The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Federal Government]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection(s):
There Can Be NO Compromise On Data

Display list of topics

Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog Buy Sarah's Pictures
Full-Text Search & Archives
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2018-10-08 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Federal Government , 280 references
[Comments enabled]  

I'll tell you where -- absent.

And it is for this reason -- standing alone, above all others -- that I declare we need to revisit The Declaration of Independence and have a clear and public debate on secession.

There are two groups of people in this country, roughly -- those who believe in the Constitution as written and those who do not.  Those who believe in it as-written also believe in the process to amend same, and we respect said amendments, whether we agree with them or not.

Those who do not believe in the Constitution include Donald Trump, Brett Kavanaugh and indeed the entire Supreme Court along with all 535 members of Congress.

The group that believe in the Constitution is much smaller than those who do not, but we are not absent.  Indeed I suspect we reach the critical threshold for such things -- which is around 10% of the population.  In a representative republic it does not matter how small one is as a minority, however -- the entire premise of such a form of government is that minorities have the same right to expect enforcement of the Rule of Law as the majority does.

It is for this exact reason that the sort of attack which took place against Kavanaugh has occurred, it is why you get buttraped on a daily basis by the medical system and it is why car insurance in Michigan is ten or more times as expensive for basic liability coverage as it is in other parts of the nation.  It is why various CEOs robbed you blind before 2008 and why Wells Fargo didn't have one executive indicted and imprisoned after that firm continued ripping people off in the years since, including with outright-forged "account applications" the consumer never filled in or requested.

What happened with Brett Kavanaugh -- unbridled character assassination on a grand scale, intentional violation of Judiciary Committee rules by Feinswine, the apparent suborning of perjury by a former FBI agent who was fingered as obtaining assistance in beating a polygraph from Ford herself and more, is an outrage.

That Feinswine was not immediately expelled from the committee for violating its rules on admissible evidence before same, which absolutely bars the sort of "late hit" game she played with such allegations, is outrageous standing alone.  That the rest of the Democrats in the committee piled on and abused said violation is inherently also not only in violation of the rules of the committee but is also in violation of the rules of comity that the Senate allegedly upholds.

May I remind you that the Senate has the right to expel members for such behavior.  Yet it has not, and will not -- and you will not demand that it does.  May I ask why not?

May I also remind you that everyone made such a big deal about allegations made under penalty of felony, yet not one perjury investigation is yet underway, nor has anyone been called on same, even with regard to the most-outlandish allegations put forward by CreepyPornLayer Avenatti on behalf of Swetnick, who had her credibility impeached almost immediately by others and then impeached her own sworn testimony on national television -- on MSNBC, a hard left liberal news channel -- a couple of days laterNow she's whining that she's "disgusted" at being "re-victimized."  Heh chick: Blow me; you've done more damage to actual victims of sexual assault than anyone since the Duke Lacrosse liar.  You should hang for what you pulled along with CreepyPornLayer.

If you remember the same sort of allegations were made against Judge Moore in Alabama.  As soon as that campaign was over the accusers vanished, despite hard evidence that the so-called "yearbook" presented as evidence was in fact intentionally forged.  Neither the accuser or their attorney, despite having seen and handled the facially fraudulent yearbook (the color of the ink changed mid-"signature") faced any sanction for what appeared to a prima-facia act of forgery and perjury.

We also have Federal Judges who sit on a given circuit court issuing blanket, national injunctions.  These are blatantly unconstitutional as no judge has the right to bind conduct beyond the boundaries of his or her jurisdiction.  The federal appellate system is broken into different circuits and jurisdictional boundaries on purpose to prevent a single judge from doing this sort of thing; if the issue is truly in controversy and differs between circuits it properly makes its way to the Supreme Court in due course.  An alleged injunction beyond the boundaries of one's jurisdiction is extra-judicial tyranny, a legal nullity and to the extent enforcement is threatened it quite-arguably constitutes armed insurrection against the United States.

Prior to the 18th Amendment the Federal Judiciary and Congress knew they could not ban alcohol sales and importation on a national basis by other than Constitutional Amendment.  Irrespective of alleged justification while individual states and counties could and did ban the sale (or even possession) of booze such could not be imposed beyond that local or state political boundary without a Constitutional Amendment, and the judiciary, county and state governments knew it.  The 21st Amendment repealed same; both the 18th and 21st Amendments were Constitutional and in accordance with the rule of law.

Since that time, however, the Rule of Law no longer applies to any federal office-holder nor does it apply to any large corporation.  What occurred in the 1990s with fraud-laced "internet startups", in the 2000s with mortgage lenders and banks, for the last 30+ years with medical firms of all stripes and today with various commercial interests that have given the middle finger to both law the and Constitution is outrageous.  Our own Department of Justice has published statements that if a firm is large and it would "harm" people if it was forced out of business they will not bring criminal charges.  That is a literal license to commit any crime, up to and including murder and it has been exploited by many.  Said "Justice" department has no authority to issue any such statement nor provide any such deference under the law; by doing so backed with the force of arms it too is committing armed insurrection against the United States and the Constitution on a literal daily basis.

This must be stopped.

Those who brought false allegations on a sworn basis and then impeached themselves in public, admitting the falsity of their claims by doing so, must be prosecuted and go to prison.  Every credible allegation deserves to be heard (I have an adult daughter, by the way) but those who lie for political purposes must be destroyed as they trash the credibility of actual victims -- and that is unacceptable.

Judges that issue national injunctions must be removed and, until they are, all decisions from said "courts" must be ignored; indeed you have not only a right but a duty if you adhere to the Constitution to do exactly that.

Those who take up arms against the Constitution and use same as a threat or worse, actually shoot people in "service" of same must be arrested, indicted, tried and executed in accordance with the law irrespective of whether they claim an official government title or not.

There are those who claim that the Civil War and Lincoln "settled" the issue of secession.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Lincoln was a tyrant of the highest order; it is the height of hypocrisy to declare that one does not have the right to secede from a political union when this very nation exists as a direct consequence of doing exactly that.  Lincoln deserved no better than Hitler or Mussolini and his mere presence in a list of Presidential portraits is an indelible stain on this nation and its Founders.

Those who claim that the firing upon Ft. Sumpter was an "outrageous aggression" are also liars.  It is now known with historical certainty that the ships approaching the fort were carrying arms and soldiers, not food and basic supplies, and that the resupply was intended to make possible an attack from the Fort.  Firing upon it was an attempt to prevent said attack from being possible.  Exactly as was the case with the Lusitania that the Germans sank (and which was part of the reason for America's entry into WWI) the Union lied about the purpose of said ships and their cargo.  I note that the Lusitania claim by Britain stood for decades until diving teams blew their lies wide open by exposing the fact that it was carrying roughly four million rounds of live military ammunition and thus was a legitimate wartime target of the German navy.

If we're not going to honor the Constitution in word and deed, imposing its structures without fear or favor, then quit pretending, quit taking false oaths and just come out and admit it: You're a damned tyrant, you intend to and do rule by the force of the gun and you consider shooting anyone who refuses to acquiesce to your bull**** as both appropriate and deserved.

Oh, and by the way -- you deserve to burn in Hell.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

Why aren't we talking about this?

 DatePublic DebtIntergovernmentalTotal
-09/30/201513,123,847,198,347.81 5,026,770,468,136.52 18,150,617,666,484.33
Purchasing Destruction 1,049,576,318,548.01373,250,728,904.451,422,827,047,452.46

Remember, the actual "public" deficit is the difference in borrowing between the end of the fiscal year and the beginning in debt held by the public.  The total increase in debt, including intergovernmental (mostly Social Security and Medicare) is the actual deficit and is exactly equal, on an arithmetic basis, to the destruction in your personal purchasing power that the government causes (or gain if the government runs a surplus.)

The actual deficit -- that is, the destruction in purchasing power the federal government caused last year, is the percentage of 1.423 trillion .vs. the total GDP of 18.450 trillion or approximately 7.7%.

That's right -- the government intentionally destroyed almost 8% of your paycheck and your savings last year, running a $1.423 trillion dollar budget deficit, which is roughly equal to the worst of the "great recession" when tax revenues went through the floor.

Today there is no such "tax shortfall" excuse. 

The breakdown of exactly where the ugly is coming from will be published next week.  I already know what is in there because I've been following the monthly treasury statements all fiscal year, but wish to report final "as tallied" facts -- and thus will have another post at that time.

Let me be clear: On the arithmetic if we do not stop this now within the next 4-5 years -- that is, within the next Presidential term -- our government will collapse, our economy will collapse, our health care system will collapse and both the stock and housing markets will collapse.  This is not politics, it's arithmetic.  And the worst part of it is that I am utterly certain that the "references" count, along with the "views" count on this article will both be a fraction of the politically-oriented articles I've recently posted.  That the real end of our way of life in America, a threat that is obvious, mathematically certain, not very far in the future and yet avoidable if we act now fails to garner any sort of serious attention is the real outrage folks.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

A bit of the piece I wrote before got my mind going..... I hadn't actually sat down to think about this much (other than when Bill Still was running for the Libertarian ticket), and I bet you haven't either.

But we should.

I'm going to take just our Federal budget and break it down into the following general categories for Fiscal 2013, a year for which we have the Federal Treasury Statement:

Social Security: $870 billion

Medicare and Medicaid (All): $1,113 billion

Children and Families (TANF, Energy, Children and Family Services, Adoption, etc): $50 billion

HUD (Rent, projects, operating funds, etc) + "Community Planning": $45 billion

SNAP/WIC/Etc (Food Stamps & "Free" School Lunches): $109 billion

Veterans Affairs: $143 billion, of which about $52 billion is medically-related.  The rest is (mostly) pensions and readjustment benefits.

Ok, now let's add all this up, with one exception -- Military Pensions.

I get $2,239 billion, or $2.2 trillion dollars, out of a total as spent of $4.058 trillion -- roughly 54%.

Note that the deficit was $680 billion, or one third of that spending.

So let's just take our $2,239 billion and see what we could do with it, assuming we didn't have these programs at all. In other words, let's make a few assumptions:

  • Families in the lowest quintile of income (under $27,794) pay an effective tax rate of zero.  That is, their income (all sources, including benefit checks from the government) is all theirs to spend.

  • Families in the second quintile of income ($49,788) pay few taxes, with an effective rate under 20%. That is, if we remove the taxes the gross amount they'd have to "make" would rise by about $10,000 (what they pay in taxes.)

  • There are an average of 3.12 persons per family.  Since the US population is approximately 330 million, there are approximately 100 million family units ranging from a single person to five (where the bell curve flattens to near-zero) persons.  As these are quintiles this happens to divide out nicely; there are approximately 20 million families in each quintile.

Ok, so we're going to do this instead of the programs we have now:

  • We're going to enforce the Sherman and Clayton Acts vigorously against all in the medical field.  This will result in the cost of medical care plummeting by approximately 80%.  Doubt me?  Go price procedures and drugs in Japan, India and other nations where you can get first world, cash care.  Or, for that matter, price a procedure at The Surgery Center of Oklahoma.

  • We're going to delete all of these programs and benefits outlined above.

  • For the 20 million family units in the second quintile, we're going to give each a tax credit amounting to the 1/5th of the ratable difference between their family income and the $49,788 threshold.  There is an approximately $22,000 range in this quintile so the average household will receive $2,000. That will cost $40 billion a year.
  • For the 40 million family units in the first and second quintile we're going to give each a further refundable tax credit amounting to 100% of the funds necessary to reach the 1st quintile threshold (average for the first quintile is $14,000 @ 20 million people) plus, for those under $40,000, another $5,000.  This will cost (20 million * 14,000) + (35 million * 5,000) or $455 billion more a year.

Note that these two direct refundable tax credit disbursements result in nobody having a family income of less than approximately $32,000 after tax.  We spent $495 billion doing it.

Bluntly: If we do this there are no more poor citizens in America unless you care to argue that a $32,000 household income is "poor."  If you do then I'll preempt your statement by telling you that you're stupid and ought to go find a high building and jump, you ****er.

End of discussion.

We started with $2,239 billion that we whacked out of the budget and have spent $495 billion of that eliminating, on a permanent basis, poverty in America.

We have left $1,744 billion each and every year.  We will not run a deficit ($680 billion) any more, and in fact will run a $400 billion surplus on purpose to start paying down the debt.  We now have $764 billion left each and every year.

That $764 billion is roughly 40% of the remaining federal budget.  We therefore will cut all taxes, income FICA, Medicare, everything -- by 30% so as to bring receipts in line with actual spending.

The result of this is:

  • A balanced Federal Budget right now and, over the space of a few decades, a zeroed Federal debt.
  • I did not touch the military budget, nor any of the other departments.
  • Those who are in the lowest quintile of American life suddenly and permanently have a reasonably middle-class lifestyle.  There is no longer any argument over whether someone will starve irrespective of their economic circumstance, other than by choice.  There are no more poor citizens in America.
  • I have permanently stopped all fiscally-driven inflation, and thus destruction of purchasing power, since there are no longer deficits being run.  In fact we now see purchasing power increases over time of about 2.3% annually.

  • Those who are in the second quintile will see their after tax income effectively rise to their pre-tax income.

  • And everyone, from poor on up, will see a 30% reduction in all federal taxes and fees.

Note that I left a hell of a lot of Socialism in the Federal Government due to handing out money to the lowest two quintiles.  However, I got rid of all of the government waste and corruption at once in social programs by doing it this way, and as a result what has happened is that the people in the lower economic strata got all the money instead of a quarter of it with the various scam artists in and around the government stealing the rest.

I also broke the Medical Monopolies -- everyone can now afford to pay cash for their medical care.

And, I did it while cutting taxes across-the-board by 30% while not only balancing the budget immediately, not in 10 or 20 years in some phantasm of lies and fraud, but also while putting $400 billion a year toward retiring the debt.

We're not short on money in this country, nor on taxation.

We're short on integrity and people who argue otherwise are liars.

Argue with my math; if I missed something or made an error, show me where.

PS: Before the criticism commences, let me point out that I'm well-aware of adverse selection and the arguments that can be raised in support of it, including the fact that were we to do this we might end up with a lot of people in that first quintile by choice!  After all, $32,000 as a guaranteed household income is pretty good for doing nothing!

View this entry with comments (opens new window)