convinced than ever that Trump will win the presidency in November. This is a Fourth Turning. The status quo never wins during a Fourth Turning.
Fourth Turnings never peter out. They intensify to a crescendo of turmoil, chaos, violence, war, and bloodshed. This Fourth Turning intensification just got turned up dramatically. It will eventually be turned up to 11.
“Our carceral state banishes American citizens to a gray wasteland far beyond the promises and protections the government grants its other citizens… When the doors finally close and one finds oneself facing banishment to the carceral state—the years, the walls, the rules, the guards, the inmates—reactions vary. Some experience an intense sickening feeling. Others, a strong desire to sleep. Visions of suicide. A deep shame. A rage directed toward guards and other inmates. Utter disbelief. The incarcerated attempt to hold on to family and old social ties through phone calls and visitations. At first, friends and family do their best to keep up. But phone calls to prison are expensive, and many prisons are located far from one’s hometown… As the visits and phone calls diminish, the incarcerated begins to adjust to the fact that he or she is, indeed, a prisoner. New social ties are cultivated. New rules must be understood.”—Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic
In a carceral state—a.k.a. a prison state or a police state—there is no Fourth Amendment to protect you from the overreaches, abuses, searches and probing eyes of government overlords.
In a carceral state, there is no difference between the treatment meted out to a law-abiding citizen and a convicted felon: both are equally suspect and treated as criminals, without any of the special rights and privileges reserved
The indignity of the stop is not limited to an officer telling you that you look like a criminal. The officer may next ask for your “consent” to inspect your bag or purse without telling you that you can decline. Regardless of your answer, he may order you to stand “helpless, perhaps facing a wall with [your] hands raised.” If the officer thinks you might be dangerous, he may then “frisk” you for weapons. This involves more than just a pat down. As onlookers pass by, the officer may “‘feel with sensitive fingers every portion of [your] body. A thorough search [may] be made of [your] arms and armpits, waistline and back, the groin and area about the testicles, and entire surface of the legs down to the feet.’”
If you still can’t read the writing on the wall, Sotomayor breaks it down further: “This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants—even if you are doing nothing wrong… So long as the target is one of the many millions of people in this country with an outstanding arrest warrant, anything the officer finds in a search is fair game for use in a criminal prosecution. The officer’s incentive to violate the Constitution thus increases…”
Just consider some of the many other ways in which the Fourth Amendment—which ensures that the government can’t harass you, let alone even investigate you, without probable cause—has been weakened and undermined by the courts, the legislatures and various government agencies and operatives.
Breath tests, blood draws: Americans have no protection against mandatory breathalyzer tests at a police checkpoint, although mandatory blood draws violate the Fourth Amendment (Birchfield v. North Dakota).
Ignorance of the law is defensible if you work for the government: Police officers who violate the law can be granted qualified immunity if they claim ignorance of the law (Heien v. North Carolina). That rationale was also applied to police who clearly used excessive force when they repeatedly tasered a pregnant woman during a routine traffic stop and were granted immunity from prosecution (Brooks v. City of Seattle).
High-speed car chases: Police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits (Plumhoff v. Rickard).
No-knock raids: Police can perform a “no-knock” as long as they have a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile or give occupants a chance to destroy evidence of a crime (Richards v. Wisconsin). Legal ownership of a firearm is also enough to justify a no-knock raid by police (Quinn v. Texas).
Warrantless searches by police: Police can carry out warrantless searches of our homes based on a “reasonable” concern by police that a suspect (or occupant) might be attempting to destroy evidence, fleeing or hurt, even if it’s the wrong house (Kentucky v. King). Police can also, without a warrant, search anyone who has been lawfully arrested (United States v. Robinson) as well as their property post-arrest (Colorado v. Bertine) and their vehicle (New York v.Belton), search a car they suspect might contain evidence of a crime (Chambers v. Maroney), and search a home when the arrest is made on its premises (Maryland v. Buie).
Forced DNA extractions: Police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime. Innocent or not, your DNA will then be stored in the national FBI database (Maryland v. King).
Strip searches: Police can subject Americans to virtual strip searches, no matter the “offense” (Florence v. Board ofChosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington). This “license to probe” is now being extended to roadside stops, as police officers throughout the country have begun performing roadside strip searches—some involving anal and vaginal probes—without any evidence of wrongdoing and without a warrant.
Seizures: For all intents and purposes, you’re “seized” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment from the moment an officer stops you (Brendlin v. California).
Search warrants on a leash: Police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes,” justifying any and all police searches of vehicles stopped on the roadside (Florida v. Harris), but the use of a K-9 unit after a reasonable amount of time has passed during a stop does violate the Fourth Amendment (Rodriguez v. the United States).
Police and DUI Checkpoints: Police can conduct sobriety and “information-seeking” checkpoints (Illinois v. Lidster andMich. Dep‘t of State Police v. Sitz).
