Jakob Hanke — EU and China break ultimate trade taboo to hit back at Trump

Brussels and Beijing on Wednesday launched explosive cases at the World Trade Organization, in which they will argue that Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum, imposed in May, cannot be justified on grounds of national security, as the White House claims. The EU and China were joined in their protest by Mexico, Norway, Russia and Canada.

The six-fold attack on Trump is a landmark departure from the orthodoxy of trade diplomacy as countries have traditionally shied away from challenging restrictions justified by national security concerns, for fear that such a case could blow up the entire global trading system.

Whichever way the WTO rules, Pandora’s box has been opened. If it rules that national security can justify tariffs, the decision could inspire other countries to play the security card. On the other hand, if Washington finds itself backed into a corner, it could simply quit the WTO.…

More unraveling.

Washington is now openly weaponizing trade, finance, and economics in the attempt to maintain and extend US hegemony.

Not going down so well.

Politico
EU and China break ultimate trade taboo to hit back at Trump

Jakob Hanke

Frank Sellers — SHOCKER: US sides with Moscow over Kiev in WTO case

Typically, Washington is against anything that benefits Moscow, and is for anything which bolsters the position of US puppet regime Ukraine. But, at ongoing cases before the World Trade Organization, that narrative isn’t applicable. This is so because if Washington slam Moscow for its actions relative to Kiev, it would provide a case against Trump’s metals tariffs. However, by standing with Russia on this issue, Washington thinks that it can save its own trade actions, namely Trump’s metals tariffs.…

National security trumps WTO regs. Both the US and Russia are claiming national security supervenes in their cases, and the US is supporting Russia on this.

In effect, this is the recognition that the national sovereignty supersedes international agreements in certain cases. The nation state is not dead yet.
The Duran
SHOCKER: US sides with Moscow over Kiev in WTO case

Frank Sellers

Seraphim Hanisch — Russia bans Telegram messaging service

FSB requests for decryption keys refused, prompting a nationwide ban of highly successful messaging platform.

The priorities for which governments are created are in descending order:

1. national security
2. good order
3. general welfare
4. distributed prosperity

People universally demand this.

Does this permit the abrogation of human and civil rights and constitutional liberties?

To some extent it does.

Here is why.

The first obligation of government to a society is to address existential threats. No right is absolute, even the right to life. It has been universally recognized that it is legitimate for a government to declare serious enough transgressions as capital offenses.

Therefore, a government can legitimately require extraordinary measures that compromise the right to privacy, for example.

Because this creates the opportunity (perverse incentive), fences and gateways must be constructed to ensure that legitimate requirements are not abused.

Whether nations are justified in particular cases must be approached case by case, and their implementation of means also.

I would personally prefer a straightforward way of approaching this, as Russia and China have, rather than a clandestine way that pretends to preserve rights and freedoms, e.g., by secretly requiring backdoors, as has the US.

With the globalization of the Internet, this issue affects just about everyone. It's not going away.

Russia Feed
Russia bans Telegram messaging service

Seraphim Hanisch

Wolf Richter — Trump’s Order Stops ALL Foreign Takeovers of Large US Tech Companies

President Trump signed a far-ranging executive order late Monday that blocked the $117-billion hostile takeover of Qualcomm by Broadcom, a Singapore-based company, on concerns over national security. This crushed any hopes that remained in some corners of seeing what would have been the largest tech deal ever. But the order was far broader: It blocked all such deals....

Wolf Street
Trump’s Order Stops ALL Foreign Takeovers of Large US Tech Companies
Wolf Richter

Jeremy Scahill — James Clapper Has a Classified Blog. It’s Called “Intercept.”

Taking James Clapper to the woodshed over civil liberties.

And yes, no joke. Clapper's classified blog is called "Intercept."

The Intercept
James Clapper Has a Classified Blog. It’s Called “Intercept.”
Jeremy Scahill

Sputnik — Sputnik Putin's Top Security Advisor Lays Out Vision of Global Security in 5 Easy StepsPutin's Top Security Advisor Lays Out Vision of Global Security in 5 Easy Steps

In an exclusive interview for Sputnik, Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev offered his assessment of the main threats facing the world, and Russia's plans to deal with them. Given the Security Council's status as an advisory body reporting to the president, Patrushev's word is basically the Kremlin line on national security issues.

Russia and the US face different security issues. Russia views US pursuit of its policy objectives as creating security issues for Russia.

Sputnik
Putin's Top Security Advisor Lays Out Vision of Global Security in 5 Easy Steps

Reuters — Russia says U.S. actions threaten its national security

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Sunday he had detected increasing U.S. hostility towards Moscow and complained about what he said was a series of aggressive U.S. steps that threatened Russia's national security.

In an interview with Russian state TV likely to worsen already poor relations with Washington, Lavrov made it clear he blamed the Obama administration for what he described as a sharp deterioration in U.S.-Russia ties.

"We have witnessed a fundamental change of circumstances when it comes to the aggressive Russophobia that now lies at the heart of U.S. policy towards Russia," Lavrov told Russian state TV's First Channel.

"It's not just a rhetorical Russophobia, but aggressive steps that really hurt our national interests and pose a threat to our security."

The wake-up call.

The fundamental problem is that in the US view anyone that doesn't do what the US wants is posing a threat to US national security. "You are either with us or you are against us."

Reuters
Russia says U.S. actions threaten its national security
Reporting by Maria Kiselyova; Editing by Andrew Osborn

Maxim Trudolyubov — Everybody Wants To Be Great Again

ROFLMAO and then shaking head in disbelief. The propaganda flaks ae arguing that a county should put economic progress (real liberalism) ahead of national sovereignty and national security. What universe are they living in?

Alongside the much-vaunted support that Putin enjoys (in large part a creation of the state-run media) there are strong dissenting voices. Putin’s former Vice-Premier and Minister of Finance, Alexei Kudrin, is saying that Russia needs a rule-based political and economic system capable of providing for sustainable economic growth. Kudrin, who is now responsible for drawing up a new reform plan for Russia, recently tried to persuade Putin to ease geopolitical tensions in order to attract foreign investment. The former finance minister received a stern rebuttal from Putin who said that he would never bargain over Russia’s sovereignty. Putin has thus confirmed that his understanding of sovereignty and security takes precedence over any economic logic. He seems to consider it beneath him to deal with lowly economic issues.

One has to be very clear about the kind of building blocks that bolster Russia’s assertiveness: they include the primacy of absolute political sovereignty and the willingness to use force. These key concepts are brought up by Moscow’s state-controlled news media and top Russian politicians on a daily basis. Russia is building a new credibility on its readiness to use the country’s hard power; not soft power, trade power, or economic competitiveness. Led by the current political elite, Russia has decided against pursuing economic development or modernizing policies, seeing these essentially as compromises.

This person is supposedly an expert on international relations and foreign policy. Spare me.

HIs bio shows him to be a Russian liberal. The agenda of Russian liberals is for Russia to return to the Yeltsin years that almost destroyed it as country, ruled by oligarchs and mafiosi.

National priorities are sovereignty, security, order, welfare, and prosperity, in that order. The Kennan Institute and Wilson Center know this very well. The conclusion is that this a propaganda piece.

Kennan Institute Wilson Center
Everybody Wants To Be Great Again
Maxim Trudolyubov | Senior Fellow at the Kennan Institute and the Editor-at-Large of Vedomosti, an independent Russian daily. Mr. Trudolyubov was the editorial page editor of Vedomosti between 2003 and 2015. He has been a contributing opinion writer for The International New York Times since the fall of 2013.

Mr. Trudolyubov writes The Russia File blog for the Kennan Institute and oversees special publications.
- See more at: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/person/maxim-trudolyubov#sthash.v9yBO9ns.dpuf

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard — France swats aside EU budget rules in rearmament blitz

France has invoked emergency powers to sweep aside EU deficit rules and retake control over its economy after the terrorist atrocities in Paris, pledging a massive in increase and security and defence spending whatever the cost.
President Francois Hollande said vital interests of the French nation are at stake and there can be no further justification for narrowly-legalistic deficit rules imposed by Brussels. “The security pact takes precedence over the stability pact. France is at war,” he told the French parliament.
Defence cuts have been cancelled as far out as 2019 as the country prepares to step up its campaign to “eradicate” ISIS, from the Sahel in West Africa, across the Maghreb, to Syria and Iraq.…

The Telegraph
France swats aside EU budget rules in rearmament blitz
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

RT — US a surveillance superpower spying on foes & allies alike – Assange

“The US is a surveillance superpower,” [Assange] told Rossiya-1 in an interview, slated to be broadcast later on Sunday.

“This country spends on surveillance 60 percent of what the entire world spends on espionage,” he said. “They spy on everyone, including their allies. And use the information for their political and economic goals.”

RT

US a surveillance superpower spying on foes & allies alike – Assange

Moon of Alabama — The "Most Outlandish" Empire Semantics

The government of the Unites States (GDP US$ 16,768,100 million) declares that the situation in Venezuela (GDP US$ 371,339 million): 

... constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. 

This, the White House says, requires to:... declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

Way beyond double-speak.

Moon of Alabama
The "Most Outlandish" Empire Semantics

RT — Security experts shape Russian strategy to counter color revolutions - report

The Russians should hire some consultants from the US Department of Homeland Security and the NYPD, based on the suppression of Occupy and other protests. They could also follow the US example and set up a total surveillance state domestically and globally on the order of NSA and the clandestine services. Or maybe they could just hack into the US system instead of duplicating it. Why reinvent the wheel. 

While they are at it, they could get their legislature to adopt anti-terrorism laws that suspend constitutional liberties and civil rights like the US did after 9/11 and continues based on being engaged in endless war. The playbook has already been written on how to proceed in an oligarchic democracy that paints a veneer of freedom over the totalitarian reality.

RT
Security experts shape Russian strategy to counter color revolutions - report

Allison Gunnar — Economic War, BRICS, and the Power of Self-Sufficiency

Globalization is the hitherto pinnacle of interdependency, crippling any nation that falls foul of those sitting at the center of this entangled geopolitical order. There are many examples of nations that haven fallen foul including Cuba, Iraq, Iran and more recently Russia. In each case, respective economies depended heavily upon imports or exports or both. The response in defense against crippling economic warfare is self-sufficiency.

Self-sufficiency is anti-globalization. The neoliberal globalizers may be overreaching and throwing a spanner into the works as countries realize that they need to protect themselves from interdependence with self-sufficiency. On the macro level this is preferring resilience to efficiency.

First appeared:http://journal-neo.org/2015/01/20/economic-war-brics-and-the-power-of-self-sufficiency/

New Eastern Outlook

Economic War, BRICS, and the Power of Self-Sufficiency

Allison Gunnar

James Rosen — Chinese bid to buy Big Apple’s fabled Waldorf Astoria under scrutiny for national security risks

…it’s the regular presence in the hotel’s Presidential Suite and the ambassadorial residence of senior U.S. leaders, plus the foreign dignitaries who visit them, that experts say will almost certainly trigger a national security review.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/10/15/243530_chinese-bid-to-buy-big-apples.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

McClatchy
Chinese bid to buy Big Apple’s fabled Waldorf Astoria under scrutiny for national security risks
James Rosen | McClatchy Washington Bureau

Also Putin Allies Said Angling to Wrest Paper From WSJ, FT by Irina Reznik, Ilya Khrennikov and Henry Meyer at Bloomberg.

“The Kremlin sees Vedomosti’s shareholders as foreign governments,” the newspaper’s editor-in-chief, Tatiana Lysova, said in an interview. “The WSJ equals the U.S. and the FT the U.K.…" 

Vedomosti’s influence among Russia’s elite is way out of proportion to its relatively small circulation of 75,000, said Dozhd TV founder Alexander Vinokurov, who considered bidding for Sanoma’s Russian business before deciding it was too risky.

‘‘The elite read Vedomosti every day, it’s exactly the readership you need to influence a country,” Vinokurov said. “It’s a critically important media outlet.” 

At a meeting of Russian newspaper editors in Moscow in September 2013, Putin’s deputy chief of staff, Vyacheslav Volodin, accused Vedomosti of serving foreign interests, according to Lysova, the paper’s chief editor.

 

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/10/15/243530_chinese-bid-to-buy-big-apples.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Robert Parry — The Whys Behind the Ukraine Crisis

Given the very high stakes of a nuclear confrontation with Russia, some analysts wonder what’s the real motive for taking this extraordinary risk over Ukraine. Is it about natural gas, protection of the U.S. dollar’s dominance, or an outgrowth of neocon extremism, asks Robert Parry.

Or a combination of the above.

What is clear that the US has no overriding national security interest in this.

Parry:

A senior U.S. diplomat told me recently that if Russia were to occupy all of Ukraine and even neighboring Belarus that there would be zero impact on U.S. national interests. The diplomat wasn’t advocating that, of course, but was noting the curious reality that Official Washington’s current war hysteria over Ukraine doesn’t connect to genuine security concerns.

So what's up with this?

My sense is that while the above reasons are factors, the overarching reason in the desire on the part of the US Establishment for regime change in Russia from Putin's "authoritarianism" back to the pliant oligarchs who were put in economic power under Yeltsin and gladly joined in the plunder of their country when the US was advising Russia on how to convert its communistic society to a capitalistic "democracy" that would be controlled by wealth. The US assumption that the Russian wealthy who were in control politically would join the global neoliberal elite in supporting globalization on neoliberal principles under US leadership. That is still the goal, so Putin, who threw out the oligarchs and took control, must be thrown out or otherwise removed. In fact, I'd say that this is quite transparent beneath the bluster of propaganda.

Consortium News
The Whys Behind the Ukraine Crisis
Robert Parry

Video: "Christian Debate?" About the Morality of Nominal Sophistry

(Commentary by Roger Erickson)

Data is meaningless without context. So before viewing the video below, please consider it's context, and the parameters which allow us to assess REAL vs only nominal success in a given context.

Many have heard of the origins of the phenomenon named "sophistry" by the Greeks.

2300 years ago, Greeks noting and naming the structure of language, immediately also noticed the fluidity and gradual change of what they named grammar, vocabulary, semantics and sophistry.

Semantic plasticity - the function of letting the same word imply different things in different contexts or usage patterns - allows a relatively small number of words to describe an unlimited set of concepts, when specified by context, word order, or many other linguistic tools (prefixes, suffixes, and noun/verb/other variants).

Sophistry was one, early form of humor noted, used and abused by various people. It use is described in the dialogues of Socrates.

"Is that YOUR dog?" 'Yes.'
"And is YOUR dog a mother?" 'Yes, she has puppies.'
"Then that dog is YOUR mother!" :)     Socrates noted two general classes of responses.
      Intelligent people: '[Greek equivalent of "bug off."]'
      Naive youth: "Oh my gosh. My dog is my mother!" Fear. Panic.

This brings up a moral dilemma. Or does it?

Maybe not in the same way for all people. The early sophists were soon reviled, for their irritating habit of practicing and refining ancient methods for confusing, dividing and 'conquering' naive targets, so that they could be more easily tricking into being the object of ridicule. Worse, sophists were soon followed by others who refined their methods of cheating at wagers, or even robbing people. Sophistry has long been associated with subterfuge, propaganda, and looting.

So, is it immoral for a person to have a dog as "their" mother? What if they own multiple dogs with puppies? How immoral is it to have multiple mothers, and that they are all dogs? :(

Or is this all a lot of data, and semantic descriptors, uselessly applied completely out of context, and therefore contravening a basic, hierarchical rule of language utilization ... i.e., that it be applied to orient to REAL, not just imaginary, nominal or nonexistent scenarios?


Let's take another example.

"Is that YOUR fiat currency?" 'Yes.'
"And in purely nominal, double-entry accounting ... fiat currency creation has to be balanced with an equal entry labeled, purely for form, a 'deficit' or 'debt?' " 'Yes.'
"Then that nominal metric is YOUR real debt!" :)

Just like with Socrates, we're seeing two general classes of responses.
   Intelligent people: '[Get lost.]'
   Naive people unaware of basic banking operations: "Oh my gosh! Our nation is in DEBT!!!' Fear. Panic

Is it only nominally immoral for a population to have a purely semantic 'debt' to itself? What if that population grows AND the transaction rate of each resident increases! Is it immoral to allow increasing use of nominal or fiat measuring units for our growing populace to denominate necessary transactions with - i.e., an increasing volume of fiat currency?

Or is the only functional immorality that of an electorate leaving itself unaware of basic operations, unable to discriminate sophistry from functional semantics, and flat out unaware of actual context?

Now, please watch this video and the 2nd link, to see how it is promoted. Then please comment below.

"Christian" Debate About the Morality of Nominal Sophistry

Government Debt is 'Idolatry,' Hurts the Poor, Future Generations, Christian Panelists Argue

The immediate issue here is confusion over the dual roles of any currency system, and conflating two separate needs.

1) denominating any and all, unpredictably needed transactions, WHENEVER they need to be denominated (tempo is paramount for group agility)

2) short term vs long term stable store of value. (Value is ultimately dictated by context, not by denominating units.)

The deeper issue is basic need to maintain situational awareness, as the threshold for survival of a functioning democracy.

Since tempo is critically important, we really need to address our electorate's situational awareness, ASAP - before we're robbed again, or confused and divided enough to be conquered? What else could be more important for National Security?

Affordable Care Act, a Profit Center, Public Private Partnership, or another Financial Scheme??

Do we need more Financial Schemes in this Country?  Isn't it a national security risk, if only Wall Street Insiders know who the sucker is in American Deal Making??


I'm just an Everyday Guy that has lost some money and watched more disposable income disappear in the modern American Age... The Financial Battleground.  A war for your wages, your income, your savings, and your retirement.


In the US Military we have Single Point of Contact who is responsible for particular expertise, operations, and coordination.  In the army I think that is called the SPO.  The SPO is responsible he gets both blame and accolades as he guides commanders and units through transitions.   

Do you think the USA has a SPO for Insurance, Financial Instruments, & Public Private partnerships??  I don't think you will get a returned phone call from the Federal Reserve, the US Treasury, the OCC, FSOC, the Executive Office, your congressman, FINRA, SEC, FTC, the US Media, the American Bar Association, ETC.   The CFPB is supposed to be the latest in a long line of agencies to protect us.  The list of federal agencies that protect us sort of looks like the 16 powerful big budget US Intelligence Agencies, ... except in the case of protecting individuals from commerce  they seem to lose most of their power when a new agency is added.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Financial_Protection_Bureau  

Dobb-Frank has provided us with yet another federal agency to follow behind the FTC and all the other agencies in protecting citizens from organized corruption and fraud.  But has that agency been given the Power, Authority, Budget, Resources, and Staffing to take a look at the Affordable Care Act (AKA Obama Care)??  

Today it has become even more clear all the risks American face in what is clearly another US Financial Scheme called the Affordable Care Act. 

1) Mandatory Program with Fees or Taxes in which personal data is surrendered and shared among various unknown agencies... enforced by the IRS.  
2) Appears there is no cost controls, policies are termed Insurance, policies exclude many features that would actually be needed for personal health, there is much lawyer language involved in the contract policies for which you will not be covered.  
3) We hear that all policies are doubling in costs, figure that co-pays and fees will also increase in some cases.  
4) All Insurance is a Financial Scheme. 
5) US Health Care is one of the most expensive in the world, no one ever talks about the costs, the executive compensations, the dividends or profits shared with investors, no one is addressing the inflation and overall yearly increases in costs.  It is sort of a spin zone. Or it is a "No Mans Land".  No one seems to be bringing the yearly cost growth to a National Discussion Level.  Capitalism Rules in the land of Insurance & Finance.   
6) The Affordable Care Act seems to be another mechanism for transferring Middle Class Wealth or Savings to Investors or Financial Managers.  The money is going to come from working Americans, I'm just not sure who the money is going to go to.  The health system will expand with more health facilities I'm sure.  But as a Public Private Partnership the wealth will be a transfer from the Federal Government to Investors and executives.
7) Bubbles, Financial Bubbles... Middle Class Savings Gone, Retiree Savings Gone, Home Equity Gone, Education Debt in process, Hurricane Damage losses to the US Wealth, US Wages Down, US GINI Coefficient Wage Gap increasing, Decapitalization of US Manufacturing, Offshore Incorporation, lower investment in US R & D, lower investment in US Job Training, No Real Leadership in Investing in the USA, ETC.   
8) I predict the Affordable Care act will create another Bubble, and transfer more wealth out of the poor and middle class.   
9) We have entered "A New Era of Financial Battles & Financial Profit taking characterized by the Rentier Class".  Executive Bonuses & Salary Increases are enough to keep the game going.  There are always ways to cut costs, cut wages, go off shore, to find new resources, and to invent new materials.  This is a kind of Social Darwinism in which corporations are sovereign, but don't really have to maintain or steward the US Economy or the US Consumer.  In the Affordable Care Act the taxpayer becomes more of a cog or "Profit Center" owned by the vast corporate system to be a monopolistic kind of bubble.

After all who can understand public private partnerships??  We have no National Security in the many areas of Economic, Financial, and Social Risk.  There is no Responsibility in Washington DC OR New York on Wall Street in this Era of Financial War... If there was then we would have a SPO and we would have National Discussions in the Mainstream Media about Financial, Economic, & Banking Literacy.    And as you have notice in federal budget discussion... the real budget data never sees the light of day.  In national budget discussions only the pieces of the budget which are getting cuts and increases are touched on at all.  Most Americans have never even seen the US Federal Budget Lines, the Trust Funds, the Revenue Streams, or the Budget Outlays.    

It is a Financial Battleground with National Security importance.  There is decapitalization in the US Economy, Capital Flight, Loss of Wealth, Loss of Average Wage Rate, Loss of Social Cohesion, and Institutional & Systemic Control Fraud.  None of this can be refuted.  No sane American would want to hide National Security Issues from the Voting Public or from Public Discourse.   

The point is the Affordable Care Act makes the federal budget & citizenry more risky as it was not designed to be simple or to address all the problems.  It is some kind of monster which might help 1% of the population while putting profits in the hands of an other 1%. Emergency rooms are still going to be filled with the uninsured who freely walk across the border and are not covered and seems doubtful they will pay into the program. Drugs are not covered. Inflation is not covered. Industry waste is not addressed. The spectrum of costs, wastes, fraud, and risk are ignored... and control has been ceded to Industry Executives.

I hate to even mention the possibility of more power going to technocrats in our government.  But we should start to broadcast and listen to the personalities that run our other agencies like the FTC, Department of Labor, SEC, FDIC, and FSOC.  Maybe if our agency heads felt more like they were on the National Stage and had more of a feeling of responsibility to the citizenry ... they would take a personal stand & develop their own personal networks to oppose the stupid political clucking out of congress.  The reason I fear technocrats is because of my perception of the EU and the Austerity imposed across Europe which is grinding all middle class people down to poverty.  

Conclusion:

But in the USA we have a chance if we recognize the changes to the global economy, transnational corporations, and the financial battle against taxpayers.  We just might be able to re-institutionalize the fight against fraud, control fraud, propaganda, the dumbing down of citizens & investors, and the loss of American Liberty, the American Dream, and American Privacy.  Maybe we should have US Celebrities that Fight Fraud, that work in our Federal Government, that expose complicated financial schemes which drain the Vitality of America!

Fascism Watch — Thom Hartmann: National Security Should Never Be a For-Profit Industry

The privatized national security apparatus isn’t just wasteful—it’s contrary to the founding principles of our democratic republic.

AlterNet
National Security Should Never Be a For-Profit Industry
Thom Hartmann

The corporate state, aka the market state, aka national security state,aka the surveillance state, the police state, aka fascism, on the march. Mussolini would love it.

First, we had a central bank controlled by the financial industry in the the US sitting on top of a command economy, then a Treasury secretary chosen from the ranks of Wall Street, then a contractor-based military, then a militarized domestic security force directed by a cabinet department, and then a privately-operated surveillance force that has continued the supposedly discontinued Total Information Awareness program run by Iran-Contra figure Admiral Poindexter.

Hope you have either already left or have an escape hatch.

"Have National Fiat, Exploring New Ways to Use It" - Can We Just Make That Our Calling Card Once Again?

Commentary by Roger Erickson

How many citizens know where currency comes from, and can trace the flow of "fiat" currency - before, during and after the cocktail party, to both penthouses and gutters? Most people get completely confused about the differences between commodity or static value, organizational or dynamic value, and the liquidity units that connect all types of interchangeable capital - not to mention the relation between fiat currency creation and fiat taxes, and fiat interest rates to boot. (I wish we would!)

Bill Mitchell recently wrote that: "If people really understood that governments just borrow back their own spending, then the financial markets would be seen for what they are in relation to bond market activity – mendicants in receipt of privileged corporate welfare."

Well stated!

Surely Beardsley Ruml would have approved, since Taxes for Revenue Are Obsolete in any fiat currency regime (see p.35).

However, corporate welfare itself is neither good or bad. "How much" is the only question that matters.  Distributed banks - starting with the Primary Dealers (PDs) who are required to buy T-Bonds - are legitimate, publicly licensed, supposedly regulated, private contractors, just like every other member of the citizenry. The TERMS of their public contracts - and their public regulation - matter absolutely. Most banking lobbies eventually return to the issue of who gets to set interest rates and control much if not all access to accounting fees for regulating inter-personal credit. The main point is that the PD and other banks DON'T DESERVE SPECIAL TERMS! Only the same terms available to all other citizens.

Are there ANY bankers who are inventive entrepreneurs, other than in the sense that crooks and charlatans are? They just keep their little accounting records and get on the golf course by 3PM. It should NOT be allowed to get more complicated than that. As most experienced Senators will admit "We just decide what needs to be done, then we appropriate the currency to do it." Everything after that is just accounting details about draining obsolete banking-reserves from obscure Fed accounts, but that trivial job, however arcane, could be done by any accountant with a high-school education. THERE IS NO DERIVATIVE NEED for further expense in the accounting process. No need whatsoever for expensive suits, international meetings, limousines, or marble buildings. None whatsoever. If I were a union, I'd lobby to have the Federal Reserve replaced in it's entirety by Google Money or something equivalent, so we could reduce it to a simple Treasury Department accounting app. With all this confusion, all we're doing is dividing and conquering ourselves!

C'est la Vie! For now, back to the banks we're living with.

If the offered TERMS that banks get for their accounting and credit-rating services remain within SOCIALLY ADAPTABLE TOLERANCE LIMITS, then banks simplify public commerce by providing a self-adjusting monitor and regulator of inter-personal credit lines. What I call "ADAPTIVE" Warren Mosler calls "serving Public Purpose." Whatever you choose to call it, in that guise the profit from trafficking in T-bonds (still arbitrary) are at least seen as one way of adequately funding the Primary Dealer banks for legitimate services - so long as their personal salary profits get spent into the rest of the country, circulating along with everyone else's "money." As you likely know, since you've at least found the MNE blog, excessive and mal-distributed rates of hoarding vs investing "fiat liquidity" is where things go south, very quickly.

Mistaking liquidity for a static value, and hoarding it, requires foregoing dynamic options. Long term, that is ALWAYS a fatal mistake in an evolving world, where dynamic value is king, and can be chased only through adaptation. Accelerating adaptive rate always wins. Hoarding static assets rarely does, and never for long.

What does this mean for us? If the TERMS of various banking licenses are allowed to become mal-adaptive, and turn into obscene amounts of corporate welfare, then it's only because a public is failing to do it's own, adequately organized regulation, and the credit examiners are then accumulating and hoarding the very credit they're hired to simply analyze and report on! More importantly for our own national security, what matters even more is HOW QUICKLY we regain control of corporate welfare rates. Tempo is usually the biggest factor in maintaining the quality of distributed decision-making.

Doesn't this boil down to an OpenGovernance issue?

If bankers are grossly overpaid, whose fault is it? We can no longer re-regulate our own bankers, on a moments notice? Bullshit! Why CAN'T we? Diverting ourselves to endlessly arguing the details of the issue is admitting defeat - by expressing it! The public's beef has to be on principle and tempo, not on micromanaging the details. "We want outcomes appropriate for fulfilling our full aggregate demand!" And we want that with our morning coffee. Or else.

Who the hell is in charge of this country? It's citizens, or any arbitrary sub-class - acting like buffoon aristocrats? Isn't that the only issue that matters?

Why not invite a national labor conference - with every union and civic organization available - and make setting of banking terms the one and only theme? Recall any politician who fails to LEAD rather than sell-out. And for HEAVEN'S sake, quit electing buffoon politicians who DO sell-out.

Can some union make the setting of banking terms the plainly stated "#1 PLANK IN THE NEXT ELECTION" (and immediate recalls)? Cut the corporate welfare rates back down to a living wage, and voila - our biggest problem is half way to being solved. We can go back to exploring actual emerging national options, instead of unproductively staring at fat-cat banker navels. Until then, our national calling card remains "Have Fiat, Won't Use It."

Our calling card should be "Have National Fiat, Exploring New Ways to Use It."

Water now not only an economic good but also a strategic good, rather than a free good?

On Wednesday, the United States intelligence community unveiled a first-ever assessment of global water-security issues.

A declassified version of the document, which looks forward through 2040, suggests that "during the next 10 years, water problems will contribute to instability in states important to U.S. national security interests."

According to one of the assessment's lead authors, Major General Richard Engel, water-stressed countries, being forced to focus on pressing internal issues, are increasingly unable to support U.S. policies and strategic interests.

While the assessment does not foresee water being a main instigator of state-to-state violence or state failure in the next decade, beyond that "water in shared basins will increasingly be used as leverage." In addition, "water shortages and pollution probably will harm the economic performance of important (U.S.) trading partners."

Read it at IPS Inter Press Service
Water Conflicts Move Up on U.S. Security Agenda
By Carey L. Biron