Unemployment numbers up sharply
Economists reacting to the ugly rise in unemployment figures (remember, the stats have already been rigged to under-report) are “looking for a bunker to hide in.” Is it any wonder populist candidates are doing so well? As usual, Bush has his finger on the pulse, saying “the nation’s “financial markets are strong and solid.”
WSJ: The sharp jump in the unemployment rate — from 4.7% to 5.0% — may be the most alarming feature of this report. Single-month increases that large occur only rarely and most often near business cycle turning points. Indeed, the last time the unemployment rate rose 0.35 in a single month was September 2001. Tellingly, the jobless rate also jumped 0.3% in January of 2001, just before the business cycle peak in March 2001. –David Resler, Nomura Securities
The rise in the unemployment rate is very disturbing. Over the last year, the unemployment rate has risen 0.6% points from its low and since 1949 the unemployment rate has never risen by this magnitude without the economy being in recession (this period covers ten recessions). Other economic indicators such as jobless claims and ISM for December are more consistent with sharp slowdown than with recession, but we now put ourselves on recession watch. –Bear Stearns
This data shows an economy slowing sharply — the first quarter of 2008 is shaping up as a negative quarter for GDP growth — and the risk of recession is rising sharply. At least a [quarter percentage point] rate cut by the Fed on January 30 is a cast-iron certainty, and a [half percentage point] move is now a strong possibility. –Nigel Gault, Global InsightDecember’s bleak jobs report represents the siren call that this business cycle is just about over. We’re about to tilt over to the other side of the economic curve and begin the downswing. The only real question now is whether the economy will contract for one or two quarters. One thing is fairly certain, though. The Federal Reserve rate is now compelled to cut rates by a [half percentage point] at their January 29-30th meeting — and they may even move earlier than that! –Bernard Baumohl, Economic Outlook Group
2007’s job gain was only about 60% of 2006’s job growth. And job creation has been even slower in more recent months. Some, but not all, of this softness has been due to the decline in housing and the turmoil in the financial markets. More important, the pace of job creation over the past year will be revised down when benchmark revisions are made in February… The slack in the labor market is growing rapidly and will force the FOMC to act again at the end of the month. –Steven A. Wood, Insight Economics
Has the economy hit a big pothole or careened into the ditch? We are congenitally inclined toward the bright side of things, so not surprisingly, we’d like to lean in that direction. That being said, we are spooked by this week’s data and very open to a much weaker economic scenario. What is keeping us from a wholesale downgrade of our economic forecast right now? Mainly the fact that consumer spending has been holding up surprisingly well. … If consumer spending collapsed in December in line with the ISM and employment readings, then RBSGC would be inclined to carve up our forecasts for 2008 and start over with much weaker growth and extensive Fed easing. –Stephen Stanley, RBS Greenwich Capital
Nearly 70% of the manufacturing industries reduced their workforces. There weren’t a whole lot of job gains in the service sectors. Health care and education, as usual, were strong as well as professional services. On the other hand, retail, transportation, information and financial sectors cut back… Less than one week into the New Year and some may be looking for a bunker to hide in. –Naroff Economic Advisors
The construction category posted its second largest monthly decline since 1992. Moreover, the decline in the nonresidential component nearly matched that of the residential sector — the first sign of some potential spillover of the weakness in housing construction to the commercial sector… Today’s report, combined with the recent trend in claims for unemployment insurance, confirms that the job market is losing momentum. That is critically important because income growth tied to the creation of new jobs has been a key source of support for the household sector of the economy over the past four years. –David Greenlaw, Morgan Stanley
The fact that the composition of the data is in line with the pattern we would have anticipated suggests that this number shows a real deceleration in hiring rather than a statistical quirk. However, next month should show some payback for retail, as less hiring around the holidays typically means less firings in that sector early in the year. –Drew Matus, Lehman Brothers
The gains in services employment away from finance, retail and government were actually rather solid. At the margin, this actually reduces hope for a significant rebound in employment gains in January… The weak December, and better indicators such as unemployment claims, point to a period in which labor markets begin sharing in the pain of the long-building growth slowdown. The rise in the unemployment rate, while perhaps exaggerated on a monthly basis, may easily hurt confidence through news headline effects, and bears watching. To the extent that labor market slack is developing, today’s data will weaken some resistance against action on the part of Fed officials. –Steven Wieting, Citigroup
The rise in unemployment hit blacks and Hispanic workers especially hard, with both groups seeing a rise of 0.6 pp in their unemployment rates to 9.0 percent and 6.3 percent, respectively. There continues to be an unusual age pattern to employment trends. Employment for workers over age 55 rose modestly, while reportedly falling by 436,000 for workers under age 55. While this December decline is probably an anomaly, employment for workers under age 55 has fallen by 625,000 over the last year. –Dean Baker, Center for Economic and Policy Research
Oh boy…more bad news! Fire up the videos, let’s get dems on the air to trash the ‘Bush economy’ (can’t do it on the war anymore as they planned).
Yeah, Bush just can’t get a fair shake from the Wall Street Journal.
This really isn’t about Bush. We have moved too far into this decades long trend of deficit spending for any President to stop it.
The current solution to the Credit Crisis with so much “bad debt,” is “more debt.” Apparently they hope the consumers that still have $10 trillion in home equity will start borrowing on that equity too, and keep spending going.
Bush didn’t cause the the “boom” nor the “recession” he inherited and it really wasn’t Clinton’s fault as much as just a long trend that leads our government around by the nose.
We know we will have a point in time where we can’t dig ourselves out “one more time.” We just don’t know when it will be. Now?, Next year? 5 years? 10 years in the middle of the boomer crisis? We do know that it will end badly.
Also, on this report, it is much better than reality. Remember this was with the positive “birth/death” model included.
Quote:
One of the methods the BLS uses to ‘hedonically adjust’ employment data is the vaunted Birth/Death Model:
snip——————–
I’d like everyone to take note of how the BLS’s Birth / Death Model for “Financial Activities” has EXACTLY the same inputs [all positive] for the last 3 months of 2006 versus 2007.
snip——————-
Well, regarding the odds of these 3 numbers [highlighted in red, above] being identical two years on the trot – I just asked Mr. Jim Willie Ph. D. [statistics] what he thought those real odds were: he told me, “one in pie to the 15th power, or, one in about 28 million.
Does ANYONE really believe that the Financial Services sector of the economy really added jobs during December, 2007?
In case I missed it, is Citibank hiring?
FICTION AT ITS FINEST
by Rob Kirby
That isn’t Bush’s fault they use the Birth/Death model either. So much crap is credited and blamed on President that it isn’t funny.
The tax cuts he got, were the only ones Congress would allow. Only now are any democrats calling for corporate income tax cuts that they wouldn’t have allowed a few years ago. That was the type of cut needed, not personal income tax cuts but, they were all Congress would pass. And, I can’t really blame them for that.
Consumers need the tax cuts to keep spending. We are a nation so deep in personal debt that we have to have tax cuts because interest payments have many too tapped out to keep spending and those interest payment keep rising.
There is no way out for the consumer. If you tax him, he has to cut spending. If you tax business the prices go up and the consumer has to seek imports or cut back on spending in some sectors for other basic needs.
The bad news isn’t this job report. The bad news is that we are going to try and get out of it with “more deficit spending and debt.”
This problem came about decades ago and got worse each decade. Bush may have sped it up with Defense spending and the Prescription plan but Democrats had their own equally expensive plan ready to go. Also, I believe John Kerry would have increased involvement in the Middle East as much or almost as much as Bush as Tenet, head of the CIA who served under Clinton would have stayed and given Kerry the same advice he gave Bush. The democrats are not “anti-war” unless it is the other party in power. Clinton proved that with his bombing of Iraq. They may not have had the same follow-up but I believe that if the U.N. asked them to, they would have.
Both parties are caught in a “death spiral” that can’t be fixed. They can only keep going forward until we can’t go forward anymore.
What might be disturbing about employment is that we added 900,000 real estate agents during the boom to the 600,000 we had. We also added thousands of contractors that were “companies” and some didn’t pay unemployment taxes like those on commission in real estate, and they don’t show up on unemployment reports. Also, aren’t those in financials laying off about 250,000?
What is the household survey showing?
That is a result of easy credit and Bush nor Congress can really be blamed for that. Even the Federal Reserve says they have lost a lot of control on credit and lending rates and the “world” is now more in control than the Fed.
I’m with bb on this one.
Bad news is for sissies.
The Bush economy is the envy of the world… may I have some more credit now, please?
There are always opportunities for entrepreneurs who know people.
Just look how increased sales taxes in Arlington, Texas helped to make George W Bush millions on the sale of the Texas Rangers.
Man, it pays to know people.
* Borrow $600,000 to buy a stake in a crappy baseball team.
* With partners pay $86 million for the Rangers.
* Convince the taxpayers of Arlington to pay $200 million for a ballpark for the Rangers (financed by a .5% sales tax increase).
* Buy the park from Arlington for 30 cents on the dollar ($60 million).
* Sell the team and the park as a package for $250,000.
* Walk away from the deal with a sweet $15 million paycheck. Not a bad return anyway you slice it.
Of course, anyone looking closely at the numbers should question this: They bought the team for $86 million, and the stadium cost $200,000. Yet they only sold the team and stadium for $250,000. This tells me that Bush and Co. reduced the value of the team by a significant amount (the difference between $286 million and $250 million). He wasn’t even a good business man. Just another shady politico.
Let’s hear it for the GOP bb. Way to go!
Bush/Cheney ‘08!
Sidenote: Bush claimed his $15 million as capital gains rather than employment income thus avoiding an additional 10% on his tax rate. Never mind that the bulk of the $15 million was for “professional services”, and not a return on an investment.
The problem with forecasting. Who will be right this time? Look at the contrasts this site published today.
quote:
Major shifts in collective psychology usually provide a wealth of dramatic contrasts, at least for anyone who’s paying attention.
* Auto loan delinquencies in November saw the largest monthly jump in eight years, and reached the highest rate of delinquency since 1991.
* One of the nation’s largest provider of student loans saw a 26% increase (year-over-year) in credit card delinquencies.
* Unemployment jumped to a two-year high, with December payrolls showing the slowest growth since August 2003.
In contrast:
* The percentage of bullish advisors exceeded 50% each week of this past December (Investors Intelligence).
* Most economists and Wall Street strategists do not expect a recession in 2008, but instead slow growth in the first half and a “pickup” in the second half.
* The least optimistic of these strategists are telling investors’ portfolios should be 60% in stocks.
Then there are the financial headlines from early 2007.
* “Home Prices Seen Rising in ‘07″ (Jan. 11 WSJ)
* “Greenspan Says Worst of U.S. Housing Slowdown Is Over” (Feb. 14 Bloomberg)
* “Let the Good Times Roll” (Jan. Newsweek)
* “Fed Doesn’t See Subprime Mortgages as Threat” (March 1 Bloomberg)
In contrast, early 2008.
* “Housing Woes Reshape USA” (Dec. 27 USA Today)
* “U.S. Housing Crash Deepens…After Record Drop” (Dec. 14 Bloomberg)
* “Jobs: December’s Big Chill” (Jan. 4 Business Week)
* “Wall Street Sees 20% M&A Slump” (Dec. 17 Bloomberg)
And with all the above in mind, here’s the biggest contrast of all.
“It’s no accident that financial markets have flourished. Now regulators, central banks and markets around the world are poised to make moves that could turn an expansion into an explosion.” (Newsweek, Jan. 9, 2007)
In contrast:
“2007: Year of the Financial Flameout.”
source: Market Watch
————————-
So, with so much doom and gloom, things may turn out good. So often the forecasters are wrong, so, why not wrong again? Take each day at a time and be prepared for both booms and busts by being out of debt or able to make payments and meet needs, for a year without a job.
Oh wait, Americans don’t save anymore so they can make payments and meet needs for a year. Hmmm? Well, how about “wishing” our way to economic health. Or “prayer?”
Jan Paul, in his post #3 states:
“Both parties are caught in a “death spiral” that can’t be fixed. They can only keep going forward until we can’t go forward anymore.”
Jan Paul, it’s hard to rebut that statement. Appears correct to me!
But I must add that Dr. Ron Paul does understand, and will do what he can, to attempt to turn this nation in the right direction. (if that’s still possible?!)
Dr. Paul may have the “fixes,” as do others but, all the “fixes” will cause a deep recession.
If he were to be elected by some miracle, reducing defense spending would probably trigger a recession.
If he cuts pork, it could lead to a recession because 44% of national income depends on government spending.
If he reforms entitlements, it could cause a recession because a lot of Medicare spending drives the private sector.
If he returns us to a “gold and silver standard” it would cause a recession.
Quote:
# If you divide it by the number of ounces of gold in Fort Knox (which is one of the USA’s sovereign assets), then the price to which gold would need to rise to enable the gold to be used to pay the debt would be $62,543 per ounce
======================
If you raise taxes to pay off debt, you cause a recession because of either less money to spend if on individuals or higher prices if on business the wealthy can always use tax free securities and other protection).
If you cut taxes you raise debt and eventually the only way out is again, a recession.
If you cut interest rates, the only purpose is to make borrowing easier and that means more personal debt and interest on debt by consumers, reduces discretionary spending and will eventually cause a recession.
But, Congress is not about to support a President that really puts us back on a sound basis because they don’t want the recession it requires for the transition period. Also, American voters will blame whoever is President if even good policies put them in a recession even if coming out of it we would be stronger.
Naturally the short “cause of recession” are much more complex but, a recession is going to have to occur to get us back on sound fiscal policy.
Although conservatives don’t have draconian solutions, a good start to fixing the economy is breaking some of the ties between DC and K street/ multinational corporations. And if you look at the neocons, they’ve all got ties with companies which ARE SHANGHAIING OUR WEALTH TO THE TUNE OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS!
And once again I’m an advocate of “borders” as well as free markets and competition (with an emphasis on AMERICAN interests and rebuilding the AMERICAN economy.
Jan
Re #7. Yeah the Bushes are champions of “public private partnerships” (corporate welfare, no-bid contracts, revolving doors, corporate fascism, ect…) not free markets. And don’t forget Grandaddy Bush sold weapons to the Nazis.
Bill, the leaders, not just the politicians, in each party have ties to the same people. This group of international elite don’t care if we are socialist or capitalist as long as the wealth of the nation is controlled by them. Even most wealthy people are not their concern.
Only those that are serving the “masters,” are protected and given the directions the elite want not just this government, but many governments to go in. The same people that are in the CFR, Banking cartel Bilderbergs, etc. are “friends” and “advisers” of governments all over Europe too.
The rise and fall of nations is not important to them as long as they can control whatever nation is in power. That may be coming to an end because if Asia rises to power again after centuries of “Western” domination, the “elite” may find they are no longer in power.
We are living in one of the most interesting times in history. But, unless you are prepared for both the “good and bad” of those times, you may suffer greatly.
I was wondering why they thing the first half of the year will be bad (another show on that this morning) and the 2nd half better.
Could it be that the consumer will spend less now as he gets out of credit card and home equity debt or just saves and then once out of debt or has some savings, starts spending again in the 2nd half. That would fit but, also, mean back into debt and the trap of paying so much in interest that spending is cut again after about a year or so.
Interesting times for sure.
Jan
For some it’s secret societies, for others it’s globalist think tanks and institutions, or religious or ethnic, and others it’s multinational corporations. Depends on how you slice the pie. Do the Bilderbergs tell the corporations what to do or the other way around? Ever play Rock paper scissors?
Depends on the corporations. Most of the most powerful are all linked through a “network” of very powerful people and organizations. Remember what President Wilson stated
quote:
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
They know that America is not a place of which it can be said, as it used to be, that a man may choose his own calling and pursue it just as far as his abilities enable him to pursue it; because to-day, if he enters certain fields, there are organizations which will use means against him that will prevent his building up a business which they do not want to have built up; organizations that will see to it that the ground is cut from under him and the markets shut against him. For if he begins to sell to certain retail dealers, to any retail dealers, the monopoly will refuse to sell to those dealers, and those dealers, afraid, will not buy the new man’s wares.
Source
Maybe you have to look at it this way. The men who funded the great corporations Wilson refers to, also funded the Central Banks, the organizations those CEO, legislators, governors, Presidents, Prime Ministers, etc. belong too. Maybe they are inseparable because the “money” and the people who control the money they depend on for existence, control both as well as most in government.
They are the “elite” that are international in residence but, together control the money that corporations and governments and even you and I, depend on. They control the supply of money, the rates that loans have, the destination of those loans.
For a world that depends on loans, personal loans, corporate loans, city loans, state loans, federal loans, the people who control the rates and supply control the world.
As Rothschild stated
“I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.”
———————
The same is true of corporations, at least the largest and most powerful ones. They depend on the “money supply,” in not just loans but in government contracts from many governments.
You, of course, know of the complaints of Haliburton and the GOP yet, the same is true of both parties. Most corporations give to both parties and both parties give to them, in subsidies, research grants, government contracts, tax breaks, loopholes, exemptions, foundations, trusts, etc.
You are familiar with “networking.” It is how you increase your potential for success. Really, there is no secret society, no conspiracy, just a “network” that has developed within the “elite.” They turn to “other successful and powerful people for their needs and also respond to them when they have needs. They are an international “community” and just like you know who in your “neighborhood” is good at this or that, they have their “global neighborhood” to turn to for money, power, connections, etc. Those that are trusted are given powerful positions where they can accumulate wealth or more power.
It is natural and human nature for like minded people to associate and work together whether in one nation or across borders in the case of these people.
Jan
re: “They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”
Maybe that’s part of the “conspiracy” -making people think that “they” know what they’re doing or have a “master plan”. I doubt you could get 2 or more in a room to agree on who’s in charge.
There is “no one person” in charge. This is a group of people who meet, discuss, act, but, there is no “master plan” as much as just constant communication and use of money and power for each other and the group collectively.
When you have a “network,” it is just like any network you have. You don’t answer to the network, you only use it and it uses you when needed.
You discuss something in the “Bilderberg meeting” with governor Perry as recently happened when Gov. Perry was fighting to get the Super-Corridor going in spite of resistance by the Texas legislature. There were probably “no orders” given. He was invited because he was doing something they thought needed to be done and needed their support. They wanted to hear what he could do for their cause and what they could do for his.
Bilderberg Members
I – Agnelli, Giovanni
I – Agnelli, Umberto
GB – Airey, Terence
DK – Andersen, Tage
A – Androsch, Hannes
GR – Arliotis, Charles C.
USA – Ball, George W.
S – Barnevik, Percy
F – Baumgartner, Wilfrid S.
GB – Bennett, Frederic M.
USA – Bennett, Jack F.
INT – Bertram, Christoph
D – Bertram, Christoph
TR – Beyazit, Selahattin
TR – Birgi, Nuri
CH – Boveri, Walter E.
USA – Brady, Nicholas F.
GR – Carras, Costa
E – Carvajal Urquijo, Jaime
USA – Cary, Frank T.
GB – Cavendish-Bentinck, Victor F.W.
DK – Christiansen, Hakon
I – Cittadini Cesi, Gian G.
USA – Collado, Emilio
USA – Corzine, Jon S.
USA – Dam, Kenneth W.
USA – Dean, Arthur H.
DK – Deleuran, Aage
NL – Duisenberg, Willem F.
CDN – Duncan, James S.
USA – Finley, Murray H.
GB – Frame, Alistair
GB – Franks, Oliver
CDN – Frum, David
GB – Gaitskell, Hugh T.N.
USA – Gerstner, Louis V.
USA – Getchell, Charles
CDN – Griffin, Anthony G.S.
GB – Gubbins, Colin
S – Gustafsson, Sten
ICE – Hallgrimsson, Geir
USA – Hauge, Gabriel
N – Hauge, Jens
GB – Healey, Denis W.
USA – Heinz, Henry J.
D – Herrhausen, Alfred
N – Hoegh, Leif
N – Hoegh, Westye
USA – Holbrooke, Richard C.
A – lgler, Hans
FIN – lloniemi, Jaakko
A – Jankowitsch, Peter
B – Janssen, Daniel E.
NL – Karsten, C. Frits
GB – Knight, Andrew
I NT – Kohnstamm, Max
A – Kothbauer, Max
NL – Korteweg, Pieter
CH – Krauer, Alex
F – Ladreit de Lacharriere, Marc
B – Lambert, Leon J.G.
USA – Lord, Winston
S – Lundvall, Bjorn
CH – Lutolf, Franz J.
CDN – Macdonald, Donald S.
USA – MacLaury, Bruce K.
USA – Mathias, Charles McC.
GB – Maudling, Reginald
NL – Meynen, Johannes
USA – Mitchell, George J.
F – Montbrial, Thierry de
I – Monti, Mario
USA – Moyers, Bill D.
USA – Murphy, Robert D.
DK – Norlund, Nils
NL – Oort, Conrad J.
USA – Perkins, James A
GR – Pesmazoglu, John S.
I – Prodi, Romano
CH – Pury, David de
USA – Ridgway, Rozanne L.
USA – Rockefeller, David
USA – Rockefeller, Sharon Percy
GB – Roll of Ipsden, Eric
F – Rothschild, Edmond de
INT – Ruggiero, Renato
NL – Rijkens, Paul
GB – Sainsbury, John
I – Saraceno, Pasquale
F – Seilliere, Ernest-Antoine
USA – Sheinkman, Jack
I – Silvestri, Stefano
GB – Smith, John
B – Snoy et d’Oppuers, Jean C.
D – Sommer, Theo
USA – Stone, Shepard
GB – Taverne, Dick
USA – Taylor, Arthur R.
DK – Terkelsen, Terkel M.
N – Tidemand, Otto Grieg
I – Valetta, Vittorio
CH – Umbricht, Victor H.
S – Wallenberg, Marcus
N – Werring, Niels
USA – Whitehead, John C.
USA – Whitman, Marina von Neumann
USA – Williams, Joseph H.
USA – Williams, Lynn R.
D – Wischnewski, Hans-Jurgen
D – Wolff von Amerongen, Otto
USA – Wolfowitz, Paul
I – Zannoni, Paolo
————————-
Just a friendly, caring, bunch of like-minded people getting together for an occasional chat with “guests.”
Members Advisory Group
Or ‘inner circle’
Italy – Giovanni Agnelli
Great Britain – Eric Roll of Ipsden
USA – David Rockefeller
Germany (D)- Otto Wolff von Amerongen
[supplementary information on Eric Roll from Hansard]
Steering Committee
The 31 national BB ‘outer circle’ Steering Group Representatives:
HONORARY SECRETARY GENERAL
Great Britain – J. Martin Taylor
Chairman, WH Smith Group PLC;
International Advisor, Goldman Sachs International
HONORARY CHAIRMAN
Belguim – Etienne Davignon
Vice Chairman, Societe Generale de Belgique
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Maja Banck-Polderman
USA Allaire, Paul A. – Former Chairman and C.E.O., Xerox Corporation
P Balsemao, Francisco Pinto – Chairman, IMPRESA, S.G.P.S.; former Prime Minister
I Bernabe, Franco – Chairman, Franco Bernabe & C. S.p.A.
CDN Black, Conrad M. – Chairman, Telegraph Group Limited
GB Clarke, Kenneth – Member of Parliament, former Chancellor of the Exchequer
F Collomb, Bertrand – Chairman and C.E.O., Lafarge
GR David, George A. – Chairman, Coca-Cola H.B.C. S.A.
NL Halberstadt, Victor – Professor of Public Economics, Leiden University
USA Johnson, James A. – Vice Chairman, Perseus LLC
USA Jordan, Jr., Vernon E. – Managing Director, Lazard Freres & Co. LLC
TR Kiraq, Suna – Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors, Koq Holding A.S.
USA Kissinger, Henry A. – Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
D Kopper, Hilmar – Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank A.G.
USA Kravis, Marie-Josee – Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Inc
F Levy-Lang, Andre – Former Chairman, Paribas
USA Mathews, Jessica T. – President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
N Myklebust, Egil – Chairman of the Board, Norsk Hydro ASA
D Nass, Matthias – Deputy Editor, Die Zeit
FIN Ollila, Jorma – Chairman of the Board and C.E.O., Nokia Corporation
INT Padoa-Schioppa, Tommaso – Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank
E Rodriguez Inciarte, Matias – Executive Vice Chairman, BSCH
D Schrempp, Jiirgen E. – Chairman of the Board of Management, DaimlerChrysler AG
INT Schwab, Klaus – President, World Economic Forum
DK Seidenfaden, Toger – Editor-in-Chief, Politiken
IRL Sutherland, Peter D. – Chairman and Managing Director, Goldman Sachs International
CH Vasella, Daniel L. – Chairman and C.E.O., Novartis AG
A Vranitzky, Franz – Former Federal Chanoellor
S Wallenberg, Jacob – Chairman of the Board, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken
USA Wolfensohn, James D. – President, The World Bank
Bilderberg Conferences
Read that list carefully and see what you think about the “network” they have and the different “skills” members have that you can turn to when needed.
Did you notice the membership involving Goldman Sachs?
quote:
Before coming to Treasury, Paulson was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs.
————————-
Paulson’s network of friends include all on that list. In turn each of the government’s represented in one way or another in that list, associate and discuss and decide in Bilderberg meetings what is “best for the world.”
David Rockefeller is probably one of the most outspoken members who openly admits to trying to “advance the world,” according to the elite’s agenda.
They’re like crabs in the ocean. Who’s more scared of who? Is it any wonder they do everything they can to water down our representative governments by “dumbed down” education and open borders?
Jan Paul,
Which Fed chairman wasn’t deeply linked to the financial system?
.
Competence should be encouraged, not derided.
Quote:
Which Fed chairman wasn’t deeply linked to the financial system?
=================================
Exactly. While you certainly want somebody with vast amounts of experience, the point is, that you can’t have one that isn’t tied to the specials interests of the Central Banking Cartel under our government.
The Federal Reserve is not a good organization. While we need a “Central Bank,” we don’t need the one we have. Many articles have been written on how ours was formed to give a certain group of people more power, so there is no need to mention why, it was formed as it was, but, we need to make sure we understand who it serves more. It isn’t the U.S. people.
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article le + ‘ – ‘ + basename(imgurl) + ‘(’ + w + ‘x’ + h +’), but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
Walter showed me a marvelous financial service that offers pay day loans including the fastest online payday loan http://www.apexpaydayloans.com obtainable by most Internet consumers in search of a related company.