Interrogating public transit passengers: Police officers are free to board a bus, question passengers, and ask for consent to search without notifying them of their right to refuse (U.S v. Drayton).
Warrantless arrests for minor criminal offenses: Police can arrest you for minor criminal offenses, such as a misdemeanor seatbelt violation, punishable only by a fine (Atwater v. City of Lago Vista).
Stop and identify: Refusing to answer when a policeman asks “What’s your name?” can rightfully be considered a crime. No longer do Americans, even those not charged with any crime, have the right to remain altogether silent when stopped and questioned by a police officer (Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada).
Traffic stops: As long as police have reasonable cause to believe that a traffic violation occurred, they may stop any vehicle (Whren v. U.S.). If probable cause justifies a vehicle search, then every part of the vehicle can be searched (U.S. v. Ross). A vehicle can be stopped even if the driver has not committed a traffic offense (U.S. v. Cortez).
Anonymous tips, careful driving, rigid posture and acne: Police officers can stop cars based only on “anonymous” tips (Navarette v. California). Police can also pull you over if you are driving too carefully, with a rigid posture, taking a scenic route, and have acne (U.S. v. Westhoven).
What many Americans fail to understand is the devastating amount of damage that can be done to one’s freedoms long before a case ever makes its way to court by government agents who are violating the Fourth Amendment at every turn. This is how freedoms, long undermined, can give way to tyranny through constant erosion and become part of the fabric of the police state through constant use.
Phone and email surveillance, databases for dissidents, threat assessments, terror watch lists, militarized police, SWAT team raids, security checkpoints, lockdowns, roadside strip searches: there was a time when any one of these encroachments on our Fourth Amendment rights would have roused the public to outrage. Today, such violations are shrugged off matter-of-factly by Americans who have been assiduously groomed to accept the intrusions of the police state into their private lives.
So when you hear about the FBI hacking into Americans’ computers without a warrant with the blessing of the courts, or states assembling and making public terror watch lists containing the names of those who are merely deemed suspicious, or the police knocking on the doors of activists in advance of political gatherings to ascertain their plans for future protests, or administrative government agencies (such as the FDA, Small Business Administration, Smithsonian, Social Security, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Mint, and Department of Education) spending millions on guns and ammunition, don’t just matter-of-factly file it away in that part of your brain reserved for things you may not like but over which you have no control.
It’s true that there may be little the average person can do to push back against the police state on a national level, but there remains some hope at the local level as long as we retain a speck of our independence and individuality—as long as we can resist the defeatist sense of double-consciousness (a phrase coined by W. E. B. Du Bois in which we view ourselves as inferior through the prism of our oppressors)—as long as we continue to cry out for justice for ourselves and those around us—as long as we refuse to be shackled and made prisoners—and as long as we continue to recognize that the only way the police state can truly acquire and retain power is if we relinquish it through our negligence, complacency and ignorance.
Unfortunately, we have been utterly brainwashed into believing the government’s propaganda and lies. Americans actually celebrate with perfect sincerity the anniversary of our independence from Great Britain without ever owning up to the fact that we are as oppressed now—more so, perhaps, thanks to advances in technology—than we ever were when Redcoats stormed through doorways and subjected colonists to the vagaries of a police state.
You see, by gradually whittling away at our freedoms—free speech, assembly, due process, privacy, etc.—the government has, in effect, liberated itself from its contractual agreement to respect our constitutional rights while resetting the calendar back to a time when we had no Bill of Rights to protect us from the long arm of the government.
Aided and abetted by the legislatures, the courts, and Corporate America, the government has been busily rewriting the contract (a.k.a. the Constitution) that establishes the citizenry as the masters and agents of the government as the servants. We are now only as good as we are useful, and our usefulness is calculated on an economic scale by how much we are worth—in terms of profit and resale value—to our “owners.”
Under the new terms of this one-sided agreement, the government and its many operatives have all the privileges and rights and “we the prisoners” have none.
As Sotomayor concluded in her ringing dissent in Utah v. Strieff:
By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time. It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged. We must not pretend that the countless people who are routinely targeted by police are “isolated.” They are the canaries in the coal mine whose deaths, civil and literal, warn us that no one can breathe in this atmosphere. They are the ones who recognize that unlawful police stops corrode all our civil liberties and threaten all our lives. Until their voices matter too, our justice system will continue to be anything but.
Olympic organizers are battling to save the $10 billion Games from becoming a fiasco, Daily Mail Online can reveal.
The games are engulfed in a desperate last-minute building and repair operation as the first of more than 10,000 athletes begin to arrive in Rio.
Daily Mail Online discovered the Rio Olympic authorities have their work cut out for them with only five weeks and two full days to go before the Opening Ceremony on August 5.
And these exclusive pictures show, that despite being given seven years to prepare, vital roads, transport, and structural work are still to be completed. In contrast, 90 percent of construction of the venues for the 2012 Games in London was completed with a year to go.
