Tough economic times (cars, factory output, and bankruptcies)

Even as the stock market grinds on through its bear market rally, the real economy continues to slide off its narrow shelf like a boneless chicken seeking someplace lower.

First, factory activity plunged to its lowest reading since 1982. How significant is this? Well, in 1982 we were in the depths of a very severe recession. (This one hasn't even officially started, according to the NBER, who are squirming desperately to avoid proclaiming one right before an election). For factory activity to plunge like this at the outset of a recession speaks to a very deep economic hit in our near future.

Factory sector weakens sharply in October
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The nation's manufacturing firms reported the worst level of output in 26 years, further evidence that the economy is slumping sharply, according to a closely followed survey of top executives released Monday.

The Institute for Supply Management index fell to 38.9% from 43.5% in September, below the 41.5% expected by economists surveyed by MarketWatch. See Economic Calendar.

The result is the lowest reading since September 1982. The indexes for production and new orders fell to their lowest level in 28 years.

What do factories make? You know, cars and things. Perhaps these two news items belong together, then:

Ford posts big drop in October U.S. sales
Toyota also posts decline along with top German automakers
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Ford Motor Co. on Monday reported a 30% drop in U.S. sales for October, touting the launch of its new F-Series pickup as a silver lining in "an economic gauntlet the likes of which haven't been seen in more than two decades."

Toyota Motor Corp. fared slightly better, but its sales still fell 23% to 152,101 units with truck sales taking the brunt of the damage.

To which we can add GM sales being down 45%.The chance of the big three automakers to survive this is very, very low. They will need a lot of public assistance to even limp along for a while longer.

Next, bankruptcies are up strongly, topping 100,000 for the month of October, for the first time since the new restrictive bankruptcy laws went into effect.

Bankruptcies Top 100,000 for First Month Since 2005
Nov. 3 (Bloomberg) -- More Americans threw in the towel in October as monthly bankruptcy filings topped 100,000 for the first time since bankruptcy laws were tightened three years ago.

Businesses and individuals in the U.S. filed 108,595 bankruptcy petitions of all types, up 13 percent from the prior month, according to data provided by Automated Access to Court Electronic Records, a service of Jupiter eSources LLC in Oklahoma City.

Filings dropped precipitously after more restrictive bankruptcy laws came into effect in October 2005. Elizabeth Warren, a professor of bankruptcy law at Harvard Law School, said the changes "drove up the cost of filing for bankruptcy, but it did not end the need for bankruptcy.''

Back in 2005 when this very, very banker-friendly law was passed, I was telling audiences that it smelled wrong that this particular law was being passed right at the outset of a Fed rate hiking campaign, following the most profligate and unwise bout of credit expansion that we'd ever lived through. It was a dead certainty that lots of personal bankruptcies were in our future, and Congress voted overwhelmingly to assure that the brunt of the pain was going to be felt by the borrowers, not the lenders.

So I kind of took exception to the manner in which the financial industry both lobbied for less oversight in their lending practices (and got it) and more restrictive bankruptcy laws and got that too.

Couple that with the fact that Congress did not heed the wishes of the electorate that overwhelmingly did not want war with Iraq (in 2002), did not want this bankruptcy law (2005), voted for a change in direction that they did not get (2006) and did not want to bail out Wall Street (2008), and you've got a pretty clear set of dots to connect. Congress is not listening to "the people."

This is not a partisan statement of any kind. Please do not send me any supporting evidence that either the Democrats or Republicans are better or worse in any particular regard. When it comes to looking out for our financial future, and listening to the people, I've truly lost the ability to detect any distinction between the parties.

That's why this site and the Crash Course exist. Every single significant social movement, from women's rights to civil rights, has been brought kicking and screaming to the marble halls of power. That's just the way it works.

Is it time to bring an economic movement to the center stage?

I think so.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

hello chris, i consider yr site as one of the diamonds… i’find myself lucky to find this site…i even don’t know how if found yr site! but i posted to my friends …

living in the netherlands/europe i’m aware of the differences, but i realise that noting can stop the flood coming over us…

i stay tuned in to yr site …

keep on going!


Chris; Its not the economy that’s the problem its the "centre stage". A big talk show is never going to change anything or even start anything for the better, never has. Politics of any sort does not have a good future from where I sit.


Anyone can trade for what they want, only fools trade for what they need.

Boy, between Chris’s insights above and reading Davos’ link under "The other shoe to drop", I don’t think my dinner’s going to set too well tonight! It truly is enough to make you sick.


My answer to your rhetorical question is a resounding YES! The pattern of the U.S. Congress not representing the people’s interests for all kinds of critical issues affecting the citizens of this counrty is SO clear - - I don’t think they really know what they are doing to people - - and has been proven over and over again. There will be no changes until the people in this country are awakened, informed and see what is really going on as it it and demand changes.

I think you have a very rare talent to cut through all these convoluted noises, propaganda and data and to present the essense of the matter in a very simple and understandable way. I hope your work and talent will play a role in bringing about changes to this country because the people can’t afford the status quo any more. I see our two political parties in the same way as you see them.



Hi Chris,

Appears a synchronicity or global brain kind of thing on the go… :wink:

Agreed, this is what I have been doing; to contribute (should others need ideas, since we all ain’t Martinson Crash Course Fundi-Creator Ph.D’s, but we each got our skill to contribute) to create opportunity for people to network, find common ground, or at the very worst (but still better than lies, deceipt and ambiguity) clearly clarify and honourably understand each other’s differences.

So, not sure if this is helpful, but hope gives a few ideas on getting of the potato anger without enthusiasm depression couch!!

Ms. Naomi Wolf (c/o info*HuffingtonPost)
→ Mainstream Liberal Media (c/o scoop*HuffingtonPost)
→ Conservative Media (c/o PeggyNoonan*WSJ)
→ JMC Patriot Alert Task Force (*
→ [Copy at: <a href="" rel="nofollow"></a>]
RE: <a href="" rel="nofollow">The Exponential Function of American Revolutionaries: [MK-NAOMI] Colt 18 Fleur-de-Lis Riddle: Vote for NWO Debt Slavery; or Liberty!!</a>
Perhaps you are either (a) unaware, or (b) in denial of the financial, political and military warfare between primarily and succinctly, [I] the Corporate Fascists (aka NWO Globalists/Demockery Oligarchy and [II] the Libertarian Republic American Revolutionaries.
In terms of Geo Politics Poker; its known as Omaha Debt Slavery v. Texas 1776 Greenbacks.
The former consider the road, since at least 1913 to present, of Corporate Welfare Fascist Parasitism morphed into Big Brother's Brave New World of Matrix Debt Slavery, as their rightful blue-blood American Aristocracy 'birthright'. A vote for them, is a vote for Globalist Fascism, and your own personal Psychological, Emotional, Political and Military Debt Slavery. Expect your vote for the DemoPublican Party 'Thank You'; in the form of a Draft Card!!
The latter, Hillbilly RedNeck 'Give Me Liberty or Death' Politically Incorrect 'Fools and Horses' prefer to <a href="" rel="nofollow">Vote-4-1776</a>, for an American President with the courage to:


&quot;begin leading the charge to dismantle the Federal Reserve, overturn the 16th Amendment, expunge the IRS, and return America to sound money principles. Someone who would get the US out of the UN. Someone who would stop spending billions and trillions of dollars for foreign aid. Someone who would prosecute the Wall Street bankers who defrauded the American people out of billions of dollars. Someone who would work to repeal NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, the WTO, and stop the NAFTA superhighway. Someone who would say a resounding &quot;No&quot; to the New World Order. Someone who would stop using our brave men and women in uniform as global cops for the United Nations. Someone who would stop America's global adventurism and interventionism. Someone who would steadfastly support and defend the right of the people to keep and bear arms.&quot;



If you vote for a candidate who represents (i) the Corporate Socialist Welfare Fascist Parasitism morphed into Big Brother's Brave New World of Matrix Debt Slavery, as their rightful blue-blood American Aristocracy 'birthright' paradigm; (ii) Globalist Fascism.

Please do not complain when you get what you voted for: Your Political and Military Debt Slavery!!
<a href="" rel="nofollow">FINAL WARNING</a>:    <a href="" rel="nofollow">Vote for NWO Debt Slavery; or War!!!!!</a> 
Vote for Demo-Publican Corporate Socialist Welfare Fascist DemoPublican New World Order Parasite's
<a href="" rel="nofollow">Vote for 1776!!
Vote for an American Republic!!!!!!!!</a>
Respectfully Submitted,
<a href="" rel="nofollow">Lara Braveheart</a>
JAG-IA 07-146
PS: NAOMI denotes: <strong>N</strong>egroes <strong>A</strong>re <strong>O</strong>nly <strong>M</strong>omentary <strong>I</strong>ndividuals, (Ref: MK-ULTRA).
Additional Info for any MK-NAOMI Feebleminded Addicts to 'Debt Slavery/Economic Growth':
1. <strong>The Pentagon and Intelligence Communities Perspective on Exponential Factors of Population viz a viz Resources</strong>, namely Exponential Yewgenics: See: <a href="" rel="nofollow">Pin2Gong-HUMINT</a> 
2. Additional Information on the Mathematical Reality, as so eloquently described by among others, Albert Einstein, and Dr. Albert Bartlett, of the Exponential Function; <strong>The Energy Economics of Feebleminded Addicts to Politically Correct Religious and Corporate $lave and €annon Fodder Breeding Economics &amp; Religion....</strong> See: <a href="" rel="nofollow">Exponential-Yewgenics</a>
3. CEO of the largest Energy Investment Bank in the World, Mr. Mathew Simmons, <strong>Energy White Paper: Revisiting The Limits to Growth: Could The Club of Rome Have Been Correct, After All?, by Matthew Simmons; CEO - Simmons&amp;Co.Intnl</strong> See: <a href="" rel="nofollow">Fleur-de-Lis</a>
4. <strong>US Naval Services Long-Term Study: Global Tipping Points on Food, Water, Energy, Population, &amp; Natural Resources</strong>; and <strong>The Population Explosion: The Most Powerful Force on Earth</strong>, by Money and Markets; See: <a href="" rel="nofollow">NavyJAG-HUMINT</a>


Mr. Rockwell,
Speaking of Liberty

CC: Chuck Baldwin, Brad Blanton, Nouriel Roubini, Jim Willie, Simmons Intl, Constitution Society, Ms. Kwiatkowski & Missouri Libertarians

RE: Why Austrian Economics Matters More Than Ever, by Lew Rockwell Jnr.

Hi. Enjoyed your aforementioned article, and setup a copy [here].

Two questions: – perhaps stupid, but nevertheless, but would be great if you could find one of your writers to address in any upcoming Rockwell or Mises articles.

Question One:

The role of the legal power of corporations within Austrian Economic Theory; namely what do Austrian Economists see as the ideal legal status of corporations.

The following are essentially plausibly socio-political opinions, or just ‘the people’ sick and tired of corporate fascism, would perhaps be more accurate.

This from (Radical Honesty) Brad Blanton, who ran for Congress in Virginia on the Green Independent Party Ticket (got 25% of the vote, on a very small budget):

Amend the U.S. Constitution to clarify that a corporation is not a person and does not have all the legal rights of a person. Also, any corporation that clearly and persistently violates laws should be routinely relieved of its corporate charter by the state that granted it. All this is necessary to make clear that a corporation is given its incorporation to be a servant of the people, not an underhanded dictator of the whole society. Fining and or jailing the officers of a corporation that violates the law, rather than fining the corporation itself.

The following from a listener to the debate between Presidential Candidates Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party) and Ralph Nader :

Daily Paul - When it was Nader’s turn to ask Baldwin a question, I was FLOORED by his choice! (paraphrasing from memory):
"What is your opinion of the Civil War era Supreme Court opinion that gave corporations the same rights as individuals, thus perverting the legal definition of the word "person"?"
Chuck’s answer that he was in complete agreement with Ralph that this is one of THE major issues of our times.

Question Two:

Abolishing the Fed would put a huge brake on the planning state. Without the ability to expand the money supply at will, the federal government would become about as threatening as state or local government. That is to say, the federal government would still be an intolerable imposition on life, liberty, and property. But we wouldn’t be worrying about hyperinflation, large scale bubbles in specific sectors, crazy business cycles, trillion-dollar bailouts, controls that reach into every nook and cranny of our lives, a cradle to grave welfare state, or a global empire that invades any and every country at will, and makes America the enemy to whole regions of the world.

That’s only the beginning of what the end of the Fed would mean. It would dramatically change the political culture in this country. Bureaucracies would tumble. Trade would stabilize. The investment-risk calculus would accord with the free market. The left could no longer live out its pipe dreams of socialist utopia at our expense. The right would have to give up its wacky notion of a world police state. The power ambitions of whole sectors of society would be scaled back.

Since no economists address the current reality of the power ambitions, not to mention the consequences of their actions of INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES involvement in takeover bids, and Stock Market Manipulation, and Insider Trading, generally almost always on behalf of the richest Fortune 500 Multinational Corporations, at the expense of smaller businesses, let alone small ‘village or town street’ businesses; should those of us aware of these realities conclude:

A. Silent Economists are ignorant (lack of due diligence in research), or like Kenneth Deffeyes says ""The economists all think that if you show up at the cashier’s cage with enough currency, God will put more oil in the ground." – Kenneth Deffeyes
B. Silent Economists are in denial of the consequences of their silence - like pretending their isn’t a fox in the henhouse, when anyone taking a look into the henhouse can clearly see there are plenty of foxes in the henhouse!
C. Silent Economists are academic and intellectual cowards or prostitutes (petrified of being scapegoated for pointing out realities; and Alice in Wall Street Wonderland are not known for their courage in public recognition of reality; they are the proverbial sheep, or worse, as exemplified in Stanley Milgram’s experiments, the emotional, intellectual and psychological cowards)
D. Silent Economists are complicit

Hopefully if and when we abolish the Federal Reserve, we may come up with some ideas about what to do about Intelligence Agencies, shall we say ‘out of control’?


Lara Braveheart

This link? Or the one where Paulson worked for the Nixon Plumber John E?
If it is this one I am not surprised. This idiot crashed 5 planes, so his judgement is so piss poor that only he would hire the biggest moron for his campaingn and then consider appointing him to head up the treasury. Like Regan hiring Hinckley to protect him.
Chris: Change yes, but when half the votes (or close to) go to an idiot - good luck getting people to even acknowledge an economic movement let alone get it to center stage. This is why I advocated to you that you do a franchise and more of a grass roots movement. You need every town and city to have your seminars. You should put everyone on this site to work and let them make a few bucks getting the word out. Great place to sell te DVD also.
You also should consider doing the political aspect of this. Congress is what needs to be cleaned out. We really need someone who can expose this stuff and someone who knows how to get these jerks the hell out of office.
No one in his right mind should be allowed to run if he/she is considering appointing the guy who expedited the crash of our economy as a treasurer. And, this guy shouldn’t be allowed within 100 miles of any candidate, he has done enough damage already. His wife is a real gem to.

I’m familiar enough with Austrian Theory to give a flavor of what Rockwell might say.

Question One: The role of the legal power of corporations within Austrian Economic Theory; namely what do Austrian Economists see as the ideal legal status of corporations.

Separation of commerce and state in the same way church and state are separated. Corporations wouldn’t be regulated. Instead, the officers would be subject to the same laws applied to the masses. It would end the bribery and kickback that goes on between Washington and the corporations immediately.

Question Two:

Abolish the Federal Reserve

It would be replaced with a private system of decentralized banks. This has worked well in the past.

The question not asked is what to do about Washington? The answer is to dismantle the central government and let the states work out their border agreements.

The kicker is that none of this can happen unless the masses lose all faith in government. Only then can the process of downsizing and dismantling can begin. Until that time, this is only a fantasy.


Hi Davos-

Yes, that's the link.

Sorry Davos, I should clarify. The link you give above is the correct one, not the Paulson one. But I did think the Paulson one was insightful too.


I think it would be a tough sell to have people pay for a seminar that they don’t yet know they need. Once people know that they do need the seminar they might stuggle to come up with the money because they’ll be busy saving their money and paying down debt or just trying to keep food on the table.

However the incredible power of today’s communication technology allows us to replicate the DVDs and allow Chris "virtually" give his seminar to anyone with the DVD and the inclination to watch it.

(I mention the last point because it isn’t enough just to lead a horse to water…you also have to find someway to get the horse to drink - this is likely the harder task - I’ve encouraged many people to look at Chris’ site but relatively few actually carry this out - for others with a high "conversion" success rate I’d be very curious to know how you "sell" Chris message to others - perhaps I myself need to focus on the material I’ve included out at the bottom of this post).

On the other hand, I’m sure that Chris would be interested in hearing from anyone that can find a way to conduct his seminars to a paying audience. Another great power of communication technology is to share ideas with others about what works and then to replicate on a vast scale. If this can be harnessed I’m sure that Chris would be excited to have franchise opportunities.

Step one in my opinion is to get the DVD to people that are motivated to watch the DVD. (i.e. the horse to water that drinks). Earlier today I suggested farmers’ market as a way of reaching people concerned about the environment. Hey, if that works I think we need to be telling other people so that they can try that avenue! But reflecting on my idea perhaps it would be better to try to reach people that have been hit in the pocket book - so how about unemployment offices?

Once you build a base of people familiar with the course then it might be possible to start offering courses. As far as price - the less you charge the more you lower the barrier to conducting the course. Thus once word gets out to a broader audience perhaps those that are retired already might be able to finance conducting the course on their own resources - allowing more to flow back to Chris to support his grassroots efforts and repay him for his efforts.

Here are some factors to consider when conducting a business that hopes to be successful. I’ve included the entire list so that each of us can consider how you might proceed to "sell" Chris’ DVD and/or Crash Course seminars - I don’t want to exclude anything that someone can find an avenue worthwhile to pursue. This is from one of my favorite business books that I highly recommend for everyone looking to start a business or to get Chris’ message out (What Rich People Know & Desperately Want To Keep Secret by Brian Sher) that I quote:

"Because of the nature of their needs, people will pay you if you can do any of the following for them better than anyone else:

  • make or save them money

  • save them time

  • supply them with food, shelter or clothing

  • provide them with security, safety or comfort

  • offer them leisure or entertainment, affection, friendship, or belonging

  • give them status, prestige, or self-respect

  • add value to their lives"

All the best,



Hello Pinecarr:
Super. Yeah, till I started researching this I thought Enron was just a small gig, (you might enjoy the Smartest Guys In The Room (on Google Video)) turns out the hill is one smelly landfill.
We have idiots slipping in Bills like this one and idiots voting without reading anything.
Presidential idiots recruiting the writer for a Treasury position.
Then we have the useless media.
Add to the mix useless economists and agencies that use Enron math.
Oh, and a Fed Chairman who wrote what caused the Great Depression and then turned around and re-created it.
No wonder we are destroying the planet and waking up as broke as Enron.
Take care.
PS If you want some insult to add to our collective injury here:
Feinstein was not convinced by Greenspan’s argument, and she continued to press for legislation to regulate swaps. And Greenspan continued to resist. In a June 11, 2003 letter—also signed by the new Treasury secretary. John Snow, the new SEC chairman, William Donaldson, and CFTC chairman Newsome—Greenspan praised derivatives and called them an essential part of the economy:

We better enjoy sites like these while they last.

The Australian government is set to impose Chinese-style Internet censorship by enforcing a universal national filter that will block websites deemed “controversial,” as part of a wider agenda to regulate the Internet according to free speech advocates.

A provision whereby Internet users could opt out of the filter by contacting their ISP has been stripped from the legislation, meaning the filter will be universal and mandatory.

The System Administrators Guild of Australia and Electronic Frontiers Australia have attacked the proposal, saying it will restrict web access, raise prices and slow internet traffic speeds.

The plan was first created as a way to combat child pornography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia,” reports the Australian Herald Sun.

Communications minister Stephen Conroy revealed the mandatory censorship to the Senate estimates committee as the Global Network Initiative, bringing together leading companies, human rights organisations, academics and investors, committed the technology firms to “protect the freedom of expression and privacy rights of their users”. (Complete black is white, up is down, double talk).

Human Rights Watch has condemned internet censorship, and argued to the US Senate “there is a real danger of a Virtual Curtain dividing the internet, much as the Iron Curtain did during the Cold War, because some governments fear the potential of the internet, (and) want to control it.”

Speaking from personal experience, not only are “controversial” websites blocked in China, meaning any website that is critical of the state, but every website the user attempts to visit first has to pass through the “great firewall,” causing the browser to hang and delay while it is checked against a government blacklist.

This causes excruciating delays, and the user experience is akin to being on a bad dial-up connection in the mid 1990’s. Even in the center of Shanghai with a fixed ethernet connection, the user experience is barely tolerable.

Not only are websites in China blocked, but e mails too are scanned for “controversial” words and blocked from being sent if they contain phrases related to politics or obscenities.


Googling for information on certain topics is also heavily restricted. While in China I tried to google “Bush Taiwan,” which resulted in ceasing to be accessible and my Internet connection was immediately terminated thereafter.

The Australian government will no doubt insist that their filter is in our best interests and is only designed to block child pornography, snuff films and other horrors, yet the system is completely pointless because it will not affect file sharing networks, which is the medium through which the vast majority of such material is distributed.

If we allow Australia to become the first “free” nation to impose Internet censorship, the snowball effect will only accelerate - the U.S. and the UK are next.

Indeed, Prime Minister Tony Blair called for Internet censorship last year.

In April 2007, Time magazine reported that researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time. The projects echo moves we have previously reported on to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a new form of the internet known as Internet 2.

Moves to regulate the web have increased over the last two years.

- In a display of bi-partisanship, there have been calls for all out mandatory ISP snooping on all US citizens by both Democrats and Republicans alike.

- In December 2006, Republican Senator John McCain tabled a proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.

- During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News in November 2006, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an “adversarial and ugly climate.”

- The White House’s own de-classified strategy for “winning the war on terror” targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to “diminish” their influence.

- The Pentagon has also announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror.

- In an October 2006 speech, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a “terror training camp,” through which “disaffected people living in the United States” are developing “radical ideologies and potentially violent skills.” His solution is “intelligence fusion centers,” staffed by Homeland Security personnel which will are already in operation.

- The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance.

- A landmark November 2006 legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations sought to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web - and their argument was supported by the U.S. government.

- A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy.

- The European Union, led by former Stalinist John Reid, has also vowed to shut down “terrorists” who use the Internet to spread propaganda.

- The EU data retention bill, passed after much controversy and implemented in 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US, can access EU citizens’ data on phone calls, sms’, emails and instant messaging services.

- The EU also proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license.

- The US government is also funding research into social networking sites and how to gather and store personal data published on them, according to the New Scientist magazine. “At the same time, US lawmakers are attempting to force the social networking sites themselves to control the amount and kind of information that people, particularly children, can put on the sites.”

Governments are furious that their ceaseless lies are being exposed in real time on the World Wide Web and have resolved to stifle, regulate and control what truly is the last outpost of real free speech in the world. Internet censorship is perhaps the most pertinent issue that freedom advocates should rally to combat over the course of the next few years, lest we allow a cyber-gag to be placed over our mouths and say goodbye to our last medium of free and open communication.

Hello James:
You have some excellent points. I love the internet and DVD’s. Please don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t an in place of, it was an in addition to.
I’d still advocate Chris selling franchises for a few bucks, having a good format and a catchy ad. We could crank out a seminare a week, keep it fast, 2 hours, sell them the DVD, give Chris a cut and move on.
Word of mouth and an army of "financial wake up call soldiers" and I’m sure we could enact change.
The ad could be a financial IQ test:
Do you know the answers to these 12 questions:

Should you really be controlling your 401(k) without knowing about this?


Just when I felt that The Matrix was shimmering the status quo fights back. If we are going to end this George Orwell 1984 that we’ve woken to find ourselves living in then it is up to Australian readers on this site to mobilize their compatriots in round one of this battle.

All the best,



I have heard rumblings that they want to do the same here in the US. Sites like would be flagged Im sure

Great read, thank you!

“radical ideologies…

- The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance.

OKAY then, let me get this STRAIGHT:
Go blog the truth and it becomes a radical ideologie and you have to report it to Congress, or -go to jail.

Screw up the economy so your wife can take a job that paid a million bucks - Become the campaign advisor and a candidate to become the Treasury chief.

  • makes sense to meSealed

anyone else seen this…?

Effectiveness of AIG's $143 Billion Rescue Questioned

Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, November 3, 2008; Page A18

A number of financial experts now fear that the federal government’s $143 billion attempt to rescue troubled insurance giant American International Group may not work, and some argue that company shareholders and taxpayers would have been better served by a bankruptcy filing.

The Treasury Department
leapt to keep AIG from going bankrupt on Sept. 16, and in the past
seven weeks, AIG has drawn down $90 billion in federal bailout loans.
But some key AIG players argue that bankruptcy would have offered more
structure and greater protections during a time of intense market

AIG declined to comment on the matter.

Echoing some other experts, Ann
Rutledge, a credit derivatives expert and founding principal of
R&amp;R Consulting, said she is not sure how badly the financial
system would have been rocked if the government had let AIG file for
bankruptcy protection. But she fears that the government is papering
over the problem with a quick fix that was not well planned.



I wonder how flagging of "controversial" sites could be related to the Homegrown Terrorism Bill (HR 1955).


Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new section concerning the prevention of violent radicalization (an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change) and homegrown terrorism (violence by a group or individual within the United States to coerce the U.S. government, the civilian population, or a segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives).