57 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bargio
Bargio
13 years ago

Why should he come fully into the 21st century when you’re still back in the 18th century with your hokum anti-science beliefs, Fester?

Mahk
13 years ago

Uncle Jack,

No offense to any of the other fine guests you have on but Mike Gaisor opens my eyes to things like you did when I stumbled upon you almost two years ago. 2%!?!!? That’s it!?!?! Show’s you just how broken both parties are that not one single politician has the vision to introduce legislation to a) cut the budget by 2% across the board and b) introduce a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

Thank you for a great show.

Scott Charlton
Scott Charlton
13 years ago

How could you not mention Ron Paul yesterday? He can win through the actions of the people and the Real Media. End the defeatism Jack, please. Liberty is worth it right?
Your largely right about Perry, who is not a Republican (most others are not either). He coward in the face of threats of the TSA, worked and Campaign for Al Gore, and sold out Texas to Merck
I posted this here too because it is vital that the message of Liberty needs to be heard.

Adam
Adam
13 years ago

I agree with Scott. The MSM’s fear of Ron Paul is laughable – indeed Jon Stewart laughed about it last night. See it here:
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/198657/20110816/jon-stewart-ron-paul.htm

I am a Texan and I have never voted for Rick Perry. He may have deep pocketed supporters, but enthusiasm for Perry in Texas runs VERY shallow here. He’s won these multiple terms in office only because his opponents have been utterly pathetic.

Americans profess they are tired of business as usual in Washington. Well, it will be exactly business as usual with President Rick Perry.

Karen
13 years ago

It is not often that i listen to a show almost as soon as it is posted. I am glad that I did for this one.
Thank you for the approach of,’I need to warn you but there are things that you can do.’ I have been considering how to invest in my family and what we will need for the future. So far the funding has been going to our suburban gardening efforts and canning. We have an extensive paper library of ‘how to do it books’ on a large number of subjects. My home is filled with my hand made blankets, hats, mittens, sweaters, scarves and socks. There are quilts slacks and tops that have come off my sewing machine. We play a number of musical instruments and there are lots of board games for non-electronic amusement.
The pantry is stocked as is the medicine cabinet. These are all things that more people need to realize that they not only can do but should do.

Thanks for your program

Joseph Dupont
Joseph Dupont
13 years ago

Hey Jack, great podcast. Every time we go further and further in debt the Federal Reserve and Goldman Sachs makes money . Every administration is full of ex or soon to be goldman or fed employees. It is disgusting. And instead of printing our own money we cower to the FED for mercy.. something is wrong.. very wrong. The end game is that they will ultimately own the United states and our future generations.

Sparky
Sparky
13 years ago

I loved this episode, but I’m struggling to understand how cutting 2% across the board will balance the budget? The total revenues budgeted for 2011 are $2.17 trillion, and the total expenditures budgeted for 2011 are $3.82 trillion, for a deficit of $1.65 trillion. Expenditures would have to be cut over 43% to make up that deficit. The numbers for 2012 are $2.627 trillion in revenue, $3.729 trillion in expenditures, for a deficit of $1.101 trillion, so a 29.5% reduction would be required to make up the debt.

How would the 2% figure work to get us to a balanced budget?

metaforge
13 years ago
Reply to  Sparky

Have to say Sparky, I’m with you. I mean no disrespect to Mike here, but I’ve got to see his math on how he says that thing would work. The only thing I could think of is if you KEEP cutting 2% year after year, then EVENTUALLY you will balance the budget. Maybe that’s what he’s saying? But it sure as heck sounded like he was saying 2% across the board and – bam! – balanced budget in 2012. I just have a hard time buying it.

Mike Gasior
13 years ago

With regard to the 2% cut in EVERYTHING balancing the budget….the numbers quoted Sparky…please remember that Iraq, Afghanistan, Social Security, Medicare, Medicade and more aren’t included in the Federal budget.

So….if the 2% cut was applied to ALL those items not included…we’d comfortably be balanced. Just as Jack I discussed on the show.

It’s not rocket science. It’s just something politicians don’t have the nerve to suggest.

Cheers!

Mike

Sparky
Sparky
13 years ago
Reply to  Mike Gasior

Thanks for the reply Mike. Do you have any links to numbers and/or charts that illustrate this? I’m interested in knowing more about it, but am having a hard time understanding how the numbers work (and I’m a numbers guy). Maybe I just need a visual kick in the pants!

Thanks,

Sparky

endure2survive
endure2survive
13 years ago
Reply to  Mike Gasior

Mike,
Your reply doesn’t make any sense. The shortfall is still over $1.1 trillion with an income of only $2.2 trillion. As much as I don’t care for government accounting, yours doesn’t add up either. Here’s the numbers as I see them (2010). How does 2% anywhere or everywhere add up to a $1.1 trillion dollar savings.

Mandatory spending: $2.173 trillion
$695 billion – Social Security
$571 billion – Other mandatory programs
$453 billion – Medicare
$290 billion – Medicaid
$164 billion – Interest on National Debt
+
Discretionary spending: $1.378 trillion
$663.7 billion – Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)
$78.7 billion – Department of Health and Human Services
$72.5 billion – Department of Transportation
$52.5 billion – Department of Veterans Affairs
$51.7 billion – Department of State and Other International Programs
$47.5 billion – Department of Housing and Urban Development
$46.7 billion – Department of Education
$42.7 billion – Department of Homeland Security
$26.3 billion – Department of Energy
$26.0 billion – Department of Agriculture
$23.9 billion – Department of Justice
$18.7 billion – National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$13.8 billion – Department of Commerce
$13.3 billion – Department of Labor
$13.3 billion – Department of the Treasury
$12.0 billion – Department of the Interior
$10.5 billion – Environmental Protection Agency
$9.7 billion – Social Security Administration
$7.0 billion – National Science Foundation
$5.1 billion – Corps of Engineers
$5.0 billion – National Infrastructure Bank
$1.1 billion – Corporation for National and Community Service
$0.7 billion – Small Business Administration
$0.6 billion – General Services Administration
$0 billion – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
$0 billion – Financial stabilization efforts
$11 billion – Potential disaster costs
$19.8 billion – Other Agencies
$105 billion – Other

endure2survive
endure2survive
13 years ago

Don’t get me wrong, if a 2% cut helps the bottom line, let’s do it. I’ll take my part, but the conversation in the podcast made it sound like a 2% cut meant problem solved, done deal, it’s fixed and congress is just incompetent. When you say a 2% cut across the board wouldn’t make grandma eat alpo it sounds like you’re talking about a 2% cut to Social Security, so that problem is solved, too. This was very unclear in the podcast and that’s the source of my frustration. Grandma isn’t even taking a cut with the 2%, so why confuse the issue?

The interest numbers are from Wiki, so take it for what it’s worth. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s that number or higher, but at 1-3% interest, it’s not much more. The problem comes when that interest rate hits historic norms of 8%. You were just talking about the sub-1% rates on short-term T-bills, so I wouldn’t doubt the numbers myself.

The problem is medicare/medicaid were never properly funded in the first place, but now the majority of Americans are relying on this program in their retirement. There is no simple solution. These are the political third rail and it’s that third rail that needs to be solved today. While dickering about 2% to preserve pet programs and not re-hire when there are agency retirements is where the talk is, the debt is from Social Security, Medicare/medicaid and the wars. If you want to solve the issue, 2% won’t do bupkiss. You gotta be willing to piss off grandma.

endure2survive
endure2survive
13 years ago
Reply to  endure2survive

I agree with you for the most part, particularly on the way to phase out social security but still retain some form of SSDI.

As for the interest rate, the fed does have one option to control US treasuries; they can buy them in bulk. Mike did an accurate representation of how interest rates are set, essentially bidding $9500 on a $10k bond in a year. When the fed is buying them up left and right with QE 1 & 2 they effectively tighten supply, so there’s more competition in the auction. As QE 2.5 winds down, that could have upward pressure on interest rates and force them to reconsider QE 3 (or suffer the consequences of fewer buyers for more debt (as the chinese lose interest and the japanese have a whole myriad of reasons to stop buying)).

I strongly urge you to read Endgame by John Mauldin. He does a hell of a job talking about the challenges going forward as the world deleverages from a 60 year long borrowing binge. The dual threats of deflation and hyperinflation are going to be an impossible line for the fed to walk in the next few years, and I suspect they’ll do everything in their power to prevent deflation. As a result, I expect we’ll see QE 4 & 5 by 2014.

As for medicare/caid, Cutting alone isn’t the fix, it’s how you cut, where you cut and how you restructure the program. I wonder if something like the VA would be a better solution, but I know already what you’d think of that. Still, how are you going to cut 30% when many doctors already won’t take patients with medicare because it pays so little for their services? Of course, even from a relatively liberal perspective, I’m for repealing the Healthcare bill. It’s a doomed plan from the get go. Retaining the link to employers for health insurance managed to piss off even my most liberal friends, so it failed in it’s most basic of points. I’d go on, but I think we agree.

Thanks for the conversation Jack. Despite our disagreements, you’ve had a remarkable impact on my life over the last 30 months. Debt free except for a reasonable mortgage on my 2.5 acre ‘stead, permaculture crops going in, increased my savings, changed the make up of my IRA and 401k, resumed hunting in 2009 after a decade-long hiatus… a very good impact indeed.

Mark

metaforge
13 years ago
Reply to  endure2survive

Agree with the ideas in your plan, Jack. But it’s not just 2% cut across the board and bada-bing problem solved, which is how it came across. 😉

At any rate it was a good episode, and thanks much for the followup explanation.

endure2survive
endure2survive
13 years ago
Reply to  Mike Gasior

This could be interesting:
http://federalnewsradio.com/?nid=35&sid=2502532

I’ll see your 2% and raise you 3%.

Kevin
Kevin
13 years ago

FYI: Peter Thiel contribute 500k to the Seasteading Institute in 2008.

Rex
Rex
13 years ago

Hi Jack,

Another great show. I have been buying junk silver, but was looking for a pull back (1700) in Gold to buy into it. I have been reading a lot to the gold:silver ratio, and it seems to indicate that there is a range where gold rises to 80:1 going into a crisis, then silver follows it during a recovery to bring it back down to 35:1 with the median of 60:1. If we are heading back down, wouldn’t a $40 silver, make it $2400 for gold? Why do you like silver better at this point? If there is no QE3 like Mike suggests, then I think we will see the double dip sooner than later. We can bet on more debt/budget fighting, more loss of consumer confidence, and nothing but bad news from Euro/UK. Here is a link to a gold:silver cycle: http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2011/1/6/756196-129431961860655-Mike-Stall_origin.png

Best Regards,
Rex

Tom NJ
Tom NJ
13 years ago

So, help my limited intellect out here. What is the real significance of the Bank not wanting the deposits? Obviously, it is because they would lose money on it. Is this because they know there is some massive deflation coming down the pipe?

Tom NJ
Tom NJ
13 years ago

Thanks Jack.

Ralph
Ralph
13 years ago
Reply to  Tom NJ

Minor point, but they don’t have your full 500K available for any use anymore, since in theory they’re supposed to have the 10:1 (or whatever the ratio of the day is) between outstanding loans and hard deposits. So, while the money stays in their possession, 10K of it has to be in a “reserve” bucket. Otherwise, they wouldn’t need any money at all and could loan an infinite amount, which would be way worse than the fractional reserve plan (which is bad enough).

metaforge
13 years ago
Reply to  Ralph

When coming to grips with how fractional reserve banking *really* works, this is the biggest sticking point to get past. I remember finally getting it and it really was a “holy shit – they can’t do that….. can they?” moment. It is the hardest point to get across when trying to teach someone who doesn’t yet understand how the system works.

Just like they say in Vegas “there’s a reason the casinos are so big, fancy, and well maintained – the house doesn’t lose”, there’s a reason bank buildings are usually the biggest & most modern & stunning in many cities, and it ain’t cuz they’re so great at investing 450k out of your 500k… 😉

Ralph
Ralph
13 years ago
Reply to  Ralph

Thanks for the follow-up. I admit that this whole magic of fractional reserve banking makes my head hurt. I understood when Jimmy Stewart was telling the folks in the “It’s A Wonderful Life” bank run that their money wasn’t in the vault, but in their neighbors mortgage, but that was probably the last part of high finance I really understood.

Bargio
Bargio
13 years ago

Jack, your denial of the accepted science of human-induced global warming is just totally unacceptable to thinking people. You’ve been co-opted by right wing radio talk show hosts and denialists working for the big polluters. You’ve swallowed all their lies hook, line and sinker. Wake up! You’re not a scientist, pal, so what gives you the right to tell the world’s climatologists that they’re wrong?

Cheese
Cheese
13 years ago
Reply to  Bargio
Bargio
Bargio
13 years ago
Reply to  Cheese

All you need to know about Jo Nova
http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jo_Nova

KAM
KAM
13 years ago
Reply to  Bargio

Just because you mindlessly accept lies, despite the ever-increasing evidence regarding the fraud and errors behind your fake-science, doesn’t mean others should.

You think it takes some special skill to identify a fraud? It isn’t that hard…if you actually VALUE science, instead of the politicized nonsense that you apparently swallow. I’m guessing that you aren’t a “climatologist” and probably don’t understand the first thing about any of the actual science behind this. Rather, you’re more likely just an amateur propagandist, out doing your duty to your cause.

I’m staggered by the level of denial that someone such as yourself must maintain in order to identify yourself as “thinking people.” This level of self-delusion is really hard to understand. Perhaps, you are suffering from Projection. You’ve bought into a massive fraud, and probably feel really stupid for having been fooled, and you aren’t intellectually honest enough to own up to that, so instead you lash out at others accusing them of failures that you’re guilty of. You project your failings (of thinking) onto them, and create this comfortable little zone of denial where you are a righteous crusader, and others are “Deniers” and pawns of “big polluters” or whatever fantasy you adhere to.

Listening to drones such as yourself, who are doing nothing more than parroting DISCREDITED PROPAGANDA, call people who ARE thinking “deniers” is really getting old.

You think that “climatologists” aren’t susceptible to the same sorts of influences as other people? You don’t think that their “conclusions” aren’t DIRECTLY tied to their funding? Your statements are juvenile.

Worst thing–is the damage to “science” that is being done by frauds and propagandists. Science is a wonderful thing, and people like you have turned it into a cheap propaganda tool. Congratulations.

Bargio
Bargio
13 years ago
Reply to  KAM

You, my friend, are living on another planet. I’m with 98% of the world’s climatologists, you’re off on Planet Denial. For the confused:
Global Warming and Climate Change Myths

KAM
KAM
13 years ago
Reply to  Bargio

This isn’t really for you, given that you won’t be able to respond, but I thought I would point something out.
I don’t care how many people agree with a lie, if it’s still a lie. I don’t care how much propaganda you heap on people, or how loud you keep screaming the same tripe.

If you’re wrong, you’re wrong, and the available information indicates you are wrong. Your group-think “consensus” isn’t worth the screen space you take up posting about it.

Majority rules isn’t how science works, and if you had even the most basic understanding of science you’d know that.

This bastardization of science is a crime against humanity. You’ve turned a method for discovering our world into a joke.

KAM
KAM
13 years ago

@Jack,

These propagandists aren’t just hurting legitimate environmental causes–they are eroding the credibility of science as a whole. They’ve made science a mockery in many ways. The fact that these whack-jobs have co-opted people with actual scientific backgrounds is a horror story, and a true scandal.

Thank goodness for the few scientists that didn’t back down to the unrelenting pressure from their “consensus” brethren.

Mahk
13 years ago

Jack,

Is Bargio one of those turds you talk about when looking to buy a house in a new neighborhood? Me thinks so.

Bargio
Bargio
13 years ago
Reply to  Mahk

How’s the heatwave going in the US this summer, Einstein? Co-incidence?

Randall
Randall
13 years ago

Great show Jack. Hopefully more people will get the message soon, but it seems unlikely.

@Bargio
Blah, blah, blah… Al Gore… blah, blah… NPR… blah blah…

Might I suggest you contribute your part to preventing global warming by divesting yourself of all things that use electricity or burn dinosaurs, and go live in a cave.

Bargio
Bargio
13 years ago
Reply to  Randall

Jack, you seem to attract like-minded listeners, pal. It’s like an echo chamber, with your dittoheads following you off a cliff. Blind leading blind.

Tinfoilhats
Tinfoilhats
13 years ago

Oh Bargio,

You’re right, we’re all kooks. You don’t need to prepare even though jacks 2+ year record has been spot on and Obamas well let’s just say, not so much. So everythings okay. Spend and play and point fingers for other people to fix things. That global warming thing should keep you nice warm when it all breaks down.

Tinfoilhats
Tinfoilhats
13 years ago

Why are the grasshoppers always so angry? You’d think not having a clue would be at least put you in a happy place …

endure2survive
endure2survive
13 years ago

Jack,
I’m all for it to keep a civil and decent tone. While I think the planet is warmer now than it was 180 years ago, there’s far more evidence to support the heavy influence of volcanic activity at the time than there is evidence that CO2 alone could account for the change. Some people just don’t get the fact that there was a time when Alaska was warm enough to be tropical, where giant algae blooms turned into vast fields of oil, where now there is ice. Humans didn’t cause that warm period and it’s highly unlikely they’re causing this one.

…and I have taken several semesters of climatology…
Mark

KAM
KAM
13 years ago

@Jack,

I am not sure if you can tell with your data(server reference or something), but is this the same stalker-type that’s been showing up with the same tripe every few weeks or so? Is this the same person using different names and repeating the same drivel again and again? The “signature” is surely the same, although who can tell when you’re dealing with a parrot.

If it is the same person, then they clearly have no purpose here other than to harass this community with their propaganda. As you say–they aren’t even responding to something you said on the show.

This is plain old kook behavior, plain and simple, not someone with an honest disagreement. You said it right–this is a troll–one who doesn’t seem all there.

Just to be clear–this is NOT about people having opposing views, I just don’t believe for a second that this person has the intention or capacity to engage in any sort of rational discourse.

KAM
KAM
13 years ago

@Jack,

If this guy is shifting names, that’s a sure sign of a dedicated troll, and one that has certainly earned a ban.

LisaPainterGirl
LisaPainterGirl
13 years ago

I was waiting for Bargio to answer your question, and tell us what he’s personally doing to improve the environment. Maybe since he’s a “thinking person”, he’s thinking about it. lol

Tinfoilhats
Tinfoilhats
13 years ago

Love when Mike comes on – Great info and no bull. So tired of talking heads with no clue…

Thanks Jack and Mike

WV Le o
WV Le o
13 years ago

38:16; “HOLY SHIT!” Hahahaha, I don’t think I’ve ever heard Jack so flabbergasted. Great show.

Dillon Allen
Dillon Allen
13 years ago

Too bad Bargio couldn’t keep his lid on. I was curious to hear his tit-for-tat reply to all the things Jack does for the environment. Would have been an interesting comparison.

Jack, thanks for all you do from a left of center right-wing nutjob.
ON-TOPIC Post Script: You mentioned a “Go” party during the show who is looking for “a few good men” to go do represent all of us in the middle of America, but there was no mention of it in the show notes. Could you either post some info (or send me an email) about this group and how to get in touch with them?