The clock is ticking down towards when the 750-strong US team are due to appear at the opening ceremony while crucial development of facilities is still needed.
The combination of unfinished facilities along with safety and health fears, have also led US athletes to make late changes to their travel plans with some heading to Argentina instead to prepare.
Athletes and fans will be disappointed to discover that Rio has still not managed to sign off several key venues for the 2016 games and the city is littered with Olympic eyesores.
Under construction: The tennis center is still under scaffolding even though organizers claim the court and seating is complete
The Physics of Life is the new book by of one of my old professors Dr. Adrian Bejan. He has developed the Constructal Law that is concerned with flowing systems, or in another sense living systems; living because there is movement. The law is thus formulated that, “for a finite-size flow system to persist in time (to survive) its configuration must evolve (morph) in time in such a way that it provides easier flow access.” On this single basis, he is able to show precisely how and why the complex geometric patterns occur in nature. “The Constructal Law is predictive: It teaches us how to discover the drawing and how to predict the evolution—the morphing—of the natural design over time.” In this book, subtitled “The Evolution of Everything,” he expands his analysis from the inanimate to, as the subtitle states, to finding patterns for everything; or almost. Thus there are discussions of sports, engineering design, government, language… and I would say philosophy, though implicitly. On several levels, I believe this book could be of interest to LRC readers.
Perhaps the most important passage in the book for libertarians explains “how freedom is the most basic and most overlooked property of nature and thermodynamics for that matter. Every natural entity has the freedom to change. Freedom means the ability of a flow configuration to change, morph, evolve, spread and retreat. This is the property that makes natural organization possible. Without the freedom to change, organization and evolution cannot happen. Social organization, civilization, and culture are the best-known evolutionary phenomena that illustrate the natural tendency to change freely, to evolve. To improve a design while loading it with constraints disguised as good ideas is nonsense.” However, soon after he strikes a false chord in my opinion by stating “Government is a complex of rules that act as channels … Without these channels, we would be stuck…” More accurately, it is society or culture that are the channels, the government is truck the mud that makes society stuck.
Furthermore, Bejan’s concept of societal flow is not new to some libertarians, “In nature nothing moves unless it is driven….” For example, LRC’s Butler Schaffer has written (in The Wizards of Ozymandias) of the need for flow, “The health of any system – be it an individual or a society – depends on the production of those values necessary for that system’s survival. The production and distribution of goods and services, technology, the sciences, medicine, the arts, and agriculture, are just a few of the more prominent examples of the values upon which Western societies have depended on .” But also reflected is the not so libertarian theme of Thomas Aquinas, who certainly would have understood the philosophy of Bejan implicit “In nature nothing moves unless it is driven….” For Aquinas, everything that moves is moved by another, there must thereby exist an Unmoved Mover (i.e., God).
In a list of examples for the positive evolutionary developments in different fields, Bejan includes “– from economics narrative to economics with mathematics (Samuelson).” From an Austrian economics point of view, this is an unforgivable sin (quoting Paul Samuelson of all people!). For me, one of the most fundamental and critical teachings of Mises concerns the application of mathematics to the social sciences including economics.
In the sphere of human action there are no constant relations between any factors. There is consequently no measurement and no quantification possible. All measurable magnitudes that the sciences of human action encounter are quantities of the environment in which man lives and acts. They are historical facts, e.g., facts of economic or of military history, and are to be clearly distinguished from the problems with which the theoretical science of action praxeology and especially also its most developed part, economics—deals.
We might even say that to be human is to have behavior that is not fixed by constants…or to have free will.
But I will leave the door open for new evidence. Bejan is very good on hierarchy for which he finds that it is normal for flowing inanimate systems as well as moving human systems. Furthermore, this is not only natural but also that “The hierarchy of the whole is good for every moving individual.” Gary North writes a lot about Pareto’s Law (curve), in that “economic inequality has not increased since at least 1897 — the year that Vilfredo Pareto published his discovery: about 20% of the people in every European nation he studied owned about 80% of the wealth. . . . The reformers just do not get it: the Pareto pyramid is found everywhere, no matter which reform group won the most recent reform. . . . This does not just apply to wealth. It applies across the board in an institution after institution. No one knows why, but it does. . . . It really is a shame that no one can explain it.” (emphasis by North) So do human constants exist, contra Mises? Could the Constructal Law explain the Pareto power law ratio? I would suggest a line of investigation that searches for the critical size of organizations such as bureaucratic governments and corporations where there is the need for controls on the flow of information and wealth. Perhaps in this short history since Pareto, there is on average, say one manager per four workers; from this fundamental unit the power law pyramid could be built. But as per Mises, it is history, and for many reasons, in different times and places, it does not hold.
The Physics of Life will make you think even if your response to a particular point is to disagree with the results of the analysis. I highly recommend this engaging book for all those who search for an understanding of the world at a high level, but without excessive jargon or mathematics.
