To prove the four cycles of social change, I will set out the historical precedents of Western civilization of which America is an extension.

The Roman Empire and the Warrior Era - Western civilization is the social order which inherited its laws, culture and traditions from Roman Society. In 31 B.C. Augustus was the absolute military ruler. As Commander of the Army and Navy, he controlled all social, political and financial affairs which the Roman Senate had delegated to him. Augustus was a benevolent ruler and for over two hundred years of military rule, Rome enjoyed peace and prosperity. By the 3rd century, military rule had become cruel and aggressive over its foreign subjects. As the foreign provinces began to revolt and German immigrants were accepted in the military, Roman control broke down and by 476 A.D. the Roman Empire was gone.

The Christian Church and the Intellectual Era - With the fall of the Roman Warrior Era and the so called Dark Ages began, intellectual knowledge, control and order was preserved in the Christian churches. The church had political power and administrative control over Europe. The Priests and Monks kept historical records and were the only ones who could read and write.

To control the many warrior kingdoms, the church sanctioned the divine right of kings to control the serfs (laborers). The priests lived lives of luxury by setting up rigid social rules that required the common man to hand over his labor, daughters and wealth to the church, less the priests put a curse on the ignorant man. Temple prostitution first became a profession, as priest coaxed young virgins to dedicate themselves to service in the church. During the warrior age, women had a higher status.

Feudalism and the Capitalists Era - Feudalism was the capitalism of the middle ages. As landlords began to amass more land, wealth and serfs to work it, power slowly shifted to the capitalists. They gave land to the church and otherwise purchased the services of the intellectual priest to work social control for them. In other words, the landlords gained economic control and hence political power. In the 11th century, the control of education began to shift from the church with the development of universities of learning. By the 14th century, the plight of the serfs caused the laborers to revolt and new leaders emerged to put an end to the anarchy which led to national monarchies and a new warrior era of strict government control and wars of succession.

Prime Ministers and a new Intellectual age - In England the wars weakened the control of kings. By 1700 intellectuals became Prime Ministers of government having been born as advisors to King & Queens and parliamentary administration was controlled by intellectuals, then came the American and French Revolutions disposing other kings’ powers as the warrior era began to die out.

The United States and a New Capitalist Era - This intellectual era continued in America as new intellectuals such as Franklin, Adams, Jefferson & Hamilton took control and formed a new government in the late 18th century. By the mid 19 century, the industrial revolution brought in a new capitalists era creating powerful wealthy families, the Rockefellers, Fords, Carnegies, Astors, Kennedys, Bushes, etc. These powerful people bought control of the government. By the 1990’s greed had infected the entire population.

In 2008, the financial system collapsed, and unemployment started rising. As more and more people lose their jobs a modern laborers revolt will take place, then a new warrior age will begin. History proves the four era cycles.

Very impressive.

Similarly, if you know where to look, it is possible to discern a perfect image of my Aunt Nina in the stars.

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue

Muddle,

Generalizations are by their very nature, generalized. Your comment regarding poverty and vice causes me to question your reverse implication, that being that no discernable relationship exists. The real implication is not that poverty necessarily breeds vice, but a real connection is found between the two. One can argue about which came first, but I suspect that this generalization has a great deal of merit.

Us Baby Boomers have been living in a huge bubble for decades. We have enjoyed the very best of what a Democratic Republic predicated upon the rule of law has been able to provide. Now, the excesses of corruption, of socialism, and of the liberal "feel" good theories of governing are beginning to come back and bite us on our asses.

I've often commented about Social Security as being a good example of liberal efforts. The idea of our seniors living in obtuse poverty caused me to overlook the impending consequences of liberal thinking.

Now our entire society and economy, weighted down by civil rights to health care, to shelter, to food, to education to ever imaginable give away has finally started to crumble under the weight of the takers.

Madoff's Ponzi scheme of 50 billion, ripped off thousands, but FDR's Social Security "Insurance Premium" tax, (which was its original name, if I recall correctly) is nothing more than a huge PONZI scheme.

Eventually, the Utopian World we lived in as Americans for the last 50 years, is going to fall and it isn't going to be pretty. My generation may survive, but I fear for my children and my children's children.

Which is why I was such an advocate for the Fair Tax. Taking power away from the politicians in D.C. and putting it back into our hands, is an idea that no power hungry liberal or conservative is willing to willingly give up. I doubt it would make much of a difference now anyway.

The ride was nice while it lasted.

Always good to see you here, Richard.

It does my heart good to see you are once again trashing Social Security and whoring for that travesty known as the "Fair Tax"....hearing you and your fellow lunatic fringers continually espouse those ideals makes me think that a Permanent Democratic Majority is becoming more and more likely!

Keep dreaming...
The Fairtax or at the very least a Flat Tax is one of the best ways to get this Nation moving again... and any way why are you so opposed to a "Fairtax" afraid you might actually start having to pay tax.. hmmmm

The FairTax is a hoax, a fantasy. It will never be enacted. Here are a few quick reasons:

1.It taxes rents, gas and electricity.
2.It taxes your debt. Any amount of interest you pay over the prime rate is subject to the tax as a financial service. This includes mortgages, credit card debt, school loans, car loans, etc. There's a real vote getter for you.
3.It taxes gasoline and diesel fuel.

There's lots more but any of those guarantees it will never be implemented.

It is also illogical in its claims. Supposedly (and briefly) it implements a 23% tax while prices fall about 23% due to embedded taxes in products being eliminated therefore the whole FairTax is essentially a wash while income taxes, etc. are eliminated. However, you are already now paying the embedded taxes and the income tax is still necessary. How can this be?

The 23% is supposedly revenue neutral. This figure was arrived at in the early 90's. Since then the cost of government has more than doubled while GNP has lagged far far behind. How can the 23% still be accurate?

Finally, the whole “take home your entire paycheck” is an outright lie. You will take home exactly what you take home now, your gross minus your withheld taxes. That withheld taxes part of your current paycheck is part of those “embedded taxes” that corporations will no longer be paying thus enabling them to reduce their product prices.

Please answer these simple questions using the current system vs. Fairtax..

Q. Why do you think that a sales tax is less prone to corruption and complexity than an income tax?

A. There are three major reasons that the FairTax would be less problematic than an income tax:

1. It applies to actual transactions where money changes hands, rather than “income”, which is a concept so abstract as to be almost ethereal. Most of the 60,000-page U.S. tax code deals with the definition of “income”.
2. There would be only about 20 million entities that would need to file FairTax returns, compared with 140 million who must file income tax returns now.
3. At the proposed 23% (inclusive) rate, the FairTax rate is much lower than the current 35% top tax rates on personal and corporate income. The lower the rate, the less incentive for avoidance, evasion, and special pleading.

Q. Are sales taxes, where they are currently in operation, simple and free from special interest lobbying?

A. Nothing in the manifested universe is perfect, but sales taxes are, in practice, simpler and less prone to special interest lobbying than income taxes. Right now, the huge Washington lobbying industry on K Street gets half of its revenue from lobbying the income tax code.

Q. Does it apply to non-profits?

A. The FairTax applies to retail sales of new goods and services. If a non-profit sells new goods and services, it will collect the FairTax on them. However, in general, charity involves giving things away, not selling them. Also, the FairTax would eliminate the payroll taxes that non-profits pay under current law.

Q. Are used goods, non-taxable?

A. Yes—the FairTax applies only to sales of new goods and services. However, the nation as a whole obviously cannot replace newly-produced goods with used goods. If I sell you my car, I don’t have it anymore. All of the new parts and labor that would go into “rehabilitation” and “refurbishment” of used items would be subject to the FairTax. This having been said, the FairTax would shift U.S. GDP from current consumption toward investment and exports. Most economists would applaud such a move.

