"Apparently, Americans are the first people in history who are so idealistic, or so thoroughly brainwashed, that they prefer to pay for wars and bail out banks than to make their mortgage payments and help their children with student loan debt."

The idealism to which the article refers in explaining the problem with the monetary system doesn't rest with the American people. It comes from brainwashing of students by economic professors, who put forth disproven theories as justification for the federal government to engage in the management of the American political economy.

If these professors would have to make a living by depending on payment of tuition with redeemable currency, 90% of them would starve to death. The support given by academia for the existence of a debt based currency system is not only a great nuscance. It has become a real problem standing in the way of reform.

Idealism on the part of the American people has nothing to do with the problems besetting our monetary system. Instead, it is the smug attitude of economic professors who depend on the federal government debt based currency for their income, while acting as, if their services were demanded by a "free market" system based on a redeemable currency.

I find the hypocricy of Paul Craig Roberts amusing. His claims of the nearly tripling of the deficit under Reagan "Does Not Matter", yet he bloviates how the deficits of the Bu$h and Obama administrations do. Please recall it was under Reagan that the U.S. went from being the #1 creditor nation in the world to the #1 debtor nation in less than 8 years while the Reagan administration raised taxes 7 out of the 8 years it was in office.

Since China has bought over 1 trillion $'s in U.S. Treasury bonds it can now be said that Reagan and P.C.R. actually admire the C.C.P..

It was Reagan's firing of the union FAA Air Traffic Controllers that began the off-shoring and out-sourcing of American manufacturing to China.If the U.S. had followed through on the Carter Energy Policy, then the country would already be operating on a grid of mass trasnsit using 2nd-3rd generation of alternative fuels and not beholden to M.E. or Canadian tar sands oil today. The U.S. would lead the world in the desirable "Green" technology jobs and not China. Proving once again Reagan's and P.C.R. admiration for the C.C.P..

P.C.R. wrote in a recent article the hypocricy of the Obama administration and he would know after Reagan called iran one of the "Axis of Evil" yet the Treason fomenting Iran-Contra weapons for cocaine scandal proved Reagan was iving weapons to Iran, taking the profits and exchsanging weapons for cocaine that was brought into the U.S. to supply the crack and ice epedemic that plagued U.S. inner cities in the 80's.

Then there are Reagan's "Freedom Fighters" Saddam Hussein, Osma Bin Laden and Al-CIAda that received billions of $'s in weapons and these people are now relabeled Terrorists costing the U.S. now trillions of $'s and thousands of U.S. soldiers killed, or maimed by the surpluses of the munitions Reagan provided them.

Reagan was the champion of deregulation that spawned the billions of $'s in S&L bailouts, that culminate in the current QE and TARP bailouts. Since few of the most convicted Felons to operate within the Reagan administration is why the corruption has continued unabated.

"Extreme Mental Cruelty" is what Reagan's first wife (whom he committed adultry with) after he engaged in pre-martial sex resulting in his marrying a 3 month pregnant Nancy; that all debt slave Americans, those who have lost a loved one in the farce, ever expanding War of Terror and whenever P.C.R. ppens his opinions that run conrtary to his actions of the past. And we all know that actions speak much louder than words.

P.C.R. is busy trying to rewrite his history as he advances in age, realizing he was on the wrong end of history and is now trying to cover his tracks. Those who agree with his articles don't know the true history of this man and too ignorant to research the truth about the man.

Quote "Adam : at least being a heroin addict doesn't have negatively impact other people" /Quote

excuse me?
Perhaps you live in a society that provides free Heroin to herion addicts.

I on the other hand don't, Heroin addicts have to pay for it, which usually means they conduct burgularies on Homes (not a victimless Crime) or they are murdering people in the streets for the change in their pockets.

baaaaaah,baaaaah,baaaaaaaah... ... ..go the sheeple not only to but sheared now, but later to be butchered by the military industrial comlex when we finally revolt... ... if we still have the energy to do it.

"they prefer to pay for wars and bail out banks"
"THEY" is not the American people. TARP was initiated without any popular support.
The bankers are grabbing free money.
The people want free lunch.
"Economic theory, empirical studies and historical experience teach that the solutions are the lowest possible tax rates on the broadest base, sufficient to fund the necessary functions of government"
Click to view link
NECESSARY being the key word here. GOV has grown into leviathan to do un-necessary functions.
AS I wrote a couple of times; this whole fight is about how to divide the "pie".

'The federal court in Germany has ruled that Germans are to be just as idealistic as Americans. The federal court has produced a ruling that it is OK for the EU to require German citizens to provide $190 billion to pay off the private banks who lent too much money to Greece.'

So very predicable. (In fact, I predicted this decision way back in a feedback.)

People won't give up their addiction to statism just because of a recession. Do you think a heroin addict would give up their addiction because of a protracted downturn in the economy? Of course not! They would double down to deal with the stress. And at least being a heroin addict doesn't have negatively impact other people.

But statism - the enslavement of your fellow man to escape your own humiliation at the hands of your rulers, the "government" - that is an addiction so very few can back from because on the other side is a crushing guilt for having preached an immoral doctrine.

Choose voluntaryism or a living death.

Click to view link

Memento mori!

There is a common error of lumping together both the private and the public sector.
So, while income may appear high, we all know that much of this is from inflated GOV salaries. There's no recession in the Beltway. With all this Keynesian fertilizer, GOV is growing like a mutant toadstool,,, maybe not "toad" but it is definitely a stool.
Public spending displaces private spending. It is HIGH !!!
"It shows how much of total GDP is accounted for by government spending. It may be a surprise to you to see that it has gotten up to the same levels seen at the height of WWII. It was to us."

Click to view link

The biggest problem is that much of GOV spending is for BS non-productive stuff.
As more and more money is diverted to non-productive "enterprises" productivity goes lower and lower. This is nothing new.

"This is the key point which the Keynesians miss. They argue for increased government spending during slow economic times to take up the slack, and stimulate more demand. But where is the evidence that it actually works? One cannot prove it based on the results of the grand Keynesian experiment of the 1930s. FDR's Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau was quoted in Burton Fulsom's 2008 book, New Deal or Raw Deal:

'We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I have just one interest, and if I am wrong... somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises ... I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!'

Deja Vuuuuu,,, all over again.

This is why I'm a neo-Luddite.
U.S. GOV spends tons of money on a continuous basis providing make-work jobs for lawyers, bureaucrats and other ne'er-do-wells.
Click to view link

Our "American rule" legal system is a curse. That's why America has 50% of the world's lawyers.
Click to view link

Moving onward with waste, U.S. GOV spends tons of money on bureaucracy,,, and gets little in return.
Japan, on the other, hand spent tons of money on infrastructure,, and got little in return. It was surplus infrastructure. It didn't add to productivity.
Keynesian spending does very little to help create legitimate jobs. The market can create legitimate jobs but, the parasites are studiously squeezing out the profits to support themselves.

In this world of uber-production, the productive economy MIGHT be able to survive the predations of GOV. The combination of the predations of GOV combined with the predation of bankers is just too much.
Regulatory capture has allowed this predation to bleed too much out of the system.
Consumption is falling. Money velocity is crashing.
All production is for the sake of consumption. As consumption falls, production falls.
The economy has 2 loops. GOV, aka the banks is trying to inject money into the upper loop to revive the lower loop. At this VERY late date, the FED has discovered that the patient is expiring.
The banks meant to tap into the jugular but, instead, tapped into the aorta. You can bet that the bank cartel, aka, the FED didn't intend for the host to expire,,, taking with it ,,,,, the FRN. They just wanted to live the good life.

"G. Edward Griffin works tirelessly to dispel the notion that the Fed has been a failure. He told a packed hall that the Fed has been wildly successful at its true mission - to protect the banking system at all costs"
Click to view link

"At all costs" seems to include you and me.
When the day comes that America has to live on what we produce, day-to-day, there aren't going to be many people working.

Bummer, Dan

Friend-of-John-Galt your username, and mine, this site, this article all say distrust of government. Yet you use government numbers to dispute the conclusion of the article. I worked for the Census Bureau in 2010 and I can tell you from first hand experience that their numbers are skewed in every way that the government can think of to make more government and bigger government look good.

Perhaps the inclusion of the very richest households makes the numbers look better as well. The total number of households has certainly fallen since so many houses have been forclosed on and not resold, and since so many recent college grads have moved back in with their parents. The steady decline in household size has taken a sharp jag in the other direction during those same five years since household income has delined.

I think that if you stop counting the wealthy, and those who were on the dole before '07, per capita income would show a pretty hefty decline.

It is the 99% that supports the 1%. If only we knew it we have the power.
When we figure that out we may start to use it.

The chart shown looks at Household Income, but does not consider changes in household size. Since average household size has decreased significantly over the years, a fairer comparison is the Per Capita income figures.

Examining the Census Bureau Table P-1 (CPS Population and Per Capita Money Income, All Races, 1967 to 2010), we can see that in constant dollars, income peaked in 2007 and has declined during the following years. We can see other peaks that correlate to various investment bubbles (e.g. tech stocks in 2000, housing 2007).

So, while I share the writer's concern about being far down the road to serfdom, the Per Capita income figures do not support the contention quite as well as the misleading Household Income figures.

For what it's worth, this is a common error.