November 23rd, 2011
A few days ago, when the Occupy Los Angeles protesters were facing the first threat of arrest if they did not leave the city hall park they have recently called home, it seemed during the majority of the television news spots highlighting the anticipated show-down that most of the individuals interviewed and causing a ruckus were actually labor union employees. Additionally interviewed on a local L.A. television station was a simpleton wearing a t-shirt with a picture of F.D. Roosevelt. The interviews inspired me to blog a message to the legitimate Occupy protesters and about the hypocrisy of the aforementioned interviewed ‘protesters.’
To any legitimate Occupy protesters I suggest: IGNORE THE LABOR UNIONS AND IGNORE ANY F.D.R. NEW DEAL-ISTS TOO!!!
It surely appears that the nation’s labor unions have done little during the last several decades to help the economic plight of the typical American. As such, the labor union leaders appear even more inept and/or disinterested about the economic difficulties of Americans than the average career politician. The unions seem have to done nothing to prevent the off-shoring of our industries and jobs. The leadership of the unions appear as nothing but a bunch of greedy individuals preaching the benefits of long-term nepotism. Even those union members who appeared to support the Occupy L.A. movement during the recent day of arrests were union workers who most likely took paid vacation or sick leave from their jobs to attend the event – which surely appears as not relevant to the plight of the protesters who cant find jobs and are frustrated by the never-ending nepotism, favoritism, and unjust practices displayed by those in power over recent history.
Then there was the interviewed individual with the New England accent wearing a shirt displaying a picture of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He commented to the news reporter: “yea…, F.D.R, the greatest American and we need another hero like him here now,” - or something like that. Either the individual was a socialist or merely ignorant. Because, clearly it was F.D.R. who allowed the Federal Reserve System to take the reigns of the U.S. government during the last Great Depression of the 1930s. When the Federal Reserve took over the nation’s government, it was thereafter that the banks rose to the level of political power that they now enjoy. So, don’t be fooled by any idiot preaching the benefits of socialism or the New Deal program/theory of the last Great Depression.
We need some level of reform in the nation, yes! We don’t need anyone else to give power to those who were never elected while these same individuals line their own pockets at taxpayer expense all the while preaching how what they do is for the benefit of the populace. Don’t listen to self-serving liars, socialists, or mere idiots that can not even ascertain the truth of history.
Adam Trotter / AVT
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
11-11-11 Day, Repeal the Eleventh Amendment, I say!
11/11/11
On this eleventh day of the eleventh month of the eleventh year, November 11th, 2011, I say:
REPEAL THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.
The beauty and simplicity of the U.S. Federal Constitution and its associated Bill of Rights, is quite remarkable. At no time in history has such a significant document for mankind ever been duplicated and it is unlikely that at any time in the future will such a document be rivaled. Additionally, it is also unlikely that such a group of intelligent men in positions of power as the Founding Fathers and the Framers of the Constitution, who had the wealth and the resources of the young U.S. nation at their finger tips merely for their taking, likely will ever again decide that such wealth and power was not Rightfully theirs for the taking and that this new-found wealth, power, freedoms, and even the government itself was properly to be left for, and vested in, the People of the Nation. Of course the men were likely geniuses who had lived in the face Tyranny and were of the mind set to never allow tyranny to rule in the new Nation of the United States of America.
Yet the most beautiful facet as well as its most simple one, is the Constitution's ability to change. And, hence, this is why We still subscribe to the Document to this day! This long-standing Document - with its ability to change to meet the needs of the Nation - makes the United States of America the longest standing democracy in the world.
Now it appears that at least one more change is necessary:
Ironically, and by comparison, it seems nearly blasphemous that the first follow-on amendment ever added to the spectacular U.S. Federal Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the Eleventh Amendment, would so hideously display the more natural inclination of those in positions of power in that it invoked sovereign immunity for the governments of the U.S. Nation. (That is, immunity from law suits, particularly on a Federal level. For instance it is unlikely that a lone, individual citizen could sue a state government in Federal court.) Because, up until the point in time that was the Eleventh Amendment, the Constitution had granted and vested in the American People the Rights of a Sovereign (essentially). Then, at the first sign of any possible trouble, i.e.: the state governments might actually have to pay their outstanding debts and could be held legally accountable for any outstanding debts (say, accountable in a Federal court), those actors who more-or-less amounted the first congressional replacement crew taking the reigns of government from the Framers of the Constitution decided to grant sovereign immunity to the governments of the land – as if the governments had now become King.* That is to say, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights originally granted Sovereign status (and the government) to the People**. Then, reality or fear or something set in and the U.S. government officials in Congress decided to grant King-type status to itself and the States of the Nation.
The Eleventh Amendment, as I have attempted to explain above, was clearly opposed to the spirit of the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. By the time the Eleventh Amendment was ratified, unfortunately, many of the Framers and original signatories of the Constitution had left the Federal government – apparently deciding that to stay in power for more than a few years would amount to a new class of nobility (hear that, modern-day career politicians?). Obviously, those of the replacement crew were more concerned for the welfare of the governments than for the welfare of the People of the Nation – as evidenced by their ratification of the Eleventh Amendment.
So, on this day of 11-11-11, November 11th, 2011, the time is now at hand to rid the Nation of this hypocrisy that is the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Federal Constitution. As are the Peoples and corporations (albeit possibly to a lesser extent) of the nation liable for their misgivings, mistakes, and wrongful behavior, it is time to make the governments of our land live up to these same standards and make them responsible for the wrongs of government as well. That is to say, get rid of the document (amendment) that allows the governments to act without reproach: RID THE NATION OF THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION!!!!!! MAKE THE GOVERNMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS, BEHAVIOR, AND INEPTITUDE!!! (I firmly believe such would make Chief Justice Marshall proud.)
Should I be able…..
Adam Vernon Trotter / AVT
* 'long about 1812, the King of England for his part, put the governments of the new U.S. Nation on notice as to what would happen when they didn’t pay their debts to him, mind you – regardless of how the governments now saw themselves above the American People; these entities were clearly not beyond the reach of the King and his armies in red, nor beyond reproach by the King’s ships on the high seas, it should be noted.
** Worthy of note, several signatory officials did not sign the Constitution claiming that it vested too much power in a centralized form of government. "On September 17, 1787, the Constitutional Convention came to a close in the Assembly Room of Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. ... While offering incredible contributions, George Mason of Virginia, Edmund Randolph of Virginia, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts refused to sign the final document because of basic philosophical differences. Mainly, they were fearful of an all-powerful government and wanted a bill of rights added to protect the rights of the people." They were probably a bit ahead of their time, methinks. Also of interest, "There were 70 individuals chosen to attend the meetings with the initial purpose of amending the Articles of Confederation. ... Rhode Island opted to not send any delegates. ... John Delaware was absent but had another delegate sign for him. ... [A]nd ultimately only thirty-nine delegates signed the Constitution." "On September 25, 1789, Congress transmitted to the state legislatures twelve proposed amendments of which the first two dealt with Congressional representation and Congressional pay. Numbers three through twelve were adopted by the states to become the Bill of Rights in 1791."
(Facts from "The U.S. Constitution And Fascinating Facts About It." http://www.amazon.com/U-S-Constitution-Fascinating-Facts-About/dp/1891743007/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321054943&sr=1-1. Buy it!! At about three dollars ($3), it will likely be the best book you ever purchased. Tell 'em at Amazon that I sent you and maybe you can get a discount on the price.) :)
A Just Government Fears Not…
http://poetrybyadamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-government-fears-not.html
REPEAL THE ELEVENTH (11TH) AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. FEDERAL CONSTITUTION!! Fix Our Dysfunctional Governments and Make Them Liable!
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/02/repeal-eleventh-11th-amendment-to-us.html
On this eleventh day of the eleventh month of the eleventh year, November 11th, 2011, I say:
REPEAL THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.
The beauty and simplicity of the U.S. Federal Constitution and its associated Bill of Rights, is quite remarkable. At no time in history has such a significant document for mankind ever been duplicated and it is unlikely that at any time in the future will such a document be rivaled. Additionally, it is also unlikely that such a group of intelligent men in positions of power as the Founding Fathers and the Framers of the Constitution, who had the wealth and the resources of the young U.S. nation at their finger tips merely for their taking, likely will ever again decide that such wealth and power was not Rightfully theirs for the taking and that this new-found wealth, power, freedoms, and even the government itself was properly to be left for, and vested in, the People of the Nation. Of course the men were likely geniuses who had lived in the face Tyranny and were of the mind set to never allow tyranny to rule in the new Nation of the United States of America.
