Bill Clinton Holds 'Private' Meeting With Loretta Lynch As FBI Probes Hillary

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-30/bill-clinton-holds-private-meeting-loretta-lynch-fbi-probes-hillary

“Father of The Year” Bill Clinton Checks out Kelly Clarkson’s Backside

No commentary needed.

Click on Image to Enlarge

As Clinton sounds interest rate alarm, does Congress think it's for real?

Let's assume you the reader are a progressive liberal, and while you're finally convinced debt and deficits do matter, you still believe in an activist Fed--a central bank which deploys massive quantitative easing, in an attempt to stimulate the economy.  The ol' "pile on more debt short-term to induce sustainable economic growth long-term" argument.

You ignore the warnings from the conservatives, the so-called deficit hawks.  Damn the Hoover Institute from Stanford University.  Reagan's trickle-down, supply-side economics were a colossal failure in your mind.

Full speed ahead!  What we need is QE to infinity to stimulate growth, growth, growth!

Here's a wet splash across the face from everybody's favorite Democratic former President Bill Clinton:

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/24/14071974-as-clinton-sounds-interest-rate-alarm-does-congress-think-its-for-real?lite&ocid=msnhp

The Bill Clinton Myth

http://www.mises.ca/posts/blog/the-bill-clinton-myth/

However this is a misunderstanding of the difference between spending by private individuals and political spending.  Government is incapable of being run like a business.  Enterprise is based off the principle of satisfying voluntary patrons with no guarantee of success.  Even in a hampered market economy where corporations receive special privileges via the state, the consumer remains the kingmaker.  On the other hand, government receives all income through coercive measures.  Profit and loss accounting is of little concern when losses are borne by the taxpayer and profits are immediately devoted to political projects.  Should the public Treasury run low, tax collectors can be sent forth to shakedown the unpresuming citizens.

When it comes to rational economic calculation, public officials need not worry about spending money effectively. To attribute increased revenue being taxed away from the private economy with robust growth misconstrues how wealth is created.  Government doesn’t create wealth; it merely transfers it between parties.  Similarly, it only consumes capital that has already been produced.  Because society existed before the state and because the state functions off of what it pilfers from society, public expenditures do not add to net wealth.  In order for one tax dollar to be spent, it has to be first taken from the pocket of a taxpayer.  Whatever subjective desires could have been achieved by that dollar become overridden to satisfy the whims of the political class.

The fact that the economy didn’t stagnate under higher taxes during Clinton’s term in office doesn’t demonstrate that taxation has no harmful effects.  Economies aren’t closed experiments where one variable can be introduced and the effects observed.  There are far too many factors at play.  Concrete theories based off certain truths must be applied in such a way to interpret date and wring sense out of it.  Good economic conditions weren’t a result of heightened taxes but instead prevailed in spite of them.  While the productivity gains from the newly widespread use of personal computers and the internet had a positive effect on growth, another factor often goes unmentioned.  The later-half of the 1990s may be looked back upon as golden years but much of the gains experienced by the stock market were not representative of organic growth.  A significant amount of investment came not from natural causes but from monetary manipulation by the Federal Reserve.

Like the decade that preceded the Great Depression, productivity gains which drove consumer prices downward masked the amount of monetary stimulus being pumped into the economy.  When the bubble collapsed, Greenspan once again turned to the printing press to bail himself out.  Instead of causing a bubble in the tech sector, the burst of inflation made its way into the housing sector.  By the time the housing bubble popped, Greenspan left the chairmanship of the Fed to great acclaim.  Milton Friedman writing in the Wall Street Journal declared Greenspan had “set the standard” for Fed chairmen in maintaining stable prices and growth.  In actuality, he and his colleagues of the Federal Open Market Committee were responsible for the continuation of the boom-bust cycle and current Great Recession.

Today, Clinton still takes credit for Greenspan’s manipulated boom.  His supporters on the left love nothing more than to point at his presidency as vindication of the backwards theory that higher taxes equal more growth.  Clinton wasn’t a policy wonk; he was a politician who dipped into the Social Security trust fund to give an appearance of balancing the budget while the national debt still climbed higher.

Through all of his financial scandals, womanizing, aggressive foreign policy approaches, and possible cover ups, it is actually fitting that Clinton is still looked to by the political establishment as someone worthy of respect.  He is representative of F.A. Hayek’s timeless lesson: in government the worst rise to the top and state power corrupts.

No Inflation? In 1996 Slick Willie Raised $42.5 Million In Campaign Receipts; In 2011 Obama Plans To Raise $1 Billion

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/no-inflation-1996-slick-willie-raised-425-million-campaign-receipts-2011-obama-plans-raise-1

Ratigan: "We Spent Four Times More On Clinton's Blowjob Than We Did Investigating The Financial Crisis"

Thanks to Brian for finding this video.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shoPWQcgDHs

Clinton exonerates Goldman Sachs and is a gold bug

Yes, former President Clinton believes going off the gold standard in 1971 has been the source of our financial problems. I nearly fell off my chair--surely, it must have been a Freudian slip on his part.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfjBdfKJMO4

Democrat or Republican, most voters respected President Clinton for his fiscal policies while the economy prospered during his presidency in the '90's. His conclusions on Goldman Sachs are insightful, if debatable, but his ideas on the gold standard are surprisingly forthright, given the government's preponderance to demonize gold--and ridicule gold enthusiasts. See commentary on this interview.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/04/hell-has-frozen-over-bill-clinton.html

Tragedy and Hope, by Carroll Quigley

“The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds’ central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.”

- Carroll Quigley, Georgetown University professor, economic historian

Quigley was one of Bill Clinton's professors at Georgetown.