CIA & JFK: The Secret Assassination Files – Jefferson Morley
The Problem with Socialism – Thomas DiLorenzo
A Century of War: Lincoln, Wilson & Roosevelt – John V. Denson
TWA 800: The Crash, the Cover-Up, and the Conspiracy – Jack Cashill
Against the State: An Anarcho-Capitalist Manifesto – Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
The Last of the Freemen – Carl Trotz
- 9 Presidents Who Screwed Up America: And Four Who Tried to Save Her – Brion McClanahan
The Anatomy of the State – Murray N. Rothbard
Thank you for supporting LRC with your Amazon purchases.
A few days before the last FOMC meeting The Wall Street Journal reported on the Fed’s hand-wringing over its inability to identify the “natural rate of interest” and explain its recent movements. According to the report, the Fed uses the “mysterious natural rate” to guide its decisions in setting the target for the fed funds rate. Modern macroeconomics defines the natural rate of interest as the (real) rate of interest that maintains the economy in a Keynesian state of bliss, with stable prices (or moderate inflation) and actual real GDP equal to “potential” or full-employment GDP.
According to Fed economists, the natural rate is “unobserved” and therefore “has to be inferred from observable data” using econometric models or other statistical techniques. But different models yield different estimates of the natural rate. These estimates range from “persistently negative since 2008” to a “reasonable range” between 1% and 2%. Nor are these estimates very precise. One model estimates a natural rate of 0.5% from 2010–2015 with a 90% confidence interval of 4 percentage points, meaning that there is a 90 percent probability that the natural interest rate lies somewhere between -1.5% and 2.5%. Another model yields an estimate of the natural rate for the year 2000 that includes both 0% and 6% within the 90% confidence interval! But the main problem befuddling monetary policymakers is that almost all estimates have indicated that the natural rate has fallen precipitously from 2 to 2.5% leading up to the financial crisis to near or even slightly below zero and has remained there since 2009. Further deepening the mystery is that the rate shows no signs of recovering despite the fact that the real economy has considerably strengthened since 2009.
For Wicksell, then, in sharp contrast to Keynes, the natural rate is a real price spontaneously determined by market forces, to which the loan rate normally and automatically tends to adjust. In his view, one of the main reasons why the two rates might substantially diverge from one another is because fractional-reserve banks have the power to expand credit by lending deposited gold or, more likely, creating and lending out bank notes and what he called “fictitious deposits.” The expansion of credit by the banks drives down the loan rate below its “normal” equivalence to the natural rate. The divergence between the two rates induces entrepreneurs to eagerly borrow the additional funds at the loan rate and invest them in production processes yielding the higher natural rate of return. The result is an increase in the demand for labor, raw materials, commodities and machinery and a bidding up of wages rates and other factor prices and rents. The additional money payments to laborers and other resource owners eventually cause a rise in the demand and prices of consumer goods. The result is what Wicksell called a “cumulative process” of general price increases that lasts as long as banks suppress the loan rate below the natural rate. The inflationary cumulative process comes to an end only if and when credit expansion ceases and market forces are permitted to establish equality between the loan and natural rates. Theoretically, the gap between the two rates could cause an “unlimited” rise in prices. Wicksell also maintained that a cumulative process of inflation or deflation could be precipitated by a failure of fractional-reserve banks to adapt the loan rate quickly enough to an initial rise or fall in the natural rate of interest by contracting or expanding credit.
It is worth noting that Ludwig von Mises, in The Theory of Money and Credit (pp. 349–66) originally published in German in 1912, developed the Austrian theory of the business cycle on the foundation of Wicksell’s crucial analysis of the distinction between the loan rate and the natural of interest. Unwilling or unable to comprehend this distinction, Keynes in the General Theory (pp. 192–93) charged Mises along with Friedrich Hayek and Lionel Robbins with “confusing the marginal efficiency of capital with the rate of interest.” Keynes’s “marginal efficiency of capital” was his peculiar term for the expected rate of return on investment — which is nothing other than Wicksell’s natural rate.
In the current era, serious engagement with the history of economic thought is actively discouraged in Ph.D. programs in economics. Contemporary macroeconomists, therefore, fail to grasp the difference between Wicksell’s and Keynes’s definitions of the equilibrium interest rate and confuse the provenance and meaning of what they call “the natural rate.” Their view is that the natural rate is an elusive, non-market “policy goal” subject to sudden and inexplicable fluctuations, which must be laboriously extracted from the data using statistical methods. In order to maintain economic stability, the Fed must continually manipulate the fed funds target rate to roughly approximate the natural rate. But, as we have seen, because Fed policymakers deny that the true natural rate can ever be known with certainty, they argue that the Fed must use its own judgment and discretion in conducting monetary policy.
Wicksell and modern Austrian economists — who are Wicksell’s true heirs — hold a conflicting view of the natural rate. They argue that the natural rate is a real and observable market phenomenon that is ultimately determined by the consumption/saving preferences of households and effected by entrepreneurial decisions about the allocation of resources among consumer goods’ and capital goods’ based on anticipations of these preferences. The decisions of entrepreneurs tend to bring the rate of return on capital investment into equilibrium across all production processes and business firms in the economy. This rate is reflected in the interest rate on the loanable funds market, which is merely a component of the overall capital or intertemporal market. The latter market includes all funds used to purchase factors of production whether the funds are borrowed or directly invested by shareholders, partners, and proprietors into their own corporations and privately-held firms.
It is thus the continual creation of bank reserves out of thin air via Fed open market operations that facilitates the continual expansion of bank credit and drives the loan rate below the natural rate determined in the free and unfettered intertemporal market. For Austro-Wicksellians, then, if the goal of monetary policy is really to adapt the rate in financial markets to the natural rate of interest, then all the Fed needs to do is to cease all open market operations, slam the discount window shut, and freeze reserve requirements at current levels. This undoubtedly will involve a short and sharp bout of recession and liquidation of unsound firms and investments. But if the Fed refrains from interfering — as was the case, for example, in the 1920–21 depression — the process of recession-adjustment will swiftly return the economy to a sound footing and the Wicksellian natural rate will at long last manifest itself for all to observe in the interest rates and yields across financial submarkets. (See Jim Grant, The Forgotten Depression, 1921: The Crash that Cured Itself.)
Ironically. the Fed’s ongoing manipulation of interest rates in relentless pursuit of the illusive and misconceived Keynesian natural rate causes the true Wicksellian natural rate to remain “unobservable” — and distorts financial markets and produces economic instability in the bargain. Bernanke unwittingly made this very point, when he wrote:
A similarly confused criticism often heard is that the Fed is somehow distorting financial markets and investment decisions by keeping interest rates “artificially low.” Contrary to what sometimes seems to be alleged, the Fed cannot somehow withdraw and leave interest rates to be determined by “the markets.” The Fed’s actions determine the money supply and thus short-term interest rates; it has no choice but to set the short-term interest rate somewhere. So where should that be?
Actually, it is Bernanke who is badly confused and has completely misunderstood Wicksell’s analysis of the natural rate. Certainly, the Fed affects interest rates when it determines the money supply. But this begs the question. If the Fed were to completely halt its manipulation of the money supply, the loanable funds market would not disappear nor would interest rates become indeterminate. The supply of loanable funds would simply shift to the left and the interest rate would rise to a new equilibrium that aligns the loan rate with the long-run rate of return on investment in the real production structure. Wicksell’s natural rate would finally emerge for all to see. It is precisely the Fed’s attempt “to set the short-term interest rate somewhere” that causes it to be unobservable anywhere.
Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.
Introduction by WhoWhatWhy
Omar Mateen had been on the FBI’s radar for some time before he opened fire at a nightclub in Florida, killing 49 and wounding 53 people. Now the public is asking why the FBI didn’t do something to prevent the tragedy.
Glenn Greenwald responded to an article in The Washington Post, “The FBI Was Right Not to Arrest Omar Mateen Before the Shooting”. He warned that pressure on the FBI to be more pro-active will inevitably lead to more draconian anti-terror legislation and the loss of even more civil liberties in the name of preventing the unpreventable.
But there is a legitimate reason to question the FBI. There are times when the Bureau seems to be playing dangerous games with dangerous people, as shown in the article below.
This was first published in June of 2013. At the time, we said there were ‘aspects of the Boston Marathon bombing where the official story just doesn’t add up. But what if these inconsistencies point to something amiss on a far deeper level? What if the FBI’s initial claim that it didn’t know who the Tsarnaev brothers were — when in fact it knew about them for several years — hides an even bigger embarrassment?
Update. Last month, WhoWhatWhy’s James Henry reported that, despite public denials, the FBI secretly flagged Tamerlan as a terrorist threat in his immigration records. And the Bureau admitted that it conducted a six-month-long “assessment” of Tsarnaev, two years before the bombing. But then the FBI said it closed the investigation after it“found no link or ‘nexus’ to terrorism”.
Contradicting that statement, both the FBI and CIA had actually put Tsarnaev’s name on the terrorist “watch list,” stating that he “may be armed and dangerous” — and that screening him is “mandatory” if he attempts to board an airplane.
So why didn’t they do so?
Was Tamerlan Tsarnaev a Double Agent Recruited by the FBI?
Amid the swirl of mysteries surrounding the alleged Boston bombers, one fact, barely touched upon in the mainstream US media, stands out: There is a strong possibility that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the older of the two brothers, was a double agent, perhaps recruited by the FBI.
If Tsarnaev was a double agent, he would be just one of thousands of young people coerced by the FBI, as the price for settling a minor legal problem, into a dangerous career as an informant.
That he was so coerced is the easiest explanation for two seemingly incompatible incidents in his life:
The first is that he returned to Russia in 2012, ostensibly to renew his Russian passport so he could file an application for US citizenship.
The second is that Tsarnaev then jeopardized his citizenship application with conspicuous, provocative — almost theatrical — behavior that seemed more caricature than a characteristic of a Muslim extremist.
This morning, I happened to overhear something I found to be highly hilarious, to say nothing of guffaw-inducing. Ok, so I’m here in Tucson and I walk all over the place. To date, I have only been approached twice in about a year by panhandlers asking for money. And I see the homeless all the time. Talk to some of them at length. But petition gatherers? I think I’ve been approached by a little over a hundred within the past six months. Feh, it’s like running a gauntlet of government officials at a budget free-for-all of McPork Barrel proportions. And your humble scribe has discovered why that is.
This morning, one approached me to ask if I’d like to sign a petition to limit “dark money” campaign contributions from the corporations. I, of course, pointed out that I burned my voter registration card quite some time ago and lit the barbeque with it. It finally did something for me—those fire-roasted green chiles were delicious. But I then overheard the other petition gatherer with him answering a question from a signer. These petition gatherers are paid! These guys were supposedly getting $18 an hour! My gosh, that’s probably more than sheriff’s deputies here get, I think! At the least, these human gnat-imitators are garnering $2.50 per signature. “Well, they can’t do it for free!”, defenders say. Oh, can they not? What happened to the tough guys telling me this was a democratic process?
Look here, Thomas Jefferson, WHO is paying these guys to gather these signatures? And why is it worth so much money to pass these laws? Gee, Tom, you don’t suppose maybe the political parties themselves might be behind this, do you? And, gosh, you don’t suppose they’d have at least three front groups doling out the money so it looks like the money comes from “Jimmy Crack Corn Public Relations” and not directly from the Democratic Party or the Republicans, do you? Because that’s how corporate marketing works. You, Boffo Frisbees Inc. issue a press release through Dingbat Marketing who then hands it to the press agency through Scam-O-Matic Public Relations. The paper trail is difficult to follow.
Therefore, Mr. Jefferson, how is it you can be against “dark money” in political campaigns when you are PAYING to gather signatures to create yet another law allegedly against it? Unless, of course, you seek to pass a law that benefits your party because you’ve written into it a loophole that’ll immunize you from the law while it nails everyone else? See, it’s really quite simple. If you really believe in a cause, you’ll go gather these signatures as a volunteer effort. But there are ads in the paper to enlist these people, promising great pay. Come on, man, how can you claim this as some kind of democratic process? This is the best government money can buy.
How can anyone fail to see the obvious here? And people go and die for this system?! People imagine they owe some kind of “debt” to a system such as this? Some kind of “duty” or the shivers up the spine when they hear “The Blood-Spattered Banner”? Oops, Star-Spangled Banner. Well, they can spangle their own stars for all I care because I don’t want their gold star on my report card. I’ve had enough star-spangling, thank you very much. Every tax time, the star-spangling gets more expensive. Duty? Huh, I feel more of a duty to the spider residing in a corner of the porch because it provides a useful service. To my mind, if they’re paying these jokers at least $2.50 per signature, they owe me $1.00 of it for my part in that transaction.
Now, hear me out here. Obviously, we cannot prevent them from passing more laws. So I’m thinking, gee, there’s a problem with this entire transaction of the petition gathering itself. I, the signer, am the supplier the same as if I was growing apples people wanted. But I am not being paid for the product I am providing, that being my signature and personal information. If the petition gatherer is getting $2.50 for this on his end, then he owes me $1.00 for supplying the product which he then garners a $1.50 profit after paying his supplier. The Very simple market economics here.
I think I have stumbled upon a way to reform the government here. From here on, I will ask these jokers for $1.00 cash every time they ask for my signature. Of course, they’ll invoke the false idol of “democracy” to refuse paying for my product. But then I will ask what they get paid and why it is acceptable for them to be paid for the simple task of harvesting the signature when I am the grower of it. I have to feed and water and shelter the body that produces the signature. Signatures don’t just grow on trees, but if you want to harvest mine, look, man, it’s going to cost you $1.00. That’s cheaper than the per-pound price of Granny Smith apples right now, so I think it’s a good deal and a fair price.
Nah, I don’t think I could go through with it. There are just some things a person cannot morally do for any amount of money. Participating in politics and government is one of them. But as an experiment, it would be interesting to see the reactions of them when they’re told the signature will cost $1.00 because then the hypocrisy will be revealed. The hypocrisy is this: The government makes money off of us through our labor and this is how they exist. Their bread-and-butter is jumping over our corral fence and milking our cows and swiping the loaf of bread cooling on the windowsill.
Knowing all of this, how can the government be said to be any form of moral force in the world? Again, the political parties pay people to gather signatures to pass more laws that favor the political parties. They do this to create a false majority of the people because they’ll claim all these people want these laws. No, they were hassled into signing these petitions by political panhandlers. “Excuse me, could you spare a signature?” This is not a “democratic process”, this is panhandling. Cities want to pass laws banning panhandlers. But these political panhandlers run amok hassling people relentlessly without so much as a nod to the public nuisance they are. Democracy, huh, yeah, sure it is.
Thus, I think the Dollar Rebellion might just be a free market solution to this problem with petition gathering. “Excuse me, can I get your signature on—” “It’s a dollar.” “What?” My signature. It costs one dollar. That’s my price, based on my overhead.” “But this is a democratic process!” “Is that a fact? Well, you get paid, so why am I not to be paid? Remember, this is a democracy, you say. So, if it’s good for you, it’s good for me, too.” Watch how quick the scam is defeated and he goes off to find the people giving away their names for free. Well, buddy, I am not free in this country and so neither will my signature be free until I am in fact. Put that on your clipboard and file it into you know where.
Spend ten minutes on the web surfing the keywords “prepping skills” and you will be presented with the site after site preaching the gospel of prepping for the time when the stuff hits the fan, something we commonly call SHTF. The truth is it is a bit bittersweet to see so many of us planning for a major meltdown of our economy, food supply, power grid, country, society, and quite possibly our planet.
Call it a feeling or an intuitive guess, but It is as though we are preparing for a huge rogue wave that will hit any moment. There is a huge, 100-foot wall of disaster that is zooming toward us. We don’t know what is coming or when, but we know in our gut that it is on its way. And so we prepare.
In my opinion, every once in awhile we need to go through a self-assessment to determine how well we are doing in planning for this rogue wave of collapse, in whatever form it might take.
Last week the Supreme Court of the United States voted that President Obama exceeded his authority when he granted exemptions from the immigration laws passed by Congress.
But the Supreme Court also exceeded its own authority by granting the University of Texas an exemption from the Constitution’s requirement of “equal protection of the laws,” by voting that racial preferences for student admissions were legal.
Supreme Court decisions in affirmative action cases are the longest running fraud since the 1896 decision upholding racial segregation laws in the Jim Crow South, on grounds that “separate but equal” facilities were consistent with the Constitution. Everybody knew that those facilities were separate but by no means equal. Nevertheless, this charade lasted until 1954.
But minority students admitted to institutions whose academic standards they do not meet are all too often needlessly turned into failures, even when they have the prerequisites for success in some other institution whose normal standards they do meet.
When black students who scored at the 90th percentile in math were admitted to M.I.T., where the other students scored at the 99th percentile, a significant number of black students failed to graduate there, even though they could have graduated with honors from most other academic institutions.
We do not have so many students with that kind of ability that we can afford to sacrifice them on the altar of political correctness.
Such negative consequences of mismatching minority students with institutions, for the sake of racial body count, have been documented in a number of studies, most notably “Mismatch,” a book by Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor, Jr., whose sub-title is: “How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It.”
When racial preferences in student admissions in the University of California system were banned, the number of black and Hispanic students in the system declined slightly, but the number actually graduating rose substantially. So did the number graduating with degrees in tough subjects like math, science and engineering.
But hard facts carry no such weight among politicians as magic words like “diversity” — a word repeated endlessly, without one speck of evidence to back up its sweeping claims of benefits. It too is part of the Supreme Court fraud, going back to a 1978 decision that seemingly banned racial quotas — unless the word “diversity” was used instead of “quotas.”
Seeming to ban racial preferences, while letting them continue under another name, was clever politically. But the last thing we need in Washington are nine more politicians, wearing judicial robes.
While San Andreas and Cascadia are well known for their potential to cause megaquakes, researchers have warned a little-known fault in the midwest is also long overdue a tremor.
The New Madrid Seismic Zone is 150 miles long, and experts say a quake would impact seven states – Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi.
They claim ‘all hell would break loose,’ with 715,000 buildings damaged and 2.6m people left without power.
The New Madrid Seismic Zone is 150 miles long, and experts say a quake would impact seven states – Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi.
The Mid-America Earthquake Center at the University of Illinois released a report in 2009, which suggested the effects of a force seven or stronger quake from the fault line.
Amr Elnashai, the study’s lead author, wrote ‘All hell will break loose.’
The 150-mile (240 km) long fault system, which extends into five states, stretches southward from Cairo, Illinois; through Hayti, Caruthersville and New Madrid in Missouri; through Blytheville into Marked Tree in Arkansas.
It also covers a part of West Tennessee, near Reelfoot Lake, extending southeast into Dyersburg. It is southwest of the Wabash Valley Seismic Zone.
Most of the seismicity is located between 3 and 15 miles (4.8 and 24.1 km) beneath the Earth’s surface, researchers believe.
The area has not seen significant earthquakes for more than 200 years.
In the winter of 1811 and 1812, there were three earthquakes of magnitude 7 – as high as 7.7 – and a series of aftershocks across the American Midwest.
Last week’s UK vote to leave the EU may have come as a shock to many, but the sentiment that led British voters to reject rule from Brussels is nothing unique. In fact, it is growing sentiment worldwide. Frustration with politics as usual, with political parties that really do not differ in philosophy, with an economy that serves the one percent at the expense of the rest of society is a growing phenomenon throughout Europe and in the United States as well. The Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump phenomena are but one example of a frustrated public sensing something is very wrong with society and looking for a way out.
What is happening in the UK, in Europe, and in the US, is nothing less than a breakdown of the entire system. The EU was meant to be a customs union where post-World War II Western Europe could rebuild itself through free trade and a reduction in bureaucracy. Through corruption and political ambition, it became an unelected bully government in Brussels, where the well-connected were well compensated and insulated from the votes of mere citizens.
Wait a minute. They’re already dead. Brexit just reveals that not everybody’s brains have been eaten. A viral contagion now threatens the zombified institutions of daily life, especially the workings of politics and finance. Just as zombies exist only in the collective imagination, so do these two principal activities of society operate mainly on trust, an ephemeral product of the hive-mind.
When things fall apart in stressed complex systems, they tend to fall apart fast. It’s called phase change. Too many things in 21st-century life have depended on sheer trust that the people-in-charge know what they are doing. That trust has subsisted on the doling out of money-from-nothing: debt, reckless bond issuance. TARP, QEs, bail-outs, bail-ins, Operation Twists, Ponzi schemes… the whole sad-ass armamentarium of banking necromancy. The politicians let it get out of hand. Things that can’t go on don’t, and now they won’t.
The politics of Great Britain are now falling apart landslide-style. Since just about everybody in or near power can be blamed for the national predicament, there’s nobody to turn to, at least not yet. The Labour party just acted out The Caine Mutiny, starring Jeremy Corbyn as Captain Queeg. The Tory Cameron gave three months notice without any plausible replacement in view. Now Cameron’s people are hinting in the media that they can just drag their feet on Brexit, that is, not do anything to enable it from actually happening for a while. Of course, that’s what the monkeyshines of banking and finance have done: postponed the inevitable reckoning with the realities of our time: growing resource scarcity, population overshoot, climate change, ecological holocaust, and the diminishing returns of technology.
Britain illustrates the problem nicely: how to produce “wealth” without producing wealth. It’s called “the City,” their name for the little district of London that is their Wall Street. In the absence of producing real things, the City became the driver of the UK’s economy, a ghastly parasitical organism that functioned as the central transfer station for the world’s swindles and frauds, churning the West’s dwindling residual capital into a slurry of fees, commissions, arbitrages, rigged casino bets, and rip-offs. In the process, it enabled the European Central Bank (ECB) to run the con-job that the European Union (EU) became, with the fatal distortions of credit that have put its members into a ditch and sent the private European banks off a cliff, Thelma and Louise style.
The next stage of this protean global melodrama is what happens when currencies and interest rates become completely unglued from their assigned roles as patsies in financial racketeering. Sooner or later we’ll know what’s going on in the vast shadowy gloaming of “derivatives,” especially the “innovative” arrangements that affect to be “insurance” against losses in currency and interest rate “positions” — bets made on the movements of these things. When currencies rise or fall quickly, these so-called “swaps” are “triggered,” and then some hapless institution is left holding a big bag of dog-shit. A zombie is a terrible thing to behold, but a zombie holding a bag of dog-shit is like unto the end of the world.
Once this contagion starts burning, the people-in-charge won’t be able to quell it the way they did last time: by drowning it in torrents of money-from-nowhere. At least not without inducing real-deal inflation, the kind that leads to epochal ruin and more intense political upheaval: the nation-changing kind. We’re about five minutes away from that in the USA already, with the loathsome duo of Hillary and Trump putting on a Punch and Judy show for a disgusted public. If nothing else, Hillary and Trump represent the withering of political trust in America. The parties that spawned them are also whirling around the drain of credibility. They won’t survive in the form we knew them.
Who knows what comes out of this vacuum, what rough beast slouches towards Washington.
Reprinted from Kunstler.com.
Bromelain is a protein-digesting (proteolytic) enzyme complex found in the fruit and, in higher concentrations, in the stem of the pineapple (Ananas comosus). It is able to hydrolyze or break down a wide variety of protein types in a range of both acid and alkaline environments.
Originally isolated in the late 1800s, bromelain can play a key role in digestion, and perhaps more importantly, its properties have prompted many practitioners to use it as an agent in wound healing and the prevention of illness and irritation decades.
What Does Bromelain Do?Due to its beneficial properties, bromelain is currently being studied for topical applications for burns. Recent lab studies on animals show that bromelain helps slough off dead tissue from third-degree burns. Other studies show its effective topical use in people with second- and third-degree burns.
4. Insect Bites and Stings
Bromelain may be applied topically to lower swelling and reduce discomfort associated with insect bites and stings.
5. Reduced Swelling After Sports Injuries
Studies show that bromelain may speed up healing time after a physical or sports injury. Taking it has been linked to reduced swelling related to sprains, strains, bruises, and other minor muscle injuries.