Yet the most beautiful facet as well as its most simple one, is the Constitution's ability to change. And, hence, this is why We still subscribe to the Document to this day! This long-standing Document - with its ability to change to meet the needs of the Nation - makes the United States of America the longest standing democracy in the world.
Now it appears that at least one more change is necessary:
Ironically, and by comparison, it seems nearly blasphemous that the first follow-on amendment ever added to the spectacular U.S. Federal Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the Eleventh Amendment, would so hideously display the more natural inclination of those in positions of power in that it invoked sovereign immunity for the governments of the U.S. Nation. (That is, immunity from law suits, particularly on a Federal level. For instance it is unlikely that a lone, individual citizen could sue a state government in Federal court.) Because, up until the point in time that was the Eleventh Amendment, the Constitution had granted and vested in the American People the Rights of a Sovereign (essentially). Then, at the first sign of any possible trouble, i.e.: the state governments might actually have to pay their outstanding debts and could be held legally accountable for any outstanding debts (say, accountable in a Federal court), those actors who more-or-less amounted the first congressional replacement crew taking the reigns of government from the Framers of the Constitution decided to grant sovereign immunity to the governments of the land – as if the governments had now become King.* That is to say, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights originally granted Sovereign status (and the government) to the People**. Then, reality or fear or something set in and the U.S. government officials in Congress decided to grant King-type status to itself and the States of the Nation.
The Eleventh Amendment, as I have attempted to explain above, was clearly opposed to the spirit of the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. By the time the Eleventh Amendment was ratified, unfortunately, many of the Framers and original signatories of the Constitution had left the Federal government – apparently deciding that to stay in power for more than a few years would amount to a new class of nobility (hear that, modern-day career politicians?). Obviously, those of the replacement crew were more concerned for the welfare of the governments than for the welfare of the People of the Nation – as evidenced by their ratification of the Eleventh Amendment.
At sometime during the early 1800s, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall informed the governments that they were liable in equity (and Law per Article III section 2) nevertheless and in spite of the garbage spewed forth under the guise of the Eleventh Amendment. Not surprisingly, the courts within the United States have never since referred to that decision. (Can we see a trend forming here?)
The Eleventh Amendment itself experienced a delay of proclamation “…because of delays that occurred in certifying the ratification.” I would put forth that such a delay was due to the fact that Congress of that time knew well that the Eleventh Amendment was contrary to spirit and contrary to nearly every aspect of the Federal Constitution. Such would surely seem to have been an embarrassment to all involved. The amendment was ratified in February of 1795 but not proclaimed until 1798. For instance, was it merely coincidence that about this same time Congress passed The Sedition Act of 1798? I would think not! (See: Relevant to: The Sedition Act of 1798, 1 Stat. 596.)
The Eleventh Amendment itself experienced a delay of proclamation “…because of delays that occurred in certifying the ratification.” I would put forth that such a delay was due to the fact that Congress of that time knew well that the Eleventh Amendment was contrary to spirit and contrary to nearly every aspect of the Federal Constitution. Such would surely seem to have been an embarrassment to all involved. The amendment was ratified in February of 1795 but not proclaimed until 1798. For instance, was it merely coincidence that about this same time Congress passed The Sedition Act of 1798? I would think not! (See: Relevant to: The Sedition Act of 1798, 1 Stat. 596.)
So, on this day of 11-11-11, November 11th, 2011, the time is now at hand to rid the Nation of this hypocrisy that is the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Federal Constitution. As are the Peoples and corporations (albeit possibly to a lesser extent) of the nation liable for their misgivings, mistakes, and wrongful behavior, it is time to make the governments of our land live up to these same standards and make them responsible for the wrongs of government as well. That is to say, get rid of the document (amendment) that allows the governments to act without reproach: RID THE NATION OF THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION!!!!!! MAKE THE GOVERNMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS, BEHAVIOR, AND INEPTITUDE!!! (I firmly believe such would make Chief Justice Marshall proud.)
Should I be able…..
Adam Vernon Trotter / AVT
* 'long about 1812, the King of England for his part, put the governments of the new U.S. Nation on notice as to what would happen when they didn’t pay their debts to him, mind you – regardless of how the governments now saw themselves above the American People; these entities were clearly not beyond the reach of the King and his armies in red, nor beyond reproach by the King’s ships on the high seas, it should be noted.
