Keiser Report: Food Stamp Army

We interview Dmitry Orlov

251 comments on “Keiser Report: Food Stamp Army
  1. Mep says:

    Bob – I find it most hilarious and ironic that at the same time you disparage our educational system and make the unsubstantiated and erroneous claim that the assault on teachers, their unions, and public education is a result of a “grassroots movement by the people,” (when in fact, it’s just another corporate astroturf campaign, which you’ll find simply by doing your homework and looking into who’s funding and pushing for all of this bullshit) you also prove how the educational system failed you (or you failed in it?) by demonstrating your tendency to be propagandized:

    This isn’t an attack on the ‘little guy’; it’s changes to something that doesn’t work very well. If the Nov election was any indication many more changes from the voter are on the way.

    The voter? The voter is asking for public education to be dismantled? Show me where any of these teaparty or Republican assholes ran on a platform of destroying unions and education. If protests, recall efforts, or poll numbers are any indication, “the voter” is pissed off about being sold a bill of goods . . . one that is weakening their own families, individual rights, and the futures of their children.

    Snap out of it, bud.

  2. bammbamm says:

    The tea party has a cognitive dissonance issue to resolve. To them, business is good; government is bad. So where, on the way to DC, did Hank Paulsen experience metanoia, changing from Gallant to Goofus? Rahway? Wilmington?

  3. Mark Lytle says:

    @Keehotee

    I just scanned your link and I don’t agree with it.

    If you just want to throw rocks at a structure that’s been developed patiently since Isaac Newton’s time, you’re wasting everyones time. I don’t doubt there are some parts of classical physics that are wrong, or incomplete, Physics is a work in progress.

    That said, you should understand that Wikipedia SHOULD stay mainstream, just to give wet-behind the ears kids a chance to learn something. Now, once someone has mastered most of what classical physics has to offer, and they have the insight, and intelligence to go beyond that, fine.

    But a lot of young people today just don’t like structure of any kind, or rules, or intellectual discipline. This lack of rigor in logic and indifference to scholarship is trumped up as ‘free thinking’ when it’s usually non-thinking.

    Only one in 30-50 people can even master what we know now. Probably not one in 100,000 is smart enough to innovate above and beyond it.

    I don’t think in my nearly 60 years, I’ve met more than one person who was in that class, and he was one of my profs (a young PHD) at Penn State. He was spectacular, I knew it, and all of my classmates knew it. He had it goin’ on.

    I would guess I would have to wait another 60 years to meet another one. In the meantime, all of you young ones should go to a good University and learn what we ‘think’ we know. Then if you’re that good, go beyond it. But lets not just throw rocks at things we don’t understand.

  4. Keehotee says:

    @ Mark Lytle I believe you once told me that “chemtrails are BS”. While I have to agree that they are bullshit – that does make them go away. Why would anyone consider relevant the thoughts or opinions of someone who cannot see an obvious truth right in front of their face? Are you saying those are just regular old contrails – because you WANT them to be? Because “chemtrails don’t fit into your lytle world? Your edumucation has obviously been a hinderance to you.

  5. Mark Lytle says:

    It’s very expensive to haul tons of chemicals up in airplanes and drop them on rural areas. If you’re trying to kill people there are faster (and cheaper) ways of doing it.

    It’s also going to kill some of the elites, it’s totally non-specific in it’s targeting. So of course the ‘illuminatti’ would order it done. Right?

    It fits into the normal Alex Jones paradigm, though.

  6. Mark Lytle says:

    I have noted that some of the water samples taken from the California sites, claimed to be contaminated by ‘chemtrails’ were heavy with Aluminum, Barium, and a couple other things, I don’t remember at the moment.

    What they should have been testing for, in addition, was Perchlorate. The things I heard told me that these water samples had gotten hit with Solid Fuel combustion products, common in the west, where they periodically test Minuteman missiles and other large solid fuel powered ordinance.

  7. Keehotee says:

    Who says chemtrails are to kill people? Although that may be a beneficial side effect. How can you deny what;s right over your head?

    Cosmology and astronomy are being redefined by electrical engineers right now. The entire foundation of how the universe is perceived is being rocked and will soon be turned over. If you can’t see the obvious validity of the plasma cosmology model – and can’t see chemtrails – I truly feel sorry for you.

  8. Mark Lytle says:

    @Keehotee

    Feel sorry all you want, you don’t know what the Hell you’re talking about.

  9. Mark Lytle says:

    The give away is Barium salts. they are used in rocket propellants, but they’re very heavy. they don’t stay suspended in the air. So they’re not useful for ‘weather modification’ or any other harebrained conspiracy stuff.

  10. Mark Lytle says:

    Barium salts are used by oil drillers to increase mud weights on drilling platforms. The stuff is DENSE. No, it won’t work for atmospheric mods,

    Kapish?

