Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

what is doomering about but an effort to focus anxiety about 100 incomprehensible troubles onto one, big conceivable/plausible nightmare?

Huh? What did you say?

[metalman]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Huh? What did you say?

sign of the cow...

[Sharky]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

I've called the bonds fakes from the very beginning. As I've posted before, early news reports clearly called them "Federal Reserve Bonds," not Treasury Bonds as often subsequently reported. For example:

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=e...6&geo=2&size=A

They include 249 US Federal Reserve bonds worth US$ 500 million each

But the Fed never issued bonds. The photos confirmed that they are nothing but common fakes. The photos also showed no coupons missing, which was another Big Clue. What's so hard to understand about that?

The fact that anyone ever considered that they might be real for more than a few seconds is just beyond my imagination.

[metalman]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

of all the people, I don't like is Peter Schiff. He is an anti-american in my book.
He may be right with many things, but he comes of as a one-line man : "USA going down"

right on! criticize.. but what's his solution? besides the idiot libertarian fundamentalist 'do nothing' routine, that is.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

My "huh?" should have been more explicit. I am unable to parse, and have no friggin clue what was the meaning of your query that began "what is doomering about but an effort".

The post of mine to which you replied with this mangled query was trying to make the point that it is not just the bullhorn which leads the masses to cluelessness. It is also the natural tendency of most of us (doomers or not) to ignore what problems we have no clue how to deal with.

Even doomers have plans, be they just guns, whiskey and a cabin in the woods.

Past that point, our mini-subthread makes no sense to me. Sorry.

[metalman]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

My "huh?" should have been more explicit. I am unable to parse, and have no friggin clue what was the meaning of your query that began "what is doomering about but an effort".

The post of mine to which you replied with this mangled query was trying to make the point that it is not just the bullhorn which leads the masses to cluelessness. It is also the natural tendency of most of us (doomers or not) to ignore what problems we have no clue how to deal with.

Even doomers have plans, be they just guns, whiskey and a cabin in the woods.

Past that point, our mini-subthread makes no sense to me. Sorry.

no worries..

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

no worries..

Ok.

[metalman]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Ok.

next time...

[cobben]

Re: Fake

One really simple explanation would be that these two Japanese were actually the final marks of the scam, financial novices who were sold the bonds at a "steep discount" and told that a "sure way" to smuggle them into "tax haven" Schweiz was to take that commuter train.

But I'm still waiting for the connection to the missing Canadian gold . . . and then why not a world wide CB conspiracy, including the empty vaults of Fort Knox, while we're constructing theories, why accept some half-baked one?

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

next time...

Ouch :eek:

[ggirod]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

I want to start with a tip of the hat to the Metalan for his hundred problems comment that made me investigate. It would appear that Doomers are indeed good at reassuring the public by jumping quickly to worst cases, aggregating a few hundred insoluble problems into one big catastrophe and then saying "It's not all that bad, now, is it?" This article goes into how to communicate risk and has lots of perspectives to think about. I am not sure it gives all the answers but it does focus the questions.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Or maybe the US Media, rather than speculating, were working on getting the facts?

More specifically, every US mainstream media entity accept for Bloomberg waited for official word to come down from the US Gov before reporting even the one part of this event that isn't being disputed by anyone; the initial arrests. And there were a number of these entities in Japan, Italy and the UK reporting those facts as well as quotes from officials in Japan and Italy. You are convinced this was only a case of working on getting the facts? In a day and age of saturation coverage, I for one find that hard to believe. This happens all the time.

The BBC has covered on television and beyond allegations that Alan Stanford was working for the DEA since 1999 and had protection from the SEC. One US media entity has mentioned it at all. Vanityfair.com with one sentence in an article not published in the magazine. Note that the US government has of yet declined to comment in public.

[FRED]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

More specifically, every US mainstream media entity accept for Bloomberg waited for official word to come down from the US Gov before reporting even the one part of this event that isn't being disputed by anyone; the initial arrests. And there were a number of these entities in Japan, Italy and the UK reporting those facts as well as quotes from officials in Japan and Italy. You are convinced this was only a case of working on getting the facts? In a day and age of saturation coverage, I for one find that hard to believe. This happens all the time.

The BBC has covered on television and beyond allegations that Alan Stanford was working for the DEA since 1999 and had protection from the SEC. One US media entity has mentioned it at all. Vanityfair.com with one sentence in an article not published in the magazine. Note that the US government has of yet declined to comment in public.

EJ writes in:

Thank you for your comment.

We have stuck our necks out for more than ten years alleging that the majority of U.S. media outlets are hamstrung by conflicts of interest with advertisers and other influences over editorial content and selection of news stories. Before making these allegations, members of our advisory board who currently work for or have worked for major media outlets provided us with convincing evidence that this is the case. Needless to say, this has not made us a lot of friends in the media, and that is reflected in the kind of coverage we get in the media.

After the tech bubble and more recently the housing bubble collapsed without warning from the U.S. media, the fact of capture of the media by FIRE Economy interests has become evident to broad audience.

On Wednesday I did the keynote presentation at a venture capital and entrepreneurs conference in Boston. On my panel was Craig Benson, former governor of NH and others. I presented as I always do my beliefs about the FIRE Economy, including the capture of regulators such as the SEC and the media. No one even blinks. Everyone knows this is the fact but no one seems to know what to do about it.

The backlash is an indiscriminate blackballing of all media outlets. I think this is as destructive as the blackballing of Congress. What about the hard working, honest members of our government who are in the trenches every day fighting for us and trying to work within the system and also to change it? If they get discouraged, who do you think will be left behind if they give up because we don't support them?

A far more constructive approach is to identify those members of Congress who demonstrate that they are trying to do the right thing, as well as news sources that persist in the mission to serve the public despite the consequences. But our support for them has no value to them if we are not credible ourselves. A rush to judgment to criticize the media for not covering a story may earn us approval from some readers who in the current environment are angry at the media for not doing their job but it is the kind of applause that Ambrose Bierce called "the echo of a platitude." We must consider each case carefully so that when we do encounter verifiable cases of the media avoiding a story the report carries the weight of a record of sound judgment.

[cjppjc]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

EJ writes in:

Thank you for your comment.

We have stuck our necks out for more than ten years alleging that the majority of U.S. media outlets are hamstrung by conflicts of interest with advertisers and other influences over editorial content and selection of news stories. Before making these allegations, members of our advisory board who currently work for or have worked for major media outlets provided us with convincing evidence that this is the case. Needless to say, this has not made us a lot of friends in the media, and that is reflected in the kind of coverage we get in the media.

After the tech bubble and more recently the housing bubble collapsed without warning from the U.S. media, the fact of capture of the media by FIRE Economy interests has become evident to broad audience.

On Wednesday I did the keynote presentation at a venture capital and entrepreneurs conference in Boston. On my panel was Craig Benson, former governor of NH and others. I presented as I always do my beliefs about the FIRE Economy, including the capture of regulators such as the SEC and the media. No one even blinks. Everyone knows this is the fact but no one seems to know what to do about it.

The backlash is an indiscriminate blackballing of all media outlets. I think this is as destructive as the blackballing of Congress. What about the hard working, honest members of our government who are in the trenches every day fighting for us and trying to work within the system and also to change it? If they get discouraged, who do you think will be left behind if they give up because we don't support them?

A far more constructive approach is to identify those members of Congress who demonstrate that they are trying to do the right thing, as well as news sources that persist in the mission to serve the public despite the consequences. But our support for them has no value to them if we are not credible ourselves. A rush to judgment to criticize the media for not covering a story may earn us approval from some readers who in the current environment are angry at the media for not doing their job but it is the kind of applause that Ambrose Bierce called "the echo of a platitude." We must consider each case carefully so that when we do encounter verifiable cases of the media avoiding a story the report carries the weight of a record of sound judgment.

Nobel thoughts. I grow fatigued, and feel the wave is too large to push back.

[BlackVoid]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

What if the faked bonds are a death threat directed at the USD?

A warning. Fakes for now, but....


It is plausibly deniable by any government.
Explains lack of US media coverage. - If it was directed as a speculative act, why not trumpet it in the media?