** Worthy of note, several signatory officials did not sign the Constitution claiming that it vested too much power in a centralized form of government. "On September 17, 1787, the Constitutional Convention came to a close in the Assembly Room of Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. ... While offering incredible contributions, George Mason of Virginia, Edmund Randolph of Virginia, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts refused to sign the final document because of basic philosophical differences. Mainly, they were fearful of an all-powerful government and wanted a bill of rights added to protect the rights of the people." They were probably a bit ahead of their time, methinks. Also of interest, "There were 70 individuals chosen to attend the meetings with the initial purpose of amending the Articles of Confederation. ... Rhode Island opted to not send any delegates. ... John Delaware was absent but had another delegate sign for him. ... [A]nd ultimately only thirty-nine delegates signed the Constitution." "On September 25, 1789, Congress transmitted to the state legislatures twelve proposed amendments of which the first two dealt with Congressional representation and Congressional pay. Numbers three through twelve were adopted by the states to become the Bill of Rights in 1791."
(Facts from "The U.S. Constitution And Fascinating Facts About It." http://www.amazon.com/U-S-Constitution-Fascinating-Facts-About/dp/1891743007/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321054943&sr=1-1. Buy it!! At about three dollars ($3), it will likely be the best book you ever purchased. Tell 'em at Amazon that I sent you and maybe you can get a discount on the price.) :)
A Just Government Fears Not…
http://poetrybyadamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-government-fears-not.html
REPEAL THE ELEVENTH (11TH) AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. FEDERAL CONSTITUTION!! Fix Our Dysfunctional Governments and Make Them Liable!
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/02/repeal-eleventh-11th-amendment-to-us.html
Renegade U.S. Military Death Squad Leader Convicted
November 11th, 2011 – Veterans Day.
The military is an odd entity. It first must judge a recruit to have enough moral character to know that killing is wrong and immoral. Then it trains the recruit how to follow orders and how to best kill when ordered. The military then sends the recruit to some foreign and hostile area of conflict and the recruit is told to kill whenever necessary for offensive or defensive purposes. The military then seems shocked when a few sociopaths make it to the front lines of combat.
In the end, I don’t understand how it is that so many of our combat troops reportedly degenerate to the point that they believe themselves above the law and seem to feel the need to play God – either for the ‘success of the mission,’ for survival of themselves and comrades, or even for sport – as the case is reported to be here.
Ultimately, all I really know is that I am tired of seeing troops sent into a ‘theater of conflict’ only to subsequently return home as criminals. I mean…, if the military can not prevent the urge or necessity (or whatever) of these individuals to play God or prevent these individuals from feeling the apparent necessity of indiscriminately killing seemingly innocent civilians for the protection of themselves and fellow soldiers (or for whatever the reason), then maybe our troops should not be there at all – certainly not at U.S. taxpayer expense, in my opinion.
Bottom line is this: WE DON’T EVEN NEED PEOPLE TO FIGHT OUR WARS ANYMORE!!!!! So, why send our troops into combat if any are going to return home as convicted murderers and criminals? JUST LET THOSE CRUISE MISSILES FLY!!! The cost of the cruise missile stockpile is surely a sunk cost for the taxpayer anyhow. So, why increase the cost to our society and to the taxpayer by sending our troops into combat if any of them will returning home only to be further housed at taxpayer expense in Leavenworth Federal Prison – or wherever? Isn’t a billion dollars a day for the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq enough of a cost already?
Besides, I would have to think that much of the U.S, nation has now become in tune with the likely reason we are really fighting in Afghanistan: to control the gold, lithium, and other rare-earth metals present in that land. So, that being said, such is all the more reason to let the cruise missiles fly: pulverize the crap out of those hills so it will be all the easier for corporate America (and the likes) to come in and sweep up the gold, lithium, and whatever other rare-earth metals are present in those hills to such an extent that we would risk the lives of thousands of our countrymen to control – not to mention trillions of our dollars. No doubt, one cruise missile can do the work of a lot of steam shovels anyhow, right?
Maybe DoD would be better served to hire me as a consultant than to pay the hundreds of millions of dollars every month in salaries to the Pentagon Brass. I would probably do a better job obtaining the ‘nation’s goals’ with less ‘collateral damage’ and less societal costs to America and to the world as a whole.
Well, anyway, at least we can be proud that the U.S. military doesn’t stand for just any killings of innocents in the field. Regardless, We owe it to our veterans who fought and died for our Rights to further the cause of Justice wherever We are able.
By the way, happy Veterans Day.
AVT
PS. This blog entry was not intended to come across as arrogant. It was merely an attempt to show the idiocy of the long-standing and continued Pentagon paradigms which bring situations like this ‘death squad’ to bear on the American nation.
A Just Government Fears Not…
http://poetrybyadamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-government-fears-not.html
Soldier Is Convicted of Killing Afghan Civilians for Sport
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/us/calvin-gibbs-convicted-of-killing-civilians-in-afghanistan.html
Calvin Gibbs, Leader of 'Thrill Kill' Soldiers, Guilty of Murder
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/leader-thrill-kill-soldiers-found-guilty/story?id=14924863
'Kill team' US platoon commander guilty of Afghan murders
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/11/kill-team-calvin-gibbs-convicted
Taliban ambush 1st platoon 3rd squad 12 B.co afghanistan 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbUoRlDQ7QI&feature=related
U.S. Military 'Death Squad' Investigated
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSSPyasUH7A
Gold Mine Deal in Afghanistan Equates to Things Are "...on track to achieve our goals" for the U.S. Presidential Administration?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/12/gold-mine-deal-in-afghanistan-equates.html
Rare-Earth Metals Abundant in Afghanistan?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/06/rare-earth-metals-abundant-in.html
The military is an odd entity. It first must judge a recruit to have enough moral character to know that killing is wrong and immoral. Then it trains the recruit how to follow orders and how to best kill when ordered. The military then sends the recruit to some foreign and hostile area of conflict and the recruit is told to kill whenever necessary for offensive or defensive purposes. The military then seems shocked when a few sociopaths make it to the front lines of combat.
In the end, I don’t understand how it is that so many of our combat troops reportedly degenerate to the point that they believe themselves above the law and seem to feel the need to play God – either for the ‘success of the mission,’ for survival of themselves and comrades, or even for sport – as the case is reported to be here.
Ultimately, all I really know is that I am tired of seeing troops sent into a ‘theater of conflict’ only to subsequently return home as criminals. I mean…, if the military can not prevent the urge or necessity (or whatever) of these individuals to play God or prevent these individuals from feeling the apparent necessity of indiscriminately killing seemingly innocent civilians for the protection of themselves and fellow soldiers (or for whatever the reason), then maybe our troops should not be there at all – certainly not at U.S. taxpayer expense, in my opinion.
Bottom line is this: WE DON’T EVEN NEED PEOPLE TO FIGHT OUR WARS ANYMORE!!!!! So, why send our troops into combat if any are going to return home as convicted murderers and criminals? JUST LET THOSE CRUISE MISSILES FLY!!! The cost of the cruise missile stockpile is surely a sunk cost for the taxpayer anyhow. So, why increase the cost to our society and to the taxpayer by sending our troops into combat if any of them will returning home only to be further housed at taxpayer expense in Leavenworth Federal Prison – or wherever? Isn’t a billion dollars a day for the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq enough of a cost already?
Besides, I would have to think that much of the U.S, nation has now become in tune with the likely reason we are really fighting in Afghanistan: to control the gold, lithium, and other rare-earth metals present in that land. So, that being said, such is all the more reason to let the cruise missiles fly: pulverize the crap out of those hills so it will be all the easier for corporate America (and the likes) to come in and sweep up the gold, lithium, and whatever other rare-earth metals are present in those hills to such an extent that we would risk the lives of thousands of our countrymen to control – not to mention trillions of our dollars. No doubt, one cruise missile can do the work of a lot of steam shovels anyhow, right?
Maybe DoD would be better served to hire me as a consultant than to pay the hundreds of millions of dollars every month in salaries to the Pentagon Brass. I would probably do a better job obtaining the ‘nation’s goals’ with less ‘collateral damage’ and less societal costs to America and to the world as a whole.
Well, anyway, at least we can be proud that the U.S. military doesn’t stand for just any killings of innocents in the field. Regardless, We owe it to our veterans who fought and died for our Rights to further the cause of Justice wherever We are able.
By the way, happy Veterans Day.
AVT
PS. This blog entry was not intended to come across as arrogant. It was merely an attempt to show the idiocy of the long-standing and continued Pentagon paradigms which bring situations like this ‘death squad’ to bear on the American nation.