  11. Keehotee says:

    The funny thing is that I do know what I’m talking about- yet I am willing to keep my mind open, examine new evidence and ideas, and change my model/belief as needed – something you are clearly not familiar with – typical of old people (as long as we’re throwing out age related barbs).

    I see no benefit to arguing with someone I perceive to be unwilling to admit that they don’t know everything. Have a lovely day.

  12. Mark Lytle says:

    Another young person damaged by Alex Jones.

  13. F. Beard says:

    The problem I’m having, is to grow an economy, usually takes loans, to build more manufacturing, whatever. Mark Lytle

    Common stock as money requires no borrowing or usury or PMs or fractional reserves. It is the ideal private money form, I’m telling you.

  14. F. Beard says:

    @Stacy,

    Clothes gal, not jewelery!

    But yeah, make Max share his clothing budget with you. He can stand to repeat a tie occasionally.

  15. Mark Lytle says:

    @F.Beard

    The use of common stock as the source for loans would put tremendous pressure on the issuing institution. What would be the net asset value of a bank that just warehouses money? If I rent a storage place (which I do) for $60 per month and I compare that with a bank, that has more labor associated with it (bookeepers, computer system and security). Where does the ‘extra value’ come from?

  16. stacyherbert says:

    @Mark Lytle – oh boy, I wouldn’t bother engaging in those who prefer magic to elementary science

  17. Mark Lytle says:

    I think you’re just ‘moving’ the problem to a different place. I see inflated stock valuations coming,…fraud will find a way…

  18. Mark Lytle says:

    @Stacy

    So true…I just get so irked at Alex Jones sometimes, which I then feel guilt over as he IS a good soul…but he’s handing these young people so much junk, and then they go around deluded that they think they’ve learned something… This mode of being will serve them poorly in life…
    It’s the one of the dangers of the age we live in…it’s like we’re already going into the Dark ages, knowledge wise, before the collapse fully happens.

  19. F. Beard says:

    The use of common stock as the source for loans would put tremendous pressure on the issuing institution. Mark Lytle

    Common stock money is not borrowed or lent; it is simply spent into existence. It goes out of existence as it is spent on goods or services the company that issued it produces.

    Conventional banks and money (except government fiat) are obsolete and have been since 1602 when the common stock company was invented.

  20. Mark Lytle says:

    The thing about these blogs is that we’re all on stage, in a certain way, and there are countless people reading these posts that never post themselves. If pseudo-science goes unchallenged, then dozens, at least, will think pseudo science is real…

    There’s not much out there to challenge the wave of False Science and Urban legends and general noise that’s building up…I can imagine how manipulators in the future can leverage the poor technical foundations of the population, perhaps it’s already being done, hard to know…in many ways this leaves people as vulnerable as does a lack of knowledge of financial matters, or the general structure of the fraud we call the U.S. Political System…

  21. Mark Lytle says:

    @F,Beard

    I think I misunderstood you, you are not talking about ‘Stock’ as in stock market, you are talking about currency, notes of some kind?

  22. F. Beard says:

    I wouldn’t bother engaging in those who prefer magic to elementary science Stacy

    But thou art magic, my dear. Actually, a Creation so sophisticated that all of humanity has not been able to figure out much less create from scratch the simplest cell in your body or even the simplest cell in the simplest creature.

    And you fret about your breath (CO2)? (I’ll give you concern about farts, but for social reasons, not climate ones. :) )

  23. F. Beard says:

    I think I misunderstood you, you are not talking about ‘Stock’ as in stock market, you are talking about currency, notes of some kind? Mark Lytle

    I am talking about using common stock DIRECTLY as money. Conventional money is an expensive, unnecessary intermediary between those who have capital (including their own labor). It exists mostly to enrich bankers who are thus parasites, as many have long suspected. Neither government or the private sector needs bankers.

  24. Eduardo says:

    @Keehotee

    Mark Lytle seems to be reasonable, polite and he is using good argumentation to show you that you shoud not accept any BS that AJ says.

    I like AJ too. He says the truth in many fronts and his sugestions are good: End the FED, buy PM, and he is against the war.

    In the fronts of HAARP and Chentrails he is wrong.

    Accept it!

    And please do not use the age of a person, use arguments and logic.

  25. Mark Lytle says:

    @F.Beard

    O.K. I’m not following you.

    “Common stock money is not borrowed or lent; it is simply spent into existence. It goes out of existence as it is spent on goods or services the company that issued it produces.”

    This has me lost. O.K., I’m standing in a Radio Shack. I’ve never bought anything there before. I want to buy a radio. I reach in my wallet and pull out what? Radio Shack stock? I’ve never been there before.

    I’ve been to Starbucks. Can I use Starbucks stock top buy the radio? Does Radio Shack settle up with Starbucks later on my behalf? Trade their stock back and forth?

    Stock prices go up and down daily, and even by the minute. How do I know my Starbucks stock that I went into Radio Shack with will still buy the radio by the time I get to the store?

  26. Keehotee says:

    Who said I like Alex Jones? I was catching hell here for calling AJ out as a self promotional fear monger- he is clearly part of the control mechanism.

    OK – beotches. If you care to take a shot at plasma cosmology/electric universe theory bring it on.

    Yes, “magical” thinking is a big no no among left brain retards. I happen to think that magical thinking is the only thing that’s going to get our species out of the predicament it’s in.

  27. F. Beard says:

    This has me lost. O.K., I’m standing in a Radio Shack. I’ve never bought anything there before. I want to buy a radio. I reach in my wallet and pull out what? Mark Lytle

    Without the counterfeiting cartel to borrow from, it is likely that corporations would have to pay their employees with common stock. Let’s say your worked for Intel and that they payed you in its common stock You would take a debit card that accessed your account with Intel and swipe it at the checkout counter of Radio Shack. Instantly the store computer would look up the current Intel stock price in government fiat (the common measure of value) and inform you of the number of equivalent Intel shares needed for the purchase. Let’s assume you proceed with the purchase.

    Radio Shack would then trade those shares. Eventually those shares would end up at Intel in exchange for an Intel product where they would be destroyed or recycled.

    As for the price volatility of common stock, I would bet that very much of that is a result of the underlying crooked and unstable money system we currently have plus government privileges for the stock exchanges.

  28. Eduardo says:

    Money can be anything and the quantity of money in circulation do not affect the wellbeing o f the people.

    What is important is the capital of the society and the distribution of wealth.

    The problem of the paper money is that the issuer benefit some group of well connected people throught inflation.

    The inflation funneled throught friends results in wealth been transfered from the people to the oligarcs.

  29. F. Beard says:

    What is important is the capital of the society and the distribution of wealth. Eduardo

    Bingo! But what is also important is the means by which capital is transferred lest it be destroyed. Honesty and liberty have been found to be the best means. Some just restitution is also called for, I’d bet.

  30. Mark Lytle says:

    @F.Beard

    “As for the price volatility of common stock, I would bet that very much of that is a result of the underlying crooked and unstable money system we currently have plus government privileges for the stock exchanges.”

    No, I disagree with this. Many small companies that are below the radar for many people are very volatile because:

    (1) They are very thinly traded, one large investor can cause wild swings.

    or

    (2) There is some pump and dump stuff going on by the originators of the stock

    or

    (3) People like, but not limited to, Jim Cramer.

    without banks you’ll still haver the whole Stock Fraud system perpetrated by Wall Street and CNBC and Fox News.

    Wall Street is more than just banks…

  31. Mark Lytle says:

    I also forgot to mention earth quakes and such as a cause of volatility. Didn’t the Nikkei suffer a 15% drop or something over the last two weeks. If you held Japanese stocks, your capital just took a heck of a haircut, fast. I’s rather be holding Gold than that.

  32. Mark Lytle says:

    I think Nuclear companies have taken big hits also..any big product failure or recall, could really mess with your ‘money’ if it was stock…

  33. Mark Lytle says:

    Actually, the Yen has soared through the crisis, probably due to the selloff in Japanese stocks. Until recently, the same thing happened in the U.S., when we had the market crash in 2008, the fiat dollar soared…

  34. Mark Lytle says:

    I believe one of the argument the Fed uses to justify itself is to reduce market volatility. I think they do damp it down sometimes, but free markets are supposed to be volatile. That’s how they work…

  35. Keehotee says:

    I didn’t think so.

    Examples of (silly) magical thinking:

    matter so dense that it violates the laws of nuclear physics, and creates a gravitational field so strong it sucks in everything – even light.

    unmeasurable, untestable “dark matter” that must be everywhere to make the gravitational models of galaxy formation work.

    the big bang theory (talk about magic!)- wholly based upon the “red shift” concept that has been refuted by multiple examples of observational data.

  36. F. Beard says:

    (1) They are very thinly traded, one large investor can cause wild swings. Mark Lytle

    With what? Remember I am assuming the government backed counterfeiting cartel is abolished. Leverage by any remaining banks would be very limited. Interest rates would be relatively high. And who cares if the value of your common stock money goes up? Short selling? Who will lend their common stock money just so it can be driven down in price?

    But in any case, a worker could demand payment in the government’s fiat whose value should be relatively stable.

  37. Mark Lytle says:

    @F.Beard

    I not talking about leverage at all. One large cash investor can cause big moves in small caps. I’m talking about an investor, not a trader. They still exist…

    The other causes of volatility I mentioned will not go away, nor should they. It’s part of price discovery.

  38. F. Beard says:

    One large cash investor can cause big moves in small caps. Mark Lytle

    Who cares? Every common stock money holder would be a part owner of the corp that issued it and could vote on additional issues. For the right price in government fiat then why not sell?

    I am not advocating the exclusive use of any money; one would be wise to diversify. However, I am pointing out that conventional banks and conventional money (except for government fiat) and usury itself are not needed at all.

  39. JP says:

    You and Orlov talk of “Peak Oil”. Russian scientists proposed then proved the theory of Abiotic Oil. It’s covered extensivley on the web. Start with theoildrum.com and other websites. Get some experts on. Do a show on it.

  40. Mark Lytle says:

    @F.Beard

    I don’t think you’ve made a convincing case to use common stock as money. I want to know when I leave the house in the morning I’ll have the same amount in my wallet when I come home. No one could live in that financial condition that you’re creating.

  41. Mark Lytle says:

    @JP

    Abiotic oil has nothing to do with Peak oil.

    Peak Oil is about reservoir exhaustion. It doesn’t rise or fall on whether the oil came from dead algae, dead dinosaurs, or outer space.

    As I’ve said,if Hydrocarbons and water both came on comets or asteroids, does knowing that help me drill a water well?

    No.

    An Oil well?

    No, for the same reason.

    More Alex Jones noise. (sigh)

  42. F. Beard says:

    I don’t think you’ve made a convincing case to use common stock as money. Mark Lytle

    No matter. I just point out that there is plausible alternative to the current system. I would not outlaw fractional reserves, PMs or even usury itself. I would just eliminate all government support for them. People could then freely choose what they used for money.

  43. Mark Lytle says:

    Just to complete the statement I just made, some very deep aquifers in the mid west (for example) are being rapidly depleted. They are not recharging in real time, even with the help of rainfall.

    Most oil reservoirs over 50-60 years old are doing the same thing…

  44. F. Beard says:

    Abiotic oil has nothing to do with Peak oil. Mark Lytle

    Perhaps it does. It might not be found in the same places as biological oil which suggests we might look elsewhere.

    However, unless abiotic oil is found SOMEWHERE it remains a dubious theory.

    What’s the worry about oil anyway?. It is just a mixture of simple hydro-carbon compounds. With enough energy we could pull carbon from the air and split water to make it. That would be a worst case solution. Many better ones doubtlessly exist.

  45. Mark Lytle says:

    Also, for the record, I readily agree that the outer planets and comets are loaded with Hydrocarbons, but it’s mostly methane and a little bit of ethane, the real light stuff. There is some evidence that ultraviolet light has polymerized some of that into some heavier compounds, you see something like ‘smog’ on some of the outer planet’s moons, but overwhelmingly the bulk of outer space hydrocarbons is methane.

    The ratio of heavier hydrocarbons on earth to methane is very different then the other planets, and that’s because of life. Earth has it, other planets don’t. So even though I think, yes, the original carbon that we have was extraterrestrial, it has been heavily reworked by ancient life forms and geologic processes..That’s why we have so much ‘oil’, compared to other places that have mostly methane.

    And again, Peak Oil doesn’t depend on any of these points.

  46. F. Beard says:

    . I want to know when I leave the house in the morning I’ll have the same amount in my wallet when I come home. Mark Lytle

    That’s impossible anyway whatever you use for money.

    No one could live in that financial condition that you’re creating. Mark Lytle

    They would not have to; conventional money solutions would still exist if people freely chose to use them.

  47. Mark Lytle says:

    One mitigating factor in Peak Oil, is the new shale gas technology, which also produces some oil, but it threatens water supplies and aquifers.

    There is some new technology coming up that may mitigate the pollution, but it’s too early to know what the final value of this will be…

  48. F. Beard says:

    So even though I think, yes, the original carbon that we have was extraterrestrial, it has been heavily reworked by ancient life forms and geologic processes.. Mark Lytle

    Good point if the ratio of lighter to heavier hydrocarbons is as you say.

  49. jischinger says:

    just now

    JUST NOW

    local right wing radio is bring up the bailout of foreign banks

    JUST NOW

    they are doing this so it looks like Obama did it when it was Bush – and they don’t mention Bush.

    BUT that doesn’t matter because the only thing they are doing is trying to divide us into two camp

    This is their only goal

  50. jischinger says:

    I’ll bring this up again – even though I have no actual proof of my own but I was told in the 90s by a geologist that there are huge reserves of oil in Iowa and Montana

    and just for the record I’m a solar power bug

  51. bigsmoke says:

    @ Mark Lytle

    Shale gas development has bigger problems to solve than what new technology alone can fix.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_05A3Rr4t0&feature=related

Watch the latest Keiser Reports:

Watch our Google Hangouts: