In recent polls, 65% of
Americans said they were against the US government becoming involved in
Syria. Yet, the Obama administration has made it abundantly clear that it
will now actively support the rebels there.
Disturbingly, our
so-called allies in this fight – the anti-Assad rebels – are the sort of
people who use suicide bombers to achieve their goals. Which is not
surprising given that Al-Qaeda has openly taken a leading role in the
opposition the Obama administration now sees fit to support.
And so it is that the
very same Al-Qaeda that the US claims is Enemy #1 will soon be receiving
weapons from the US, and probably already has.
In one particularly
notable display of the world view of our new friends, a prominent rebel
leader named Sunni al-Hamad was videotaped snacking
on the lung of
a dead enemy soldier. The highly placed member of the intelligence community whom I
briefly referenced in my last missive told me that the most favorable
interpretation of this barbaric act the analysts could come up with was that
the fellow was actually trying to eat the heart, but ate the lung instead.
This was taken as "favorable" because Commander Cannibal's lack of
basic human anatomy suggested that eating internal organs was not a regular
practice among our new BFF.
Now, as to the "bad
guy" in this entire drama … he is the son of Hafez al-Assad, the
man who in 1973 changed the constitution of Syria to drop the provision that
only Muslims could be president… triggering a running battle against Muslim
extremists demanding that the country be Muslim and not secular.
In 1987, Syria actually
participated in the so-called willing countries in supporting the US invasion
of Iraq.
In 2000 Bashar Assad, the
second son of Hafez, succeeded to power after his father's death and five
months later ordered the release of hundreds of political prisoners.
Now, that's not to say
that Assad is a wonderful fellow. No one would argue the fact that he's
accustomed to using a hard hand to keep the discontented in line. And given
that those discontented are dominated by the sort of folks willing to blow
themselves up in pursuit of religious goals (or, at least encourage the more
gullible into doing so), the actions of the Assad government have, on
occasion, been uncompromising.
As an aside, you may
remember that in 2006 our current allies, the radical jihadists that Assad
has also been trying to keep a lid on, attacked the US embassy in Damascus…
and now we're on the same side. Funny how a little time heals all wounds, eh?
Even so, until this
latest phase in the conflict blew up in 2011, the level of violence was
relatively minor.
But that was then. Now,
with the place in flames, the death toll has soared with the latest body
count at over 100,000 and counting.
Which brings me back to
the question above, what the hell is wrong with Obama? Or, more accurately,
what the hell is the US government thinking to interject itself in the
conflict? Why would we want to hand the largely secular country over to the
jihadists? Who wins?
I thought this quote out
of an article on the situation by the folks at CATO worth sharing.
Those most serious about
intervention, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, want to do everything.
Their joint statement demanded: "provisions of arms to vetted Syrian
opposition groups, targeted strikes against Assad's aircraft and SCUD missile
batteries on the ground, and the establishment of safe zones inside
Syria." Graham also argued that "you've got to get on the
ground" to seize chemical weapons stockpiles.
Sound familiar?
Though I am not privy to
any special information on the political calculations of Washington, it sure
seems like we are following the script set down by the neocons (Kristol,
Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Abrams, et al.) that years ago infiltrated the
US military-political complex. This is the "Might is right" crowd
who believe in exercising US power proactively to knock down the dominos of
all Middle Eastern countries Israel feels threatened by, with the end goal of
remaking the Middle East as a region dominated by friendly democracies (or,
in the case of Saudi Arabia, friendly dictatorships). Failing functioning
democracies, turning the outcast countries into failed states that pose no
real threat to US or Israeli interests in the area also works.
It's never been a secret
that Syria is a prominent domino: as recently as 2009, Israel bombed a site
in Syria where they claim secret nuclear research was being conducted.
According to the script, after Syria the US will escalate its targeting of
Iran.
Given the hostile
neighborhood it's in, it's understandable that Israel feels the need to act
aggressively to dull the threat. Like individuals, nation-states possess
finely honed survival instincts.
I do, however, blame
President Obama and the State Department and all the many sycophants in
government and parasites in businesses that profit from war for once again
entangling the country in a foreign conflict. That they do so in the face of
overwhelming opposition among the public reveals "government of the people,
for the people" as the meaningless platitude it has become.
That our new allies are
jihadists who upon taking power will oppress the country like Assad never
did, then turn their weapons against the Great Satan that provided them,
makes our support of them not just a bad joke but spectacularly bad karma.
Then there's the tens of
thousands of innocents who will suffer and die before this is over. But, hey,
it's the Middle East where life is priced very low, so why should anyone
care? The neocons certainly don't.
I've said it before and I
will say it again: the constant turmoil in places like Syria, and the
hardships it causes to the civilian population, is a damn shame, but it's not
our damn shame. Left to their own devices, maybe – just maybe – they'd
finally get their act together.
That the Obama
administration would ignore the will of the people and deliberately make the
troubles in Syria our own, and freakishly do so in an alliance with
jihadists, strikes me as highly suspect and even treasonous.
One can only hope that
one shiny day not too far down the road, these people would be held
accountable for their actions. Maybe starting by impeaching the president?
I'm not holding my
breath.
Death of (the Retirement Dreams of) a Salesman
Last week I played in a
semi-serious golf tournament hereabouts. It's only the second such tournament
I've played in, and I had great reservations about doing so again. Mainly
because of the stress associated with playing tournament golf. As one's state
of mind has a huge effect on one's state of play, undue stress can result in
all manner of bad outcomes. In this tournament, my usually reliable putting
went out for coffee and didn't come back until near the end of the third
match, at which point it was way too late.
Even so, I mostly enjoyed
the experience and didn't mind losing as the competition played significantly
better than I and were nice fellows, to boot.
I mention this only to
set the context of a rather revealing conversation I had over a consolatory
beer in the clubhouse. The fellow who so kindly bought me that beer was a
sales manager who, over the course of the conversation, revealed to me that
he was hoping to retire in the coming year in order to spend his golden years
doing little more than playing golf.
Without any urging, he
then expressed some concern that the amount of money he had saved up might
not be enough to see him through his retirement.
It's a valid concern:
with a steady stream of advances in medicine and the fact that he is a fit 64
years old, his retirement could easily last twenty years. And thirty or even
forty years isn't out of the question.
That's a lot of time, and
a lot of money.
In the way of idle
conversation, I asked him how much of his assets he has in the stock market.
The answer, "Something over 90%," made my eyebrow inadvertently
twitch.
"What sort of
stocks are you in?"
"I don't know,
stuff my broker said I should own. I think I have some stuff in the health
industry, but I'm not sure."
"Have you looked
into how the companies you own might fare under ObamaCare?"
"No, I sure hope
my broker does, it does kind of worry me."
"What kind of
broker do you use?"
"A full-service
one. He's kind of a friend."
"And you keep
all your money with a single broker?"
"Yes."
"How much
commission do you pay on a trade?"
"Ah, um…"
"You don't
know?"
"No, but I seem
to recall it's around 2%."
"Does your
broker live in a pretty nice house? Better than yours?"
"Yeah, he's very
successful."
As I didn't want things
to get awkward or spoil his happy day, I nudged the topic in a different
direction.
Yet when I got home, I
couldn't help but shake my head at the idea that someone could be so
unmindful about the funds he is relying on for retirement. Which, reading
between the lines, is an amount just a bit over $1,000,000 – the rewards of a
lifetime of hard work.
In fact, as far as I
could tell, he had committed what might be called the 7 Commandments of
Investing.
- Thou Shalt Not Over-Concentrate.
For starters, his portfolio is way over-concentrated in a single asset
class.
- Thou Shalt Not Be Ignorant About What You Own, and Why. His portfolio is made up entirely of investments that he doesn't
even know the names of, let alone the basic metrics related to their
underlying value or financial soundness.
- Thou Shalt Not Fail to Rebalance After Big Run-Ups. The sector in which he is so heavily invested, US equities, has
already had a big run-up. As you can see from the chart here, it is
looking perilously close to a near-term top. As an aside, the pattern
evident in the chart suggests a trading pattern you might want to use to
your advantage. It should continue for awhile – maybe even until the
entire Fed-led Ponzi scheme collapses the economy.
- Thou Shalt Not Keep Too Much of Your Money in a Single
Institution. Effectively, he has all of
his money in a single financial institution. As the investors with money
on account at MF Global will attest, in today's world that's just plain
reckless. Very few banks and brokerage houses aren't entangled in the
obscure and impenetrable web of derivatives markets and so are at risk.
(This is a topic that David Webb will be addressing in depth at our only
Casey Research Summit in 2013, Oct. 4 – 6 in Tucson,
Arizona. Details here, registration
is limited. )
- Thou Shalt Not Blindly Rely on the Advice of a Commissioned
Broker. It's their job to get you
to trade. It's how they earn the money to buy that nice house. Sure, if
a commissioned broker provides real value, then they have earned their
commission. But you need to do your own homework and not just acquiesce
to their every recommendation. That's how you end up with 90% of your
retirement assets at risk in a single investment sector. As an
alternative for those who want to leave their investing to a pro, a pure
fee-based money manager can make sense as their only goal is (or should
be) to impress you so you'll continue to retain their services.
- Thou Shalt Not Fail to Watch Your Investment Expenses. In this case, a full-service broker has been charging him 2%
(and maybe more) to underperform in the sector he has him in up to his
ears. And, I suspect, does a fair bit of trading. Essentially, the
client takes all the risk and the brokerage house earns a bigger net
return. Additionally, if the broker is aggressive, then there's a good
chance he's not particularly attentive when it comes to short- versus
long-term capital gains.
- Thou Shalt Not Be Ignorant About Managing Money. Anyone who hopes to maintain and increase their portfolio over
time needs to have at least passing familiarity with the fundamentals of
investing and managing money. Otherwise you are likely to violate the
preceding commandments. And you need to keep yourself informed about the
macro-picture for the economy and for the primary asset classes in which
you are invested.
These are not easy times
to be an investor.
Especially when you
consider that global stock markets are now rallying on bad economic
news – as that is (correctly) taken as providing an excuse for the Fed to
continue the money printing. That should tell you pretty much everything you
need to know about the big picture.
As Terry Coxon, co-editor
of The Casey Report, recently put it, "The stock
market is levitating on QE. When QE ends, the stock market falls to
earth."
Thus, your investment
returns depend not only on investing in the right individual asset, but on
whether the Fed in all its infinite wisdom (or proven lack
thereof) decides
to withdraw liquidity... or, as was the case recently, ponders doing so.
Simply put, we will see a
lot of volatility between now and when the vultures finally come to rest on
the bones of this crisis (either through a deflationary collapse, but more
likely an inflationary one). In the interim, the "right" investment
for the long term might turn out to be a very wrong investment for the short
and medium term.
As to the longer term,
again quoting from Terry Coxon, the smartest person I know on central banks
and matters related to monetary policy…
"The Fed is not
going to exit the business of monetary easing. They may pause now and then,
but when they see the results, they will resume. Every hyperinflation has
been punctuated with pauses during which the central bank resolved to stop
printing, to avoid destroying the currency."
At the end of the day,
for any of us to successfully make it to the other side of this crisis with
our assets intact is going to require diversification, bullet-proof income
investments, a fair bit of cash, a focus on quality, and, while it may not
seem the case at the moment, gold. Of course, we'll be addressing all those
topics and a whole lot more at our Casey Research Summit this October 4 – 6 in Tucson. Hope
to see you there.
(Because gold has been
much in the news this week, and because he'll be participating as a faculty
member side by side with the audience over the three days of our Summit in
Arizona, I thought you might enjoy this quick clip of Jim Rickards
sharing his outlook for gold.)
Speaking of the Summit,
one of the panels will feature Ron Paul and Doug Casey, among others,
addressing the topic of "Politics Gone Wild." This topic is of no
small importance, as the entire world is currently locked into a destructive
paradigm of sick nation-states committed to doing "whatever it
takes" to maintain the status quo.
Yet, as the result of
decades of irresponsible governance driven by political expedience and vote
gathering, the underpinning of the status quo has been shattered, and there's
no easy way to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Consequently, it's all
but certain we're going to go through social, as well as financial, hardships
before this thing is over.
Which delivers me
somewhat seamlessly to the next item catching my eye this week…
Failed Expectations, Failing States
There is a parable about
a Southern farmer who takes up the challenge of capturing a herd of particularly
aggressive feral hogs. The story proceeds with him putting out some food
where he knows the hogs will find it. He then continues putting the food out
day after day while, at the same time, slowly building a pen around the
feeding spot. The story ends with the farmer simply closing the newly
constructed gate on the hogs while they are snout-deep in their slops.
If one so desired,
however, one could continue the parable as follows…
Some months later, the
farmer found himself facing hard financial times and decided he could no
longer afford to keep feeding the hogs at the same level. The decision made,
the next day he cut back the quantity of their rations and substituted the
higher-quality feed he had been dishing out with far less tasty tidbits.
For a few days the hogs waited patiently for
their usual rations, but when the farmer failed to come through, the hungry
hogs began to fight over the reduced slops provided.
It was not long after
that the farmer – confident that the hogs were properly domesticated – let
himself into the pen only to find himself surrounded by angry hogs who made
him what's for lunch.
The moral to the
longer-version story is that the domesticated hogs will remain docile only
for as long as you keep them snout-deep in slops.
Which brings me to the riots in
Brazil, the
latest footnote on the continuum of the slow-motion global financial collapse
now underway.
Simply, years of expanding
politically motivated social welfare programs around the world have raised
the expectations of the masses to the point where they simply can't be met.
The results are that
growing segments of the previously submissive masses, seeing their slops reduced
in both quantity and quality, are now drifting back towards a more feral
state. (Note the Mad Max hair in the photo above… yet another example of life
mimicking art.)
You can see the problem
in this chart showing the federal government's expenditures by function.
While the chart is a little out of date, the trend couldn't be clearer… or
more concerning.
The rapid increase in
social spending reflects the unintended consequences of the "chicken in
every pot" promises that have become the basis of every election
campaign for decades now. This is a picture of what happens when you train
the masses to look to the government, and not the free markets, to solve
every problem, water every plant, kiss every boo-boo.
Thanks to the surge in
socialism, this pattern is mirrored the world over. It's now projected that
Italy will need a bailout from the EU within six months – again due to its
unfunded and non-payable social obligations.
Since the latest crisis
began, we have seen governments around the world "socialize" the
bad debts of failing financial institutions by transferring those debts from
private balance sheets to those of the governments (and the central banks).
This has only exacerbated an already impossible situation, requiring the
widespread adoption of global monetary madness.
Seriously, who in their
right mind could possibly think creating trillions in new monetary units in
order to support virtually unchecked government spending is a sound and
sustainable policy?
Yet that's exactly the
operating model of the leadership in most of the world's largest economies. I
suspect this is so only because they simply don't see any other way to delay
the inevitable.
Flash riots in places
like Brazil only encourage these governments to continue acting like monetary
sluts in order to keep the public slops flowing. And to the extent that it
helps even temporarily mollify the expectations of the masses, expect other
equally counter-productive measures as well. In the case of Brazil, its
government is seriously levying yet
another tax on
the successful to pay for the social spending being demanded by the rioters.
And the global economy
continues to spiral around the drain.
When might the hard
truths become unavoidable? For an answer, I turn to Ayn Rand's classic Atlas
Shrugged…
"Do you wish to know
when that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's
virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion
– when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from
men who produce nothing – when you see that money is flowing to those who
deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft
and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but
protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty
becoming self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed. Money is
so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make
terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as
half-property, half-loot."
–Ayn Rand
Atlas Shrugged, p. 385 (1957)
If Rand is right, we're
getting close.
Meanwhile, for those of
you deluded enough to believe the US government will someday soon get its
fiscal house in order, the social and political consequences of doing so be
damned, here's a quick snippet from USA Today last week…
WASHINGTON — The U.S. House
failed to pass a sweeping five-year farm bill with sharp cuts to food stamps,
a surprising development that sets the stage for an uphill fight in Congress
to craft a new law.
The Republican-led House
soundly rejected a $500 billion measure by a vote of 195-234, failing to
muster enough support from conservative Republicans concerned about costs and
Democrats and concerned about deep cuts to the country's popular food stamp
program.
Of course, per the above
parable, when it comes to keeping hogs and people happy, a steady supply of
food is essential. So, do you really think the US government is going to cut
back the food stamps now being provided to 1 in 5 households (approximately
50 million people)? Hardly.
The simple reality is
that "We the people" took the slops, and the consequences of
passing our personal responsibilities to the nation-state are yet to be paid
in full.
As the nation-states have
no path open to them to continue to meet their obligations – at least no path
that doesn't end in widespread pain – expect things to get very, very bizarre
in the months and years just ahead.
Remain vigilant.
Friday Funnies
A Lesson in
Irony… Apropos to the Above Article
The Food Stamp Program,
administered by the US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, is proud to be distributing
this year the greatest amount of free meals and food stamps ever, to 46
MILLION PEOPLE.
Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the US Department of
the Interior, asks us, "Please Do Not Feed the Animals." Their
stated reason for the policy is: "The animals will grow dependent on
handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves."
THUS ENDS TODAY'S LESSON IN IRONY.
Leno on the
Scandals
"I was going to start off tonight with an Obama joke, but I don't want
to get audited by the IRS."
On NSA surveillance: "We wanted a president who listens to all
Americans – now we have one."
On a new IRS commissioner: "He's called 'acting commissioner' because he
has to act like the scandal doesn't involve the White House."
On closing the Guantanamo prison for terrorists: "If he really wants to
close it, turn it into a government-funded solar power company. The doors
will be shut in a month."
Concerning the Benghazi, Associated Press, and IRS
scandals: "Remember in the old days when President Obama's biggest embarrassment
was Joe Biden?"
On Obama saying he didn't know about the IRS scandal: "He was too busy
not knowing anything about Benghazi to not know anything about the IRS."
"The White House has a new slogan about Benghazi: Hope and change the
subject."
"It's casual Friday, which means that at the White House, they're
casually going through everybody's phone calls and records."
"It is not looking good for President Obama. Today his teleprompter took
the fifth."
"FOX News has changed its slogan from 'Fair and Balanced' to 'See, I
told you so!'"
"These White House scandals are not going away anytime soon. People in
Kenya are now saying he's 100 percent American. That's how bad it's
gotten."
On Obama's commencement address: "He told the young graduates their
future is bright – unless, of course, they want jobs."
On a Chicago man who set a record for riding a Ferris wheel: "The only
way to go around and around in a circle that many times is to read the
official report on Benghazi."
On White House claims of ignorance on the scandals: "They took 'Don't
Ask, Don't Tell' out of the Pentagon and moved it into the White House."
Concerned about
NSA Spying?
Here's one (funny)
solution: everyone should begin speaking like a terrorist… here's the video link.
More Irony
Donald Grove, The Casey Report
Here's the text of his
email:
"The White House is
on a roll this morning. The audacity of this administration! That
it would suggest that it has any credibility for instilling financial
responsibility in young people just takes my breath away. The secretary of
the Treasury will have oversight. That will keep it on the up and up,
won't it?"
Don is referring to the
Obama administration's Executive Order earlier this week establishing The
Presidential Advisory Council on Financial Capability for Young Americans (or
TPACOFCFYA, for short).
Quoting from the
Executive Order…
"By starting early,
young people can begin to learn the difference between wants and needs, the
importance and power of saving, and the positive and productive role money
can play in their lives. Having a basic understanding of money management
from an early age will make our young people better equipped to tackle more
complex financial decisions in their transition to adulthood, when critical
decisions about financing higher education and saving for retirement can have
lasting consequences for financial security. Strengthening the financial
capability of our young people is an investment in our nation's economic
prosperity."
Don adds, "How about
advising young people to observe the fiscal and monetary practices of the
federal government and simply do the opposite at every turn?"
Sounds about right to me.
A Good Laugh
My golf buddy Frank sent
this along a few minutes ago. Even though the Friday Funnies is longer than
usual, I just had to share it.
It's the voice of a man
leaving a message for his boss when he witnesses a car accident… and the
incredible events that then follow. It's really funny. Here's a link to the recording.
What the Hell Is Wrong with Obama? – Part Two
This week, the
Panderer-in-Chief moved forward with his initiative
to curb carbon
emissions.
Underscoring the global warming purportedly
caused by excessive carbon, a clearly overheated Obama dramatically wiped his
face with a white hanky during his out-of-doors announcement. Given that
summer in Washington DC is famously hot and humid, maybe some staff member
should have scheduled an air-conditioned room for the announcement… oh, wait…
silly me, the whole sweating thing was staged! Duh! (Do these people really
think that the public consists entirely of gullible morons?)
Quoting Bloomberg
on the president's announcement…
Saying that science had
put to rest the question about whether the planet was warming, Obama vowed to
use his executive powers to act, arguing that limiting emissions would spur
technological advancement and new jobs.
"I don't have much
patience for anyone that denies that this challenge is real," Obama said
in the speech at Georgetown University. "Sticking your head in the
sand might make you feel safer, but it's not going to protect you from the
coming storm."
The irony here is that,
at least as far as I can tell, the science tells us nothing of the kind. In
fact, for the last seventeen and a half years – a period over which the
climate alarmists tell us the planet has been dangerously warming – the
planet has shown no warming. Quoting a recent
article by
Christopher Monckton on the always excellent Wattsupwiththat.com site…
Superimposing the
temperature curve and its least-squares linear-regression trend on the
statistical insignificance region bounded by the means of the trends on these
published uncertainties since January 1996 demonstrates that there has been
no statistically significant warming in 17 years 4 months:
And here's a
link to another
analysis by a serious scientist that shows just how far off the predictions
of global warming have been when compared to actual temperatures.
Sticking with fact versus self-serving
fiction, the Centre for Ocean and Ice plotted the daily mean temperature for
the Arctic (you know, where the warming is supposedly causing widespread ice
melting and a die-off of polar bears) for the period between 1958 and 2013.
It, too, found no statistically meaningful deviation from the mean in 2013. Here's the link.
So, let me ask again…
what the hell is wrong with Obama?
Why would he use the
powers of the executive to unleash yet another bungling army of bureaucrats
and foist yet another expensive body of regulations upon the nation – and do
so at such a precarious time for the economy… a period when businesses need
help, not hindrance?
I can only assume he is
doing so not because he is ignorant about the science, but because he is
pandering to the "progressives" (a misnomer that, corrected, would
read "regressives") and others his party needs the support of in
order to prevail in the next election.
Fortunately, slowly and
steadily the truth will come out. My favorite recent public turnaround was
delivered by the mayor of London, the straight-talking Boris Johnson, in an
article he penned for the Telegraph titled, The Weather
Prophets Should Be Chucked in the Deep End.
A relevant quote:
For more than 20 years
now, we have been told that this country was going to get hotter and hotter
and hotter, and that global warming was going to change our climate in a
fundamental way. Do you remember that? We were told that Britain was going to
have short, wet winters and long, roasting summers. It was going to be like
1976 all over again, with streakers at Lord's and your Mr Whippy melting
before you could even lick it, and Hyde Park scorched into a mini Kalahari.
They said we were never
going to have snow again, and that we should prepare for southern England to
turn gradually into a Mediterranean world. There were going to be olive
groves in the Weald of Kent, and the whole place was going to be so generally
broiling in summer that no one would be able to move between noon and 4pm,
after which people would come out to play boules and sip pastis, to the whine
of a mandolin, in the dusty square that had once been a village green.
That's what they said:
the BBC, and all the respectable meteorologists – and I reckon there were
tens of thousands of people who took these prophecies entirely seriously.
Omigod, they said to themselves, we are all going to fry.
He goes on to suggest,
tongue-in-cheek, that every English homeowner who anticipated taking
advantage of the pending warmer climate by building a swimming pool should be
able to file a claim against the government for reimbursement.
In that same vein, I
would propose that the tab for hundreds of billions in wasted taxpayer funds
on electric cars, solar, and so forth be divided up and sent for payment to
Obama, Al Gore, and anyone else found to have profited – financially or
politically – from climate alarmism.
Some of the money
collected could be spent trying to deprogram a generation of state-schooled
students who now unquestionably accept the bad science of manmade climate
warming, despite the huge body of science pointing to the contrary.
Weekend Reads
Save Us from the
Meddlers…
this from the always excellent Reason.com:
Starting this fall, high
school students in New Jersey who taunt each other during games will be
subject to investigation not only by the state's athletic association, but
the state's government.
"The days of
taunting, baiting and trash-talking during high school sporting events are
over," reads a press
release from
the New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association (NJSIAA). Thanks to
collaboration between NJSIAA, the New Jersey Attorney General, and the New
Jersey Civil Rights Division, "discriminatory conduct will also be
reported to the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights and may result in further
investigation."
Oh, and the regulation
applies to off school grounds as well.
The Making of a
Global Security State. Terry Coxon forwarded me an excellent article on the topic by Tom
Engelhardt that appeared in the Asia Times. Here's the link.
Despicable He – If you want to confirm just how
degraded the US government and its various corporate quislings have become, check out this
story about the
IRS Deputy and the $500 million contract he awarded to a buddy… then refused
to testify about it.
And with that, I will
leave you for the week by thanking you for reading, and for being a Casey
Research subscriber.
I hope I didn't come off
overly pessimistic in today's musings – I am actually quite optimistic, but
that may only be because I don't have my head stuck in the sand about where
things are likely heading. As a result, I continue to take the steps I feel
are personally necessary to weather the storms ahead. Then I go about living
the best life I can manage.
If you'd like a bit of
help in making your own plans, I'd highly recommend taking a risk-free trial
to our flagship publication, The Casey Report… and signing up for our October 4 - 6 Casey Research
Summit in Arizona before it sells out.
These are tough markets
to be going alone.
David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research