A Just Government Fears Not…
http://poetrybyadamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-government-fears-not.html
Soldier Is Convicted of Killing Afghan Civilians for Sport
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/us/calvin-gibbs-convicted-of-killing-civilians-in-afghanistan.html
Calvin Gibbs, Leader of 'Thrill Kill' Soldiers, Guilty of Murder
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/leader-thrill-kill-soldiers-found-guilty/story?id=14924863
'Kill team' US platoon commander guilty of Afghan murders
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/11/kill-team-calvin-gibbs-convicted
Taliban ambush 1st platoon 3rd squad 12 B.co afghanistan 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbUoRlDQ7QI&feature=related
U.S. Military 'Death Squad' Investigated
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSSPyasUH7A
Gold Mine Deal in Afghanistan Equates to Things Are "...on track to achieve our goals" for the U.S. Presidential Administration?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/12/gold-mine-deal-in-afghanistan-equates.html
Rare-Earth Metals Abundant in Afghanistan?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/06/rare-earth-metals-abundant-in.html
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Federal Reserve : Banks : Citizenry : Volcker Rule :: Fox : Sharp Teeth : Hens : Hen House Door.
November 3rd, 2011
It is interesting that at this point in time the Federal Reserve, SEC, Comptroller of the Treasury, and the FDIC have all reportedly supported an effort to curtail the investment activities of the nation’s banks. The Volcker Rule reportedly aims to prevent the banks from investing for their own benefit (proprietary trades) and the Rule is to allow the banks only to invest funds in the markets on behalf of clients – with some exceptions, of course. The Rule is part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act; with the Act totaling 848 pages, http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/wallstreetreform-cpa.pdf - see page 245 for the Volcker Rule. Whether such a plan as the Volcker Rule (and maybe the banking act in general) has any worthwhile effects to benefit the American nation and its people is anyone’s guess and only time will tell.
One can surmise that the aforementioned government-type* entities have supported such an effort as the Volcker Rule to force the banks into lending money to consumers and businesses again – just like the banks of yesteryear. The Dodd-Frank Act, with its Volcker Act, also claims to be an attempt to head off future credit crises, should a recovery ever materialize from the current crisis. However, one must wonder why the SEC, the FDIC, the Comptroller, and the nation’s favored private banking cartel (the national bank we call the Fed*) did not assert such a plan when the banks were given trillions of tax dollars over the last several years.
We are all well aware of the potential of our often inept governments across the land – when taking any action – to make any given situation worse. As such, one can only wonder what may result from the current initiatives. For example, it would seem that to quash the profits of the nation’s banks via the Volcker Rule (or whatever) would only incite the banks to squeeze the consumer for more banking related fees – or any other fees the banks can dream up to increase their profits. Such a goal of squeezing customers for more money may well have been the impetus behind the recently proposed fee increases and charges for purchases made with bank issued debit cards (which the banks appeared to have abandoned as a result of public outcry concerning the topic), and such abandoned efforts may have been a result of the upcoming banking regulations.
Hypothetically, maybe the outlook from this legislation is not entirely bleak. Though not very likely, the Volcker Rule effort could cause the wealthy banks to gather the required gumption to legally challenge the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System. If so, in the end, the Volcker Rule could lead to an actual win-win situation for the American consumer. Though given our government’s apparent favoritism with respect to the nation’s banks, it would seem not wise to anticipate any significant benefits to the consumer from our government or any other entity which has been sleeping with the banks throughout our nation’s history.
At best, maybe the apropos cliché is: ‘better late than never.’ Either way, this latest effort of the government entities and the Fed seems to conjure up another cliché, something like: ‘the fox closing the door to the hen house after all the chickens have been eaten.’
Adam Trotter / AVT
* Of course, we are all aware that the Federal Reserve, the banking cartel which runs the U.S. economy, is not a government agency. For those interested, see:
Volcker Rule
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcker_Rule
Volcker Rule
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/v/volcker_rule/index.html
Volcker Rule, Once Simple, Now Boggles
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/business/volcker-rule-grows-from-simple-to-complex.html?_r=1&ref=volckerrule
Volcker Rule Is Out, How Much Will It Hurt? http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2011/10/12/volcker-rule-is-out-how-much-will-it-hurt/
MF Global’s Collapse Exposes Prop-Trading Risk That Volcker Wants to Curb
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-31/mf-global-exposes-prop-trading-risk-that-volcker-wants-to-curb.html
Regulators release plan for Volcker Rule limits on bank trading
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/regulators-release-plan-for-volcker-rule-limits-on-bank-trading/2011/10/11/gIQAjVacdL_story.html
Selected Sections of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
SEC. 343. INSURANCE OF TRANSACTION ACCOUNTS.
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/reform/dfa_selections.html#619
Thomas Jefferson and the Federal Reserve System.
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/06/thomas-jefferson-and-federal-reserve.html
Concerning the Federal Reserve System and Fiduciary Responsibility….
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/10/concerning-federal-reserve-system-and.html
It is interesting that at this point in time the Federal Reserve, SEC, Comptroller of the Treasury, and the FDIC have all reportedly supported an effort to curtail the investment activities of the nation’s banks. The Volcker Rule reportedly aims to prevent the banks from investing for their own benefit (proprietary trades) and the Rule is to allow the banks only to invest funds in the markets on behalf of clients – with some exceptions, of course. The Rule is part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act; with the Act totaling 848 pages, http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/wallstreetreform-cpa.pdf - see page 245 for the Volcker Rule. Whether such a plan as the Volcker Rule (and maybe the banking act in general) has any worthwhile effects to benefit the American nation and its people is anyone’s guess and only time will tell.
One can surmise that the aforementioned government-type* entities have supported such an effort as the Volcker Rule to force the banks into lending money to consumers and businesses again – just like the banks of yesteryear. The Dodd-Frank Act, with its Volcker Act, also claims to be an attempt to head off future credit crises, should a recovery ever materialize from the current crisis. However, one must wonder why the SEC, the FDIC, the Comptroller, and the nation’s favored private banking cartel (the national bank we call the Fed*) did not assert such a plan when the banks were given trillions of tax dollars over the last several years.
We are all well aware of the potential of our often inept governments across the land – when taking any action – to make any given situation worse. As such, one can only wonder what may result from the current initiatives. For example, it would seem that to quash the profits of the nation’s banks via the Volcker Rule (or whatever) would only incite the banks to squeeze the consumer for more banking related fees – or any other fees the banks can dream up to increase their profits. Such a goal of squeezing customers for more money may well have been the impetus behind the recently proposed fee increases and charges for purchases made with bank issued debit cards (which the banks appeared to have abandoned as a result of public outcry concerning the topic), and such abandoned efforts may have been a result of the upcoming banking regulations.
Hypothetically, maybe the outlook from this legislation is not entirely bleak. Though not very likely, the Volcker Rule effort could cause the wealthy banks to gather the required gumption to legally challenge the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System. If so, in the end, the Volcker Rule could lead to an actual win-win situation for the American consumer. Though given our government’s apparent favoritism with respect to the nation’s banks, it would seem not wise to anticipate any significant benefits to the consumer from our government or any other entity which has been sleeping with the banks throughout our nation’s history.
At best, maybe the apropos cliché is: ‘better late than never.’ Either way, this latest effort of the government entities and the Fed seems to conjure up another cliché, something like: ‘the fox closing the door to the hen house after all the chickens have been eaten.’
Adam Trotter / AVT
* Of course, we are all aware that the Federal Reserve, the banking cartel which runs the U.S. economy, is not a government agency. For those interested, see:
Volcker Rule
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcker_Rule
Volcker Rule
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/v/volcker_rule/index.html
Volcker Rule, Once Simple, Now Boggles
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/business/volcker-rule-grows-from-simple-to-complex.html?_r=1&ref=volckerrule
Volcker Rule Is Out, How Much Will It Hurt? http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2011/10/12/volcker-rule-is-out-how-much-will-it-hurt/
MF Global’s Collapse Exposes Prop-Trading Risk That Volcker Wants to Curb
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-31/mf-global-exposes-prop-trading-risk-that-volcker-wants-to-curb.html
Regulators release plan for Volcker Rule limits on bank trading
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/regulators-release-plan-for-volcker-rule-limits-on-bank-trading/2011/10/11/gIQAjVacdL_story.html
Selected Sections of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
SEC. 343. INSURANCE OF TRANSACTION ACCOUNTS.
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/reform/dfa_selections.html#619
Thomas Jefferson and the Federal Reserve System.
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/06/thomas-jefferson-and-federal-reserve.html
Concerning the Federal Reserve System and Fiduciary Responsibility….
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2010/10/concerning-federal-reserve-system-and.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)