Q. What about the transition period?

A. People respond to incentives, and there would be an incentive to delay income and accelerate spending ahead of the FairTax effective date. This could well result in a short-term increase in debt. However, debt will be easier to repay under the FairTax because people will have more take-home pay. This aside, America has been around for 232 years. There are many things that could be done to ease the transition, and it makes no sense to avoid a change with huge long-term benefits because of one-year transition effects.

Q. Isn’t it true that the rate is not really 23% but 30% at least, because it’s tax-inclusive?

A. Yes and no. Both the FairTax and the income tax can be stated as either an “inclusive” or an “exclusive” rate. For an “apples to apples” comparison with the rates of our existing tax system, the 23% “inclusive” FairTax rate is the correct number to use.

Q. How do we determine the interest portion of mortgage payment?

A. Interest above the rate on 10-year Treasury bonds is subject to the FairTax. This will prevent suppliers from discounting prices and making it up with high interest rates on financing. The 10-year Treasury rate is a market-determined interest rate that is not targeted by the Federal Reserve.

Hard to argue with facts Jeff.... and you are right it is a fantasy just like Obama giving up his Socialist ideas and serving all the People...

Knowledge of the law, and only some of it at that, does not translate into being knowledgeable (and smart) about finance. The assertion that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme is egregiously stupid. (To talk of obtuse poverty is itself pretty obtuse, when the correct word is abject. Obtuse means slow to understand, not sharp.)

For your information, Hobbs, the Social Security system had assets of $2.4 trillion as of Sept. 30, 2008.

Let’s suppose you go to the bank to withdraw $100 and Joe, the person ahead of you, deposits five $20 bills into his account. You see the cashier put the five $20 bills into her till. When your turn comes, you see the cashier hand you the very same five $20 bills Joe handed her. Ponzi scheme?

No. Only an ignorant (obtuse) person would come to that conclusion.

The people who collect Social Security benefits today are collecting it out of their past contribution to the $2.4 trillion. The people who contribute to Social Security today are adding to that fund. It’s that simple. The money of current contributors is not being used to pay off current retirees or disabled beneficiaries.

Social Security invests the money. What does it invest it in? U.S. government bonds, as the decision was made years ago that the government should not influence the stock market by investing in it.

What is an investment for the Social Security system represents borrowing by the bond issuer. It is that way with corporate bonds and any loan. On one side you have a lender, receiving interest, and on the other side you have a borrower, paying interest. Somebody way back figured the U.S. government would be borrowing the money from somebody anyway, so why not borrow from the Social Security fund. It’s a bit like a father lending to his son. The money might be staying in the family, but there is an actual transaction.

Social Security is a social insurance plan. It is insurance. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with the name of the Federal Insurance Contribution Act (FICA) authorizing the contributions required for the plan.

Hobbs, you and your ilk are spreading false information. I am calling you on it. I have had enough of that stupidity.

[strong]
The people who collect Social Security benefits today are collecting it out of their past contribution to the $2.4 trillion. The people who contribute to Social Security today are adding to that fund. It’s that simple. The money of current contributors is not being used to pay off current retirees or disabled beneficiaries.
[/strong]

You are calling others obtuse, ignorant and stupid and you claim the above? By your laughable claim, SS wouldn't have to be mandatory and could stop forcing in "new investors" tomorrow and SS would run forever due to this magical fund. The new investors of SS pay off the old investors and it was setup exactly that way in the beginning. T-bill investments are paying everybody instead of current wage-earners? LOL. SS has unfunded liabilities in the trillions regardless of some short-term "surplus"

I won't even address the part where the govt borrows money from itself and it becomes an asset in some fantasyland-world instead of the liability it actually is backed by NOTHING.

SS may not be a pure ponzi since ponzis rely on fraud to convince suckers to join, but the govt twist is that you are forced to participate in the SS scam whether you want to or not. Why? TO PAY OFF THE EARLY INVESTORS! Otherwise, SS collapses exactly like a ponzi.

Another twist to the govt's version of a ponzi takes on some elements of gambling. You may get far, far more in SS benefits than you ever paid in......WINNER! Or, you might get less! BUMMER! Unlike a ponzi, the govt doesn't allow u access to the money you have paid in until it says so generally decades later. Ponzis die when investors try to withdraw their money and find out there is nothing there. SS doesn't have that problem because they won't let you withdraw it.

SS is a managed ponzi scheme masquerading as a social welfare program where by investors are forced by law to participate and cannot withdraw until the govt says OK, and then it limits how much and when.
This keeps the scam going and even convinces some people that it is "real" and not a goofy scam.

Unlike a typical private pension plan, the Social Security Trust Fund does not hold any marketable assets to secure workers' paid-in contributions. Instead, it holds non-negotiable United States Treasury bonds and U.S. securities backed "by the full faith and credit of the government". The Office of Management and Budget has described the distinction as follows:

"These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense.... They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)"

In other words, it's nothing but a big Ponzi scheme because the government took money that did not belong to them and used it for pork barrel projects. It's run by the same morons that want to bring about socialized medicine.

First of all Soc Sec is a trust fund whose trustee has a fiduciary responsibility by law to act in the best interest of its recipients. But who is the trustee? Buying gov’t bonds is a recklessly poor investment. The yield on 2 yr treasury bonds is 1.92%. Real inflation is 11%. That’s a loss of 9%. Even if you use the government’s fraudulent off budget accounting, inflation is 4.4%. Still a 2.5 % loss. And why would anyone in their right mind want to lend money to a gov’t that is functionally bankrupt. Their debt is 11 Trillion and rising, plus no plans to pay it off. They will have to either raise interests rates to keep the borrowers coming, which will further increase the deficits or devalue the dollar which will devalue the bonds. Who in their right mind would invest pension funds in such a no win investment. Their only hope is to keep printing dollars, flooding the market, causing too much money chasing too few goods with the ultimate end of hyperinflation. Hyperinflation is when you go out to eat and when you finish the meal, the price has risen. Only fools with stinking thinking like Mapleleaf. Social Security is a ponzi scheme because they are paying social security with money they take in from people born after 1947 to people who were born before 1947. They have never ever paid back any bond money to the social security fund.

According to your way of thinking our whole government finance is a ponzi scheme. The amount of tax currently being collected has caused about a ten trillion dollar dollar deficit!

We are living on borrowed money! At some point we may not be able to pay just the interest.

It would be nice to not have to donate some of our pay and profits to the tax fund, but continuing to rack up such debts as we have now simply means we must collect the taxes!
Or, we could let the dollar be worth .25 cents soon.

That is devastating to middle and below income people, and destructive to the capitalist system.

Only other way is to provide everything we need right here in the USA, charging tariffs on what comes in and goes out.

With the exception of Chinese Tea and Chromium and some odd stuff, we once nearly did that.

Then oil and manufacturing got out of hand! I'm not even sure we have the skills anymore to manufacture again or to stop using much oil!

The ride was nice while it lasted.

The 'ride' turned into a catastrophe because the 'drivers' were corrupt!
Caring for others - and doing so in a fair manner can work! Let's take off the labels, learn from the mistakes of an unregulated government, and move on! Democracy, properly implemented, can work for those willing to work for it! I feel sorry for those who have to try to live off of SS. However, in today’s financial fiasco - without social security, more people would be on the streets - hungry. Don't end it - mend it!

people who get it, paid into it all their lives and do not live well off it. The government has borrowed from the SS fund though! That might be who you want to address. The culprets are not those that worked all their lives, but the Washington gang. The shadow is right. We are still under the landlords of old who leached an opulent life, stealing from the poor. Washington has helped the CEOs robb the country blind and everyone knows it. There are very few laws against white collar crime.

Not all is a crime, but just disgusting...Disney...run by Eisner? They pay the people who work their minimum wage, and if Micky fondles your kid, oh well, they just fire him.
Eisner gets over 300 million in bonuses for one year? ownes an ISLAND in Hawaii! and if they don't give him this big salary, he'll do what? Quit?

I have often wondered if these men with such big egos, that they think they are worth so much, and find fools who will pay them. I've often thought ...they must have iddy biddy wee wees, to need SO MUCH...to make them feel like a man.

The people that vote them these big salaries, and the people who are so needy of them...have sold their souls.

Auto dealer on Board of Regents didn’t report $869,000 in sales to state
By CAMERON McWHIRTER, JAMES SALZER and JOHN PERRY

Sunday, January 04, 2009

State universities and colleges in 2007 paid at least $869,000 to companies owned by Ford dealer Allan Vigil, who is one of 18 University System regents overseeing Georgia’s universities and colleges.

But when he filed his most recent financial disclosure statement with the state, Vigil listed 2007 state payments to his businesses as “$0.00.”

Allan Vigil said the form he filed did not conceal his vehicle sales to the state but merely omitted the sums paid.
ALLAN VIGIL FILE
• Appointed in 2003 to the Board of Regents, which oversees all Georgia public universities and colleges (except technical colleges). Chairman from 2006 to 2008. His term expires in 2010.

• Trustee of the Clayton State University Foundation.
• Longtime political donor. He contributed $6,000 to the campaign of then-Gov. Roy Barnes in 2001 and 2002 and $10,000 to Gov. Sonny Perdue's campaign in 2004-2005.
• Member, board of directors of Southern Regional Hospital.
• President and owner of Allan Vigil Ford in Morrow and Allan Vigil Ford in Fayetteville.
• McDonough resident.

HOW UNIVERSITIES, COLLEGES BUY CARS
• Georgia's Department of Administrative Services' Office of Fleet Management handles bids to purchase vehicles for state agencies. Competitive bids are sent out, and the lowest bidders are awarded contracts to sell one or more vehicles.
• Colleges and universities make requests through the Board of Regents to the DOAS to buy vehicles. Because of budget shortfalls, vehicle purchases are expected to drop significantly.

Vigil did note, in a short entry on the form, that he sells some cars to the state through sealed bids.

“Annual payment varies from year to year,” he wrote. Vigil has used the same language on his annual financial disclosure reports for all four years he has been a regent.

State law requires regents — and all state public officers — every year to report payments of more than $20,000 made by any state agency or department to them or to businesses they own.

Rick Thompson, executive secretary of the state Ethics Commission, said the goal of the law is to make Georgians aware of who is serving in state positions while making money off the state.

He said board members and politicians can be fined up to $1,000 per unreported entry.

“The entire point and purpose of the [state] Ethics-in-Government Act is transparency,” he said. “It is vital that everything that is supposed to be reported gets reported.”

The State Department of Administrative Services handles all vehicle purchases for the state. It issues specifications for bids for various types of vehicles every year.

The agency reviews the bids and awards contracts to the lowest bidders that meet specifications. A college or university that wants to buy a car or truck gets approval from the DOAS through the Board of Regents and buys the vehicle from the contractor at the set price. The Regents do not determine prices.

Vigil’s dealerships consistently win state contracts to provide vehicles ranging from police cruisers to trucks.

Interviewed last week, Vigil said, “Maybe I took a shortcut by just saying payments vary.” But he stressed that all his business with the state was conducted through sealed bids and is public record.

“I figured everyone could figure it out,” he said. Vigil said he would look into the matter.

The AJC gathered and analyzed data from the 35 colleges and universities in the state system on all payments they made to companies and individuals in the 2007-2008 fiscal year, which covered the second half of 2007 and first half of 2008.

The AJC found Vigil’s dealerships in Morrow and Fayetteville sold cars and trucks to 18 state schools in that period.

The schools reported $869,473 in payments to Vigil’s companies for the second half of 2007 and $925,960 in payments in the first half of 2008. Another $678,261 in payments to Vigil’s companies were reported for the 2007-2008 fiscal year, but the date of payment was not listed.

If some of those payments were made in 2007, they also should have been covered by Vigil’s last disclosure report. His total sales for 2008 should be on his 2008 disclosure report due by July 1.

State financial disclosure forms cover calendar years; since the schools provided information on payments for the July-to-June fiscal year, the data did not include payments made in the first half of 2007. Vigil’s sales to the university system for all of 2007 may be higher.

According to colleges and university records, Vigil’s dealerships made hundreds of thousands of dollars from the University of Georgia, Georgia Tech, Georgia Southern University and Georgia Perimeter College during the 2007-2008 fiscal year.

Georgia State University, Bainbridge College, Augusta State University, the Medical College of Georgia and others each paid tens of thousands to Vigil dealerships for vehicles.

Clayton State University, where Vigil is a trustee of the Clayton State University Foundation, paid his companies $78,016.

Vigil reported none of these payments on his financial disclosure statement. The AJC analysis did not include any sales by Vigil’s companies to state agencies or departments outside the university system.

Three other regents did business with the state, the AJC found. But no other regents with state business of $20,000 or more failed to report it.

This summer, Regent Donald Leebern was fined $37,750 by the Ethics Commission for failing to file 2005 and 2006 reports disclosing that, over that two-year period, his Georgia Crown Distributing Co. sold $90,000 worth of bottled water to university system schools. In 2007, he filed a full disclosure report, listing $52,435 worth of water sales to system schools.

Regent William NeSmith Jr. did not report a little over $10,000 in business for his Community Newspapers and Glynn Press Inc. from university system schools and was not required to do so, since it was under the $20,000 threshold. He did report $29,375 in payments from Altamaha Technical College. Technical colleges are not governed by the university system.

Regent Hugh Carter did not report about $1,100 paid to his Darby Printing by university system schools, but he did report more than $85,000 in business with the General Assembly.

Vigil’s dealerships have sold individual cars and large fleets to governments across the South for years. Vigil said he checked with lawyers to make sure he did not have to give up that portion of his business when he took on the volunteer position on the Board of Regents in 2003.

Lawyers advised him that as long as the bids are sealed, meaning the lowest bidder automatically wins the contract, he was fine to continue the business, he said.

Vigil said he decided years ago not to disclose an amount on his state financial disclosure reports because he wasn’t sure each year how much he would sell to the state.

The money is substantial. In the last half of 2007, UGA paid more than any other university system institution to Vigil’s companies, purchasing vehicles costing a total of $540,919.

Thompson, of the Ethics Commission, said it’s perfectly legal for board members to do business with the state, but the law requires they tell the public what that business is and how much it is worth.

Thompson said the commission will look into the Vigil report if it receives a formal complaint. Because of its small staff, the agency typically doesn’t audit financial disclosure reports unless a complaint is filed.

Bill Bozarth, who heads the Georgia chapter of the government watchdog group Common Cause, said the financial reporting process is a critical way for the public to know how their government operates.

“Members of boards and authorities are expected to be looking out for the interests of the people when they serve on those boards,” he said. “Without full and accurate disclosure, the people have no assurance people in these key positions aren’t using these position to enrich themselves.”

Board of Regents spokesman John Millsaps said whatever issues are outstanding will be resolved.

“The regents take their responsibilities very seriously,” he said. “I am confident all issues will be satisfactorily addressed.”

I wonder if i can use that statement "Income varys year to year." On my tax return, Gee i wonder. Oh well im sure Allan and his buds wil find a way to wash their hands of this and come out smelling like a rose, after all its the american way right...L.O.L...Peace

they are just getting ..what they have ..paid...all their lives...after the government borrowed from it...

I wonder what the estimator would say about this. What happened to all that interest that was supposed to compound and rollover each year to fund this system, reguardless of the future generations paying into it.. Are we all to be played for fools or what is it going to take, to call us to action....LOAD UP...

don't do it.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Then it starts laughing, NYCE..

I owe you an email and I know it. The holidays were busy, as we had some 19 people staying over, with half of them--including my wife--down with flu most of the time.

I think I just want to deny the poverty-vice correlation as an empirical matter of fact. (And I think it goes without saying that there is no strong correlation between virtue and economic comfort.)

I suspect that the source of vice is not external, but proceeds from the corruption of our hearts, and that corruption seems indifferent to economic boundaries.

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue