16 search results for "crapitallism"

Crapitallism sinkhole: Nobody’s ever dealt with anything like this before ?!?


Assumption Parish, Louisiana Sinkhole Meeting, October 23, 2012 Watch the 1 hour and 40 minute briefing here:

Gov’t Expert: Louisiana sinkhole disaster unprecedented anywhere in world — Nobody’s ever dealt with this before — Not even any decent case studies that tell us how to proceed (VIDEO) – interesting comments too!

Nobody’s ever dealt with something like this

The most interesting comments (in my book):

VicFromOregon – October 24, 2012 at 3:33 am

So, as it has appeared from the very start, they are, indeed, perplexed. Since this new phenomenon forced the extractors, geologists, law enforcement, residents, and local leaders, including international experts, to examine this sinkhole with a fine tooth comb, the problem is going to be how to characterize this unfolding event in such a way as to not interfere with current practices of extracting and dumping and fracking at will.


Sickputer – October 24, 2012 at 5:12 am

Ah yes, the mantra of 21st century democratic economies. Big Brothers everywhere believe in capitalist profits and socialist bailouts.

All of this subterfuge is done with great public fanfare of the touted generosity of corporations in regards to helping small businesses and individuals receive reparations for oil or nuclear industry disasters.

In reality the reparations are offset by what the corporation writes off in taxes or in a Ponzi shuffle of companies to protect their shareholders and board of directors. It should be revealed that damages to the public health and livelihoods are damaged by major eco spills far beyond any assets of a corporation or even a government. The $20 billion fund by BP for the Deep Horizon reparations is an insult to the Gulf coast citizens. All the assets of every oil company in the world wouldn’t make up the financial and social costs long term from ocean spills around the globe. Fracturing damages and nuclear pollution to priceless water aquifers adds another blank check that society will never cash over the next millennia.

“Nobody’s ever dealt with something like this”. More to follow, excuse my sarcasm.

Crapitallism: Flush Sounds from a Toilet On Fire

Assessment of Spain’s eligibility (pdf) – Dutch Minister De Jager of Finance sends Dutch parliament a letter on the Spanish program for bank support. The Chamber is asked to judge the conditions for aid to Spain.

Sadly, the document has not been translated to Spanish yet, so the Spanish people do not know what’s in it.

Banks in Spain Will Collapse

Non-performing loans within the Spanish banking sector reached EUR155.84-B in May, or 8.95% of total loans, the Bank of Spain said.

The rate of non-performing loans is close to the historical high of 9.15% recorded in Y 1994, when the Spanish economy was suffering a deep recession.

Latest statistics from the central bank showed that total Spanish bank loans dropped by 42 billion euros while non-performing loans increased by EUR16-B in May.

The European Union (EU) has earlier agreed to rescue Spain’s ailing banking sector by providing up to EUR100-B in a bid to soothe a nervous Global market.

The 1st EUR30-B will be delivered in July and the remaining will be provided in 3 traunches.

Despite the EU lifeline, it is widely believed that the Spanish banking sector will continue to face harsh situations in coming months amid rising unemployment and a possible burst of the real estate bubble.

Note: I think I see some assholes hovering up there over our heads!

Hey, shhht, what’s that I hear? … Saved by the bell! There’s the sound of our upcoming rescue!

Here we go …

Debt Crisis: Stocks and euro hit record lows after Spain’s Valencia calls for aid, Irish Independent

How Spain went from quiet to crisis in two days, Washington Post

Euro Drops As Crisis Hits Spain, ValueWalk

Crapitallism: Ayn Rand and the perversion of libertarianism

Originally published in Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed no. 34 (1993), by Lance Klafta

The political controversy of the late 19th century was:

  • whether socialists (all those who believed in the individual’s right to possess what he or she produced) should engage in the political process, seize control of the state, and use the state apparatus to achieve liberation;
  • or, whether a worker’s state was inherently contradictory, counter revolutionary, and would only lead to the creation of a new ruling class whose interests would still clash with those of the ruled – that the state should be abolished allowing for no transitional stage of any kind during which power may have the chance to reconsolidate itself.

The situation has recreated itself with amazing similarity almost exactly a century later. Non-libertarian parties the world over (those who see authoritarian centralization as the bulwark of civilization) are bankrupt, economically and intellectually. The only viable intellectual current today falls under that ambiguous term – “libertarian.”

Today there exist beneath this umbrella as many splinter groups as there were a hundred years ago under the umbrella of socialism. Two distinct trends, a right and a left if you will, are clearly discernible. One group, clearly the largest with a hierarchical organization modeled on the other political parties, believes, like most Marxists, in constitutional parliamentary republican democracy. They believe that the state is a necessary guarantor of individual safety and the product of the individual’s labor, and in gradual progress toward a free society through participation in the political process. The other group, much smaller and far more splintered, rejects the state as necessarily a tool of class domination and exploitation. This group believes that what Bakunin said a hundred years ago is as true today, “If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Czar himself.”

The first group is in all fairness a direct inheritor of the ideals of the American Revolution. In modern times, however, it has only two roots: (1) the Austrian school of economics represented by Ludwig Von Mises; (2) the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Von Mises never considered the libertarians. He answered the Marxists and the Keynesians and defended laissez-faire capitalism at a time when no one else would. His justification for capitalism was empirical – the greatest good for the greatest number. Ayn Rand, however, attempted to offer a moral justification of capitalism by substituting the word `capitalism’ for the libertarian meaning of the word “socialism”. She then attributed all of the ills of capitalism to government interference with the market and all of the world’s wealth to the minds of the men whom the world considered the robber barons.

The contrast between Ayn Rand’s “Objectivism” and libertarianism is deeper than mere substitution of terminology, however. Several of her propositions or axioms place her clearly outside of the libertarian tradition. Her justification of the state is derived from a Hobbesian state of nature theory:

… a society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into chaos and gang warfare…. [The Virtue of Selfishness,152; pb 112]

If a society provided no organized protection against force, it would compel every citizen to go about armed, to turn his home into a fortress, to shoot any strangers approaching his door – or to join a protective gang of citizens who would fight other gangs, formed for the same purpose, and thus bring about the degeneration of society into the chaos of gang rule, i.e., rule by brute force, into perpetual warfare of prehistoric savages. [Ibid., 146; pb 108]

Ayn Rand’s belief in the inherent depravity of human nature which renders us forever incapable of living without rulers and not descending to the level of `savages’, clearly places her outside of the libertarian tradition which views human nature as essentially good, capable of indefinite improvement through the experience of freedom and the exercise of reason. Her knowledge of anthropology is as embarrassing as her understanding of history. For example, in regards to her conception of who are the savages, she describes America as, “…a superlative material achievement in the midst of an untouched wilderness, against the resistance of savage tribes.” [For The New Intellectual, 58; pb 50]

To Rand, the essential characteristic of the state is that it possesses a monopoly on the use of retaliatory force. How does she justify this monopoly or national sovereignty? She accepts it as a given, something not requiring a justification, and demands that an-archy, the negation of the proposition, justify itself. Her concept of national sovereignty is then something transcendental, existing separate and apart from individuals, and beyond the right of the individual to accept or reject according to his or her own reason. These propositions clearly place Ayn Rand’s philosophy closer to Hobbes, Hegel, and Marx, than to libertarianism.

The state, according to Miss Rand, must hold a monopoly on the enforcement of contracts and the settling of disputes between individuals, at least whenever this arbitration is not accepted by both sides voluntarily. She fails to consider that the enforcement of contracts by the state fundamentally alters the nature of free agreements. Agreements are made on terms which otherwise might not be, because they are justiciable.

The terms of “free agreements” under law are titled in favor of lenders over debtors, landlords over tenants, employers over employees, in a way which would not exist in a “free market.” This leveraging of power is not `objective’ at all. Depending purely on legal convention, creditors may have debtors imprisoned, tenants may be evicted without notice and their effects confiscated, one human being may own another or the land on which another lives and works, all to varying degrees.


Ayn Rand and the Perversion of Libertarianism

Crapitallism: mysterious black box formulas and proprietary algorithms

European Financial Crisis by Luojie, China Daily, China

June 02, 2012, Georges Soros

Ever since the Crash of 2008 there has been a widespread recognition, both among economists and the general public, that economic theory has failed. But there is no consensus on the causes and the extent of that failure.

I believe that the failure is more profound than generally recognized. It goes back to the foundations of economic theory. Economics tried to model itself on Newtonian physics. It sought to establish universally and timelessly valid laws governing reality. But economics is a social science and there is a fundamental difference between the natural and social sciences. Social phenomena have thinking participants who base their decisions on imperfect knowledge. That is what economic theory has tried to ignore.


I am not well qualified to criticize the theory of rational expectations and the efficient market hypothesis because as a market participant I considered them so unrealistic that I never bothered to study them. That is an indictment in itself but I shall leave a detailed critique of these theories to others.


Remarks at the Festival of Economics, Trento Italy | George Soros

Occam’s Razor and Frankenstein’s Monster: Five fundamental truths fueling the Euro crisis

Posted on June 14, 2012 by Richard D Bailey

Years of observation and analysis have made something absolutely clear to me. William of Ockham, a 14th century Franciscan Friar and logician was right.

Although frequently mischaracterized the principle of Occams Razor actually posits that amongst competing theories or explanations regarding the cause of an event; It is wise to choose the one with the fewest assumptions.

Now… I subscribe to a slighly extrapolated version. I realize the contradiction in that statement, thank you. But please bear with me.

I believe that in todays financial world we make far too many decisions based upon mysterious black box formulas and proprietary algorithms. So, when the universally acclaimed geniuses model, anticipate and create political, financial and policy reactions based upon events that may take place but are predicated upon circumstances two and three standard deviations away from the norm – the likelihood of achieving the desired result for which the model was created diminishes exponentially.

For the last 40 years we have been in thrall with the notion that we can create a better world by willing it, thinking it and modeling it into creation. That we can create a humanitarian version of Frankenstein’s monster. We have become reliant on super computer quantitative models and higher orders of thinking that can predict so many probable outcomes that the simplest explanation is instantly derided and dismissed as unlikely if not impossible.

And THAT, my friends is a big part of the problem in Europe, on Wall Street and in government. We are constantly trying to prove that we are smarter than some simple basic truths.


1. Without political union you cannot have monetary union.
2. Nations with separate and distinct cultural identities do not voluntarily surrender their sovereignty.
3. All liquidity stimuli are by their nature temporary.
4. More debt can not solve an insolvency crisis, and
5. Nations overly reliant on debt to finance themselves will eventually run out of options to finance themselves.

Occam’s Razor and Frankenstein’s Monster: Five fundamental truths fueling the Euro crisis.Politinomics | Politinomics


Crapitallism: Bleeding Cash Conservatives Wasting Money To Punish Vulnerable Americans

By Peter S. Goodman

Not so long ago, the term “bleeding heart liberal” had currency in American politics as a way to accuse someone of costly naïveté. Here was a label that could be slapped on anyone who advocated policies that aimed for fairness and decency, pursuing feel-good outcomes at the supposed expense of taxpayer interest, public safety and common sense.

These days we need a new term to describe a strain of politics that has become dominant in many areas of civic life, from the foreclosure crisis to long-term unemployment. We are living through what may be called the age of “bleeding cash conservatism”,  a time when powerful and mean-spirited authorities waste taxpayer money on their own version of feel-good policies that punish vulnerable people who have landed in trouble.

We see this notion at work in the continued unwillingness of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the government-controlled mortgage behemoths — to write down loan balances for underwater borrowers (those who owe the bank more than their homes are worth). Housing experts and even economists inside these two institutions have calculated that forgiving some loan balances would be a net benefit to the American taxpayer, who is now on the hook for Fannie’s and Freddie’s books. It would limit foreclosures, keep more people in their homes and stabilize home prices.

But Fannie and Freddie’s overseer, the Bush administration holdover Edward J. DeMarco, acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has repeatedly rebuffed appeals to pragmatism and arithmetic, instead preferring to wage ideological war against troubled borrowers.

DeMarco has maintained that he is championing the interests of taxpayers by refusing to expend more funds on homeowner relief. But this is bogus accounting that ignores the ways in which taxpayers continue to suffer the costs of the foreclosure crisis, from abandoned homes that sap communities of vitality to continued pressure on home prices as the market tries to figure out how much more distressed inventory must be absorbed.

Underwater borrowers defer maintenance on their homes, and they are more likely to slide into foreclosure. With this in mind, the Obama administration sweetened the pot, tripling the incentives that Fannie and Freddie receive when they cut principal balances, eliciting promises of a reassessment from DeMarco. But he has merely delayed since then, while releasing intellectually dishonest analyses of the effects of principal reduction that have been doctored to buttress his view that doing nothing is best.


Peter S. Goodman: Bleeding Cash Conservatives Wasting Money To Punish Vulnerable Americans

Crapitallism: Icelandic financial crisis

Published on May 3, 2012 by BirgittaJoy

This video was first published and created early 2009 as an attempt to explain what was going on in Iceland.


An island in the North Atlantic oceans
Iceland – Nest for about 320.000 people
Iceland – Same size as the state of Kentucky
Iceland – Colony of Denmark until 1945
Iceland – Best known for the singer Bjork
Iceland – Also known for being the nation who elected the first woman in the world to be a president
Iceland – also known for strange and mystical landscape
Iceland – also known for its pristine nature

Until September 29th 2008 very few people cared for Iceland or even knew about it – however that was all about to change because Iceland’s limited legacy changed from mystery to being the first country in the world to literary experience the bankruptcy – the total meltdown of corporation capitalism

When you google Iceland today you will get more information about the financial crises that brought one of the best off nations in the world to its knees
Unemployment has shot from less then 1% to 10% since October 2008

What happened one might ask in awe — how is it possible that all the newly privatized banks (6 years ago the nation owned all the major banks) got basically bankrupt and the nation had to take them back with debt beyond comprehension

No one knows yet the exact number of our national debt in the aftermath of the greatest financial blunder in the history of our world

Who is to blame for the fact that almost 70% of all companies are going under?
Who is to blame for us being driven back for decades?
Who is to blame for the fate of all the people who are loosing their savings, their homes, their work, their lives?

Beyond Borders

Crapitallism: Child Poverty Tops 20 Percent In Half Of US States: Report

By Alexander Eichler, 01/ 3/2012, via @PamelaDrew

Child poverty is getting worse in America. And with more and more states seeing their populations of disadvantaged youth soar beyond pre-recession levels, the crisis is far from limited to a few troubled states.

In 2007, before the economy seized up, and before a combination of rising unemployment and plunging home values left millions of Americans scrambling to make ends meet, the child poverty rate in America was 17.8 percent, according to a report released in December from First Focus and the Brookings Institution. Only fourteen states had child poverty rates of 20 percent or more, a percentage that put them in a category the report calls “high child poverty status.”

Things have devolved considerably in the years since, however. By 2010, the national child poverty rate had risen to 21.6 percent, and the number of high-child-poverty states had nearly doubled, to 25.

It’s expected to get worse before things get better. While the official statistics aren’t in yet for 2011, the Brookings report predicts that nationwide child poverty swelled to 22 percent in the year just ended, and that the number of high child poverty states grew again to 28.

Behind the steady upward creep of these numbers lie a series of unpleasant realities. While the economy has made modest gains in recent months — something President Obama has gingerly acknowledged — jobs remain thin on the ground, and many existing jobs pay less than what a family of four needs to live. One in five Americans has had trouble putting food on the table in the past year, and nearly half of all U.S. households are struggling to cover basic expenses like electricity and medical care.

In the years since the financial crisis, the dire state of the economy has affected children as much as anyone. By the most recent estimates, sixteen million children live in poverty in the United States — a climb of some three million from 2007. Seventeen million children live in households that lack food security, meaning they do not always know where their next meal is coming from.

All told, there were about 1.6 million homeless children in the U.S. in 2010, living in shelters, motels, on the streets or temporarily with other families, according to a recent report from the National Center on Family Homelessness. That’s a rise of almost 40 percent since 2007, the NCFH says.

Overall, child poverty has increased in 43 states since 2007, according to the Brookings report, but it hasn’t grown evenly in all areas. Indiana, Michigan and Nevada have seen some of the biggest gains, with each state experiencing more than a 6 percent rise in child poverty between 2007 and 2010. Georgia, Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin and South Carolina have also seen their rates rise dramatically.

Evidence suggests that childhood poverty can have a lifelong effect on a person’s earning potential. A previous study from First Focus found that by the time children who fell into poverty during a recession grow up to be financially independent adults, their median income is about 30 percent less than that of adults who never experienced poverty as children.

HuffPost: Child Poverty Tops 20 Percent In Half Of U.S. States: Report

Crapitallism: Canadian Currency Going Digital; Marks of the Beast Imminent

April 12, 2012, via and 404 System Error: Canadian Currency Going Digital

First Canada eliminated the penny. Then it introduced a glow-in-the-dark dinosaur quarter that cost $30 to buy. Now the Royal Canadian Mint has announced plans to develop a digital alternative to all coinage (and, possibly, small bills), called “MintChip.”

Canada is making it up as it goes along.

According to the narrator of the official introductory video released Wednesday, MintChip, still in development, will be “better than cash” and “so easy a child could use it.”

MintChip will work by storing value on a physical chip, such as a microSD card or USB stick, transferring money between chips using heavily encrypted “value messages.” The system is intended to be anonymous, as chips will not be linked to bank accounts or credit cards. MintChip will have no centralized database. MintChip will make everyone want mint chocolate chip ice cream.

Causing his own wave of dessert cravings is the Royal Canadian Mint’s chief financial officer, Marc Brûlé, who also announced Wednesday a Mint-sponsored contest asking software developers to create smart-phone and other applications demonstrating MintChip’s advantages as a form of digital currency.

The first prize winner will receive one 10oz gold wafer (more dessert-talk; I see you, Canada) worth $17,000.

Here are some examples of the kinds of small transactions ideally suited to MintChip technology, according to the introductory video:

  • buying a decaf latte
  • paying to read “a Canadian history article for school”
  • “paying back that ten bucks you borrowed last week”
  • buying a song
  • paying to read a news article
  • buying “a nifty glow-in-the-dark laser for your favorite online game character”
  • Responding to criticism that MintChip would be plagued by the same demons as its digital currency predecessor, BitCoin, Brûlé was dismissive.

    “The system we would bring in would be backed by a fund. Bitcoin may work for the small group of people that believe in its value, but that could change very suddenly.”

    Let’s just see how this one plays out.

    [Toronto Star, Calgary Herald]


Money Slave Vector Illustration - Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0 Unported (Image links to vectorportal.com)

In summary, money is an expression of social conditions where private property separates means and needs. For money to have this quality it is imperative that I can only spend that which is mine. This quality and hence this separation of need and means, with all its ignorance and brutality towards need, must be violently enforced by the police and on the Bitcoin network – where what people can do to each other is limited – by an elaborate protocol of witnesses, randomness and hard mathematical problems.


Systematic enmity of interests, exclusion from social wealth, subjection of everything to capitalist growth – that is what an economy looks like where exchange, money and private property determine production and consumption. This does not change if the substance of money is gold or Bitcoin. This society produces poverty not because there is credit money but because it is based on exchange, money and economic growth. The libertarians might not mind this poverty, but those who discovered Bitcoin as a ***** new alternative to the status quo ***** perhaps should.