Tweet these Populists for Sanders poster URLs

Tweet this:

Western States Populists for Sanders — our best move https://eastmanclann.wordpress.com/#jp-carousel-820

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Western States Populists for Sanders — our poster (from Dick Eastman)

Leave a comment

by | May 5, 2016 · 2:21 pm

items

SANDERS IS AGAINST ROTHSCHILD/ROCKEFELLER INTERNATIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS LIKE TPP AND NAFTA — BUT TRUMP IS FOR THEM WITH THE QUALIFICATION THAT THESE AGREEMENTS IN THE PAST HAVE HURT THE US ECONOMY BECAUSE THOSE NEGOTIATING THEM WERE POOR NEGOTIATORS WHEREAS HE — IN THE MOST OUTRAGEOUSLY FALSE AND ABSURD CLAIM IN US HISTORY PROMISES TO NEGOTIATE NOT FOR HIS BIGGER BILLIONAIRE FRIENDS WHO MADE HIM A LITTEL BILLIONAIRE BUT FOR THE LOWER-MIDDLE CLASS FOLKS FOR WHOM, HE SUGGESTS, HE WILL FOCUS HIS STAR SALESMAN AND REAL-ESTATE-SPECULATOR AND GENUINE EGOMANIACAL NARCISSIST (def: one whose entire purpose is dominated by pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one’s own attributes) ATTENTION UPON TO SERVE ONLY THEM THROUGHOUT HIS PRESIDENCY. SO FAR, HE SAYS, IT HAS BEEN HIM HIM HIM, BECAUSE THAT IS HOW IT MUST BE FOR HIM TO GET ELECTED, BUT HE PROMISES THAT AFTER HE WINS IT WILL BE YOU YOU YOU AND ONLY YOU FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE AFTERWARDS, TRUST HIM AND SEE etc. How stupid you are if you reject Sanders because he is a Jew while putting all your trust in Trump — friend of organized crime figure Bill Clinton and Jewish Mafia don Michael Bloomberg — because he says “You going to love me as your president.” ONE OF THESE STUPID –BUT OTHERWISE PERCEPTIVE — PEOPLE IS JON RAPPAPORT WHO CAN’T SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SANDERS AGAINST ALL TRADE DEALS

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

western state populists for

Israel is wageing aggessive war of territorial conquest against the sovereign state of Palestine, waging war in violation of all the protocols of the Geneva Convention and in fact committing war crimes against civilians. Either the United Nations exists to stop this kind of aggression in the world or else the UN is a fraud, and instrument of evil that should not exist at all.

Bernie Sanders

Good for the national economy

Sanders at National Press Club

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

items

https://www.facebook.com/dick.eastman.56 I invite you to visit my facebook page — this is just a sample. I have cut back on email — the handful of email friends I had have all gone for Trump. It is so much easier to put information on facebook — and while the messages are quickly buried and forgotten there — they do have their fifteen minutes of exposure. With over 300 facebook friends that’s more than twice the readership I have had over the last 10 or so years.

If I was an enemy of the United States wanting war and wanting public opinion completely behind me against the USA there is no president I would want to occupy the White House more than Donald Trump. He is the perfect Communist propagandists model of a decadant sefish morally bankrupt capitalist.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

We don’t need a negotiator. We need a system-buster who is a consumate system-designer and replacer.

We don’t need a negotiator. We need a system-buster who is a consumate system-designer and replacer. Only Bernie Sanders comes close to being what we need. I am for Sanders and I am for what Sanders is for even if Sanders loses the nomination.

by Dick Eastman

As someone offering a back-up reform program — populist rather than progressive (yet happy and eager Bernie Sanders’ program only with populist money and lending and large debt-repudiation added to the package in the event Bernie Sanders is defeated for the Democratic Party nomination and does not opt for an independent run with the very strong backing of independents, see-through-Trump Republicans and see-through-Clinton Democrats which would enable him to win enough states to throw the election to the House for a final presidential decision.

So let me begin.

Earlier this morning I watched Obama on television speaking from London. He was there discuss ways that David Cameron can beat strong opposition and keep the United Kingdom in the European Union. But I heard the part that he introduced by saying that he and Cameron had also “discussed jobs” and job creation. That was interesting so listened more carefully. How do David Cameron and Barrak H. Obama think they can make jobs? He answered in the very next sentence. His answer was increased trade and investment between the EU (with Britain) and the United States. How depressing it was to hear that.

Making jobs by increasing foreign investment is a monstrous deception. There is no foreign investment being contemplated for the US. Rather there are foeigners continuing to buy the farms, factories, public utilities, large housing units, businesses thrown on the market by continuing lower loop deflation, the result of the all-borrowed money supply in both the US and the EU. The all-borrowed money supply is bad because it is always deflationary in the end, because the lenders only give the loan but they always demand back the amount of the loan (principal) plus compound interest — so that the loan stimulates for a while but deflation sets in as interest payments are made until reflationary stimuls turns to depressing interest drain and businesses, households and all levels of government begin to fail and forfeit asset wealth to the creditors as the nation slips into a default crisis — or more precisly a deflationary spiral — which is a bonanza for the foreign creditors as they put on the hat of “foreign investor” and swoop in to take advantage of all the distress and liquidation sales. That is not investment. It is economic conquest by the conspiracy of the fraternal order of international investor-plunderers. And David Cameron works for the headquarters of of that system, the City, that is the Rothschild interests, the great merchant banking families and trusts.

So President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron have their program for “jobs” as described above — and Hillary Clinton, although she knows next to nothing about any of this — will admirably carry on in Obama’s footsteps if elected.

Now what about the other candidate, besides Sanders. What about Donald Trump?

Trump tells his ignorant following that the problems with the US economy in the system of world trade and world banking agreements -is simply “bad trade deals” — as if the US negotiators were trying to help the American people but simply could not get “good deals” because they lacked the kind of negotiating skills that Trump the real estate speculator, casio and hotel owner has (working as a gentile front for the operations of billionaire Michael Bloomberg.)

Is Trumps claim that Americans are doing badly because of poor negotiating skills comparable to our hitherto poor wall building skills really an accurate explanation of why those deals have been unfavorable for the commoners of this country? Heck no. Goldman-Sachs supplies our negotiators and they supply the negotiators on the other “teams” as well — and those treaties are never ever “badly negotiated.” They are brilliantly and precisely negotiated to deliver exactly the outcomes that Trump is calling the product of bad negotiating, to deliver the assets of the American and European people into the hands of a financial Mafia. (I won’t call it “the Jews” because the Jewish followers of Bernie Sanders — one third of Democrat Jews in New York — clearly are against this mafia. Finally the good Jews make their appearance in their showing for Bernie — who by the way went to the same High School as Charles Francis Eastman, my Dad, James Madison High in Brooklyn (albeit 16 years apart). So now Bernie Sanders is practically the brother of this old Jew-bashing populist — God bless him. Was that a digression? At any rate, followers of Trump are not being too bright when they imagine Trump making good trade deals for Americans while on the golf course with the battery of economists, corporation lawyers, and diplomats from each country and from all of the powerful banking and corporate interests — a culture unto its own — all standing there with clubs in hand making deals with Trump at the depth of a star salesman and real-estate deal closer — “you’ll love it baby — and while you are at it pay for that wall” etc. TRUMP HAS NEVER SHOWN ME ANY INDICATE THAT HE HAS EVER IN HIS LIFE THOUGHT IN TERMS OF THE SYSTEM THAT IS FAILING THE PEOPLE, WHO BENEFITS FROM THAT FAILURE, WHY THEY MAINTAIN THAT SO PROFITABLE-TO-THEM FAILURE AND WHY THEY WILL FIGHT ANY REAL RELIEF FOR THE COMMONERS (FOR ALL CLASSES OF PEOPBLE BELOW THIS MAIFA AND ITS RETAINERS). I have never heard Trump us the word deflation, or insufficient money supply. He has no understanding of monetary economys and the only people around him are organized crime figures and show people. (Michael Bloomberg and the Clintons are organized crime figures as are all the New York politicians in the “big leagues.”

NEGOTIATIONS LIKE OBAMA’S PEOPLE ARE HAVING NOW WITH CAMERON’S — AND THEIR CHATTING SIMPLY A FIGUREHEAD EVENT WITH NO MEANING

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Dick Eastman: The address I could not deliver to University of London students of economics and public policy

A question was posed by faculty to students of monetary economics at London University:

“Assume a government can control the rate of inflation exactly. What rate should it set? outline arguments in favour of positive, zero and negative inflation rates.”

“One LU student wrote: “Hi people, I need some help answering this question – i’d like to know how you would go about answering it.

“my thinking is that a positive rate of inflation, associated with monetary expansion, is the best target since it increases aggregate demand and allows for the expansion of national output when prices are sticky (which in most cases they are).

“Also from the fisher eqn r = R- #. a positive rate will mean that the real interest rate is not too high ( therefore it will not influence real variables like investment negatively, instead it may actually encourage it) when compared to a negative inflation rate which would mean a higher real interest rate > lower investment > lower output.

“i can’t think of any benefits from having negative inflation ( except maybe that consumers gain from an increase in their real purchasing power) or zero inflation.

“Does this question want figures??

“Thanx

[close
quote]

A confident somebody-else at the U of L replied as follows:

“Negative is a ctastrophe.It decreases investment and consumption.When you know things will be cheaper tom. you wont buy anything today.When you know your intial investments are going to decrease in value, chances are you won’t make those investments, unless you have a thing for losing your money.

“Zero is unfeasible as you need to know the exact natuaral rate.However, given the assumption, zero won’t be very good for investment.You need to make it attarctive for people to invest in the economy today and a zero inflation reduces the incentive to invest.You could mention tobins q too.

“A postive rate is the best answer.Yet, it has to be small noramlly below 5 percent.Most developed countries have inflation rates of 2 or 3 percent (at normal circumstances). This way consumers and investors would have an incentive to consume and invest today while in the mean time inflation would not be too distortionary. One problem with inflation is that it affects the allocation of resources due to the affecting relative prices, and since it would be small the gains would outstip the costs. Also, since the effects of inflation are usually followed by a decrease in production in the medium run, a too high a rate of inflation would make investors skeptical about the overall health of the economy, and hence might decrease investment. You could also add that if it is too high it might start an episode of hyperinflation as this way it would be a self fullfilling prophecy.So, yes positive but small” [positive
small]

[close
quote]

Now here is how this old populist would answer that question

The question “what rate” should that government set is a loaded question and one that is not at all in the provenance of economics to answer. Set for whom? Whom is the government exercising this interest-rate-setting power to benefit? I would answer the question this way:

Q: “Assume a government can control the rate of inflation exactly. What rate should it set? outline arguments in favour of positive, zero and negative inflation rates.”

A: The normative question, what rate should the government set, has no answer because a government or central banking authority authorized by government that has power to control interest rates will be captured by interests — and in all contemporary cases has been captured — by special interests who will manipulate interest rates to reap the greatest gain the economy can reward. Such a power will vary money supply, i.e., the amount of loaned funds in circulation, to reap gain through a cyclical process of easy money with low interest rates to create a real economy boom. As the easy money boom progresses and great wealth is created, the interests who have captured government to control both money supply through lending and regulated interest rates (the discount rate) will ratchet up the interest rates, claiming they are doing so in anticipation of inflation, that they are “covering loses they can expect from higher prices by charging more for the money they lend. In reality this is actually cutting themselves in for bigger payments of tribute from the profits of the boom easy money has created. But that is only the first phase of this dynamic process of plundering. The wealth has been built up by the increased money supply, tribute has been increased by the administered raising of the interest rate structure (through the activity of the central bank raising the discount rate) — now comes the next phase of this inevitable plunder process that ensues when government controls interest rates. The next phases is to stop monetary expansion and let the inevitable drain of principal and interest bring the economy into deflation and economic reversal, a deflationary spiral — a depression. Since every loan that injected money into the real economy was co-created with a debt obligation to subsequently pay back to the creditor class both the principal and compound interest, there must result from this deflation a wave of defaults, of business failures, of reduced hiring, of reduced revenues, of lost tax revenues — in short the liquidation of the built-up assets of households, businesses and governments, the real assets (assets that served as collateral or were parted with in distress sales) the end result is a great transfer of wealth to the creditor class, the international lenders. They end up owning the country and displacing the citizens, moving them into slum areas while the interest group (usually termed bankers or speculators) who got this control of the money creation and interest rate setting take everything and rule everything.

THUS THE QUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED THIS WAY 9RESTATING WHAT I JUST WROTE): THE INTEREST RATE WILL BE VARIED BY GOVERNMENT OR THE CENTRAL BANK MONETARY AUTHORITY AMONG DIFFERENT RANGES, NOT ONE OPTIMAL RANGE FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE. IT WILL BE VARIED TO OPTIMALLY FLEECE THE POPULATION TO THE BENEFIT OF THE INTERESTS WHO HAVE GOTTEN THIS POLITICAL CONTROL OVER MONEY. Note too that it is not interest rate that is regulating all this — but money supply. Easy money creates the boom and the boom need never end, except that the dominant interest group controlling the central bank will ratchet up the discount rate to drive up lending rates in order to maximize tribute taken from the producers who are creating new wealth with this easy money. This will continue to a point at which tribute collecting is maximized and it is time to start taking the actual asset wealth that has been built up. This is done by allowing deflation to bring it all to bankruptcy, so that assets must be sold very cheaply in a buyer’s market

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized