I think that “Government” has been Gutted & Stuffed with Nonprofit/For-profit Alliances.  How about you?

So what does the word “government” mean to you?  

How hard have you thought about it lately?

~ ~ ~ ~

Does it mean something funded by taxes,

managed by people accountable to us

(the people paying for it)

and which only collects those taxes 

for the (essential) services it provides?

Below, the question is posed:

Do you own Government? Or, does Government own you?

Anyone know how to answer this last multiple choice question? Which is truth and which is myth?

Words have connotations and associations, but only after examining what they refer to, and seeing that reality in action (in motion — in process) can we understand the reality these words point to.  It takes time and attention.  But first you have to “find the thing!”

You can get to a slice of turkey, probably, in the USA somehow today, and have seen photographs, or even the live birds — but can you say that about government, although you probably interact with several of its body parts (in action, not on a roasting pan) in daily life.

To the extent you (or I) don’t understand who and what “government” is — you, and yours, and your offspring (if any) are very probably, the turkey (dinner, that is)….

Mine already were, which is why I write about these things….My current impression of “government.” (click or hover for more detail than you wanted…)

As I’m looking at it now, …. and have been for years … “(the last vestiges of representative) Government” has been Gutted & Stuffed with Nonprofit/For-profit Alliances.

I have deduced from the data that this is so, prior to finding others who came to the same conclusion, one of whose claims I’m posting and discussion here.

It appears that government has been gutted, and a stuffing mixed with nuts, nonprofits and for-profits (private corporate interests) has been inserted.  It has been baked til done, apparently, and served up, usually when demanding more patriotism or fiscal support, as a true feast of the people.

So many things have literally changed “government.”  Wars, the revision of the financial systems, science and technology, the tax system (enabling for-profit, not for profit status), you name it.  It’s hardly “Federal-State-County-Municipal” and that’s it.  It’s also much more than “three  branches of government in every state, just like in the federal government.”  Good grief, that concept is archaic.

Don’t take just my word for it, I’m just the messenger.  I see this myself, not just experienced, but the follow-up investigation.  I call the primary research.  People far more qualified than I in the very things I was researching (in a narrower application, though, i.e., the family courts) are in agreement, and they should also be heard. The heart of this post today was inspired from a January 2012 piece by Walter Burien (CAFR1.com).  However the lime-green-background intro, and this next quote, is from a January 2011 interview by Catherine Austin Fitts.  Neither of them bears any responsiblity for what I say, or how I interpret their stuff.   I just now good reason, and priorities when I see them.

“Essentially there is no government as many of us think of it.”

It’s beyond time more of us got our thinking caught up to the reality, and found accurate, relevant ways to say what happened, what is, and what that means.  Straight talk, as it were.

(I originally cited this over at “Why Baltimore’s CAFRs are MIA — “Audit Baltimore” Tells Us.”  I am not through posting on Baltimore.  Some of these interim posts simply are laying the table for understanding its issues (and relevance to our issues) better)

There is a chilling quote on this “straight-talk” interview, I am posting at the very bottom today.  For those who don’t know the Fitts story, there are links to the right.

Four things I really appreciate also about Walter Burien’s writings around the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports and other economic/government matters:

Read the rest of this entry »

Be patient with the Bible quotes– I’m contrasting “faith” which the Bible of course talks about, with “faith-based” which word just ain’t in there, although now it was inserted by US President George W. Bush, an Executive Order marking the beginning of his reign Administration since 2001, and has remained a central feature of federal family and fatherhood policy (even in the “Change” Administration which has followed.  Did that change?  Not much!), despite complete lack of definition even in the corporate world.    What is a “faith-based” corporation? IRS has a few designations, like “religious-exempt” but does corporate law apart from that? I’ve spent a lot of time on various secretary of state sites over the years (2009ff anyhow) — and I’ve yet to see a searchable field called “faith based.” …. Even Taggs.HHS.gov doesn’t have a sortable field:  “faith-based, Yes/No” or even a Grantee Type or Class…

Psalm 139 speaks in wonder and awe about how no one can flee the presence of God, and how wonderful that is.  For those who have faith (even “as a grain of mustard seed”) it is indeed comforting to contemplate that, “even if I should make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.”

This is to be a good and comforting quality and leads into a determination to praise:

1<> O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me.2Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. 3Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. 4For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether. 5Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me. 6Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it. 7Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? 8If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. 9If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; 10Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me. 11If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me. 12Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee. 13For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. 14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.

David was a fugitive from the king and spent a period of time living in caves, and on the run, from his jealous predecessor, Saul.  Generations later, Paul (a.k.e. Saul of Tarsus; no king, but a Pharisee) also fell afoul of religious authorities of his time (after having betrayed his colleagues by converting from persecution followers of Jesus Christ and throwing them in jail, to preaching Christ and being whipped, stoned, thrown in jail (escaped a few times) and in general living like someone with no home.  He wrote in “Romans 8” also movingly about the pervasive love of God in Christ Jesus.  Apparently this was written from prison, or at least house-arrest in Rome.

35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. 37Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. 38For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, 39Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

In all these things, in other words, there is “the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Paul, as it goes, known as “apostle to the Gentiles” learned the hard way about profiling people by their religious affiliations, and after having caused major suffering, himself, later suffered.

While he did have a lot to say about “faith” strangely, he said nothing at all about “faith-based,” nor did he (as do the Mormons, or the Unification church) apparently believe that the unmarried were per se inferior, or single mothers, “anathema.”  Galatians 5, you can see the word “faith” figures prominently, but in context, it’s referring to a specific thing, apparently: faith came, faith was revealed, it justified, faith in Christ Jesus [in context, including the resurrection from the dead] enables people to become “children of God”

23But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

In one sense, it could be said the entire Bible is to elicit faith in  a specific gospel and prophecies.

The concept of something being kinda-sorta “faith-based” and as such, deserving of special consideration, is nowhere to be found.  Please see also segment in green, above, especially the third “there is neither” phrase.  Thank you.  The equalizer in this context is “in Christ Jesus.”

“Faith-Based”

I should not have to mention this, except that nowadays, it’s the “faith-based” and  gender-based (fatherhood) program material that there’s nowhere to flee from, the moment anyone enters the Federal room — which we are all pretty much operating in, in this country.  You work a legitimate job, (or business) you have a social security number, you pay towards the central pool, you are participating in producing some of these grant programs.

If perchance you end up on the wrong side of the law, it’s likely you may end up (and much MORE likely if you are male, and of a certain skin color) in some of the places operated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.  Or contracted out to private corporations.  You may end up in jail.  However, if you are living in a household without a father, and with an independent-minded single mother who fights for custody — or in ignorance of the powers that be, applies for child support, or federal assistance for things like FOOD — you are also possible fodder for the Foster Care System (if it’s not possible to find a father to reconnect you with).  

I have been working hard to understand this and come to the conclusion that the whole system appears to revolve around the letter “F.”  “F” in school is not a passing grade, but “F” in this context is fine, wonderful, friendly, family-oriented, and federally-favorable.

And it seems there is nowhere to flee from its reach either.  I’m saying this on behalf of a number of cases (in different states) where mothers are fighting either to reconnect with children in foster care, or to prevent from losing custody to a criminal whose outreach program included a faith-based fatherhood representative and related funding.

 “F,” must be it is Fun, Fair, and Family-Friendly; and should be Federally Funded.  After all, not one, but TWO, presidents who, amazingly, also were fathers* executively ordered it so.

Read the rest of this entry »

I need to take some time off this blogging (as rewarding as it is to learn the information, urgent as the information as it is to get out, and despite how really urgent the times are).

For the past several days, I was of course (and as usual) in learning mode, and happy about this information and insight — but struggling with the presentation.  Kept losing chunks of text or formatting after having worked them into a good appearance.

I am having issues with learning a few new formatting tools (did you notice the two-column boxes with borders yet? ) and what I’m grasping (conceptually) needs a little more support or help as to platform and presentation.  This is resulting in  what I see are increasingly embarrassing posts (as to format).   I think that this format may compromise the very real value of the content — although obviously format and content are related.

And I need a change of pace, for sure.

In addition I am typically having the roller-coaster income situation which some call the “cycle” of family violence (with good reason).  Roughly translated, this means, that the status quo exists until someone (typically the target party or parties) makes a move to change the status quo of extreme control, and barely concealed malevolent hostility.

Someone reaches a tolerance limit (typically the controlled person) and makes a move to change the status quo, or exit the forced through threat association.  Things are then in flux, and at risk (they are being “unfrozen”) and there is the predictable power struggle to make the next “status quo” (frozen) situation WORSE.  It’s basically like wrestling, more than, say, “mixed martial arts.”  The difference is, there is no coach — no empire to force the parties to break their holds when someone is going to be injured.    You don’t get to “tap out” of situations like this once you start fighting back. At all points someone is seeking to assess the other one for future strongholds, vulnerabilities.

The other apparent thrill someone gets is from privately weakening the parties (‘off the radar’) then getting a nice public demonstration of a “win.”  It’s one SICK game, overall, in which there are never two winners — there’s only a vanquished foe, or there is war.  And it’s not a game to one of the participants.  It sometimes appears to be sport for the others.  They get breaks.  We get “marathon training” with unpredictable breaks.  As such, we (those in the ‘target’ situation) do not either get to engage in a normal, socially acceptable work/life balance or build towards that kind of stability– because approaching this stability or independence of movement, angers the others involved.

I’m saying this openly, it’s intergenerational.

It is the incremental and cumulative losses that have to be looked at, and strengths-assessment, stamina, etc.

As with families (intergenerationally), so also to some extent, with countries.

I feel safe to say that we are, overall, at war in this country — and that this war is for a centralized control (increasingly) and it has an “endgame” which, sorry to say, ain’t pretty.  It is waged on many levels which have a coordination that CAN be seen, however the primary capital and resource for this war, obviously has systems of collection — which are coordinated with propaganda.

Some people may last longer than others in this process, but those of us who have been put into repeat sliding downward motion and family disintegration process — which is the courts.

Meanwhile, there are some advocacy groups which simply need to be exposed.

They are endangering women and children, and what’s worse, there’s a level of deceit in their agenda which is beyond belief.  I plan to document and publicize it, knowing several people who have been involved in this, to the detriment (or certainly, not any real, tangible help) of the groups.

No one — but no one — in this situation can afford to ignore economic self-sufficiency & independence.  And the fact is that, in a parent relationship, if one party goes for assistance in the form of welfare, this will precipitate a child support order.

The child support order will pull in the welfare-diversions, fatherhood funding (a few million a pop), and a lot more unforeseen variables when there has been a violent or abusive relationship.  The power base in this scenario is how PRIVATE organizations are able to pull in FEDERAL (state, county, block grant, church and corporate foundation) wealth.

It’s a fault line socio-politico-economic-religious fault line that ain’t going to get fixed in the near future.  Unless someone truly has a “fix” for human nature.  And religion ain’t it — religion is behavior modification in corporate form.

In order to retain this, (or regain it), it sure does help to take a real look at how the many “helping” agencies and nonprofits function, inbetween preaching and training to the rest of us about how to get a job.

Anything below this line is a summary of thoughts, not necessarily in order.  I am pre-occupied these days, not writing effectively and working on a transition to better format — and a few personal transitions as well.  People who know me how to reach me, and I will respond to legitimate questions or comments submitted to the blog.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is a little rough.  I’ll revisit it in a day or so, wanted to get the links up. It’s pretty much self-serve although I have a few paragraphs of what it’s about.

I actually found where the government admits that it doesn’t REALLY intend its financial statements of cumulative net worth ,etc.** for everyone, just internal control, analysts and citizen intermediaries like the news media.

Then in the next breath it also says, it wants every American citizen to know, which must be why they are sinking their (not properly reconciled and monitored) funds into things like federal clearinghouses on marriage, fatherhood, domestic violence, to promote abstinence and expand welfare participation through the child support system, etc. . . . . and not into distributing and publicizing the fact that these (embarrassing, to the USA) reports exist.

And why this a condition of graduating from high school isn’t being able to get on a computer and find the CFR of one’s own high school district (probably a “Unified” school district), and a diagram of local government which is usually in the front of every CAFR.

(**which the GAO disclaims uttering any opinion on anyhow, because there are too many problems with the underlying reports from, oh, ca. 35 federal agencies…)

Get used to words like “billions,” “trillions” and “material weaknesses” etc.

USA CAFR 2011, and why the GAO disclaims to Issue an Opinion on it…

Here’s the website for some answers:

http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/index.html  The CAFR can be seen there, but read the guide first.

  (they mean CAFR here….)

Guide to Understanding the Annual Financial Report of the United States Government 

~ ~ C.~ ~

United States Government Accountability Office’s statements about the Executive Branch of the United States Government (including 35 federal entities)

 I want us to see what an auditor’s report has to say on the highest unit of government in the USA, as of 2011, I guess:

…….An audit of financial statements and a corporation (or government) is one thing; the financial statements themselves, another.  Just for the record, this is the AUDIT.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) have identified 35 federal entities23 that are significant to the U.S. government’s consolidated financial statements, consisting of the 24 CFO Act agencies, several other federal executive branch agencies, and some government corporations (35 significant entities). Our work was performed in coordination and cooperation with the inspectors general and independent public accountants for these 35 significant entities to achieve our respective audit objectives. Our audit approach regarding the accrual- based consolidated financial statements focused on determining the current status of the material weaknesses that contributed to our disclaimer of opinion on the accrual-based consolidated financial statements and the other material weaknesses affecting internal control that we had reported in our report on the consolidated financial statements for fiscal year 2010.24

We also separately audited the financial statements of certain federal entities and federal agency components including the following:

• We audited and expressed an unqualified opinion on the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) fiscal years 2011 and 2010 financial statements.25 In fiscal years 2011 and 2010, IRS collected about $2.4 trillion and $2.3 trillion, respectively, in tax payments and paid about $416 billion and $467 billion, respectively, in refunds to taxpayers. For fiscal year 2011, we continued to report material weaknesses that resulted in ineffective internal control over financial reporting. In addition, we continued to find a significant deficiency in IRS’s internal control over tax refund disbursements, which resulted in the payment of erroneous tax refunds to taxpayers. Our tests of IRS’s compliance in fiscal year 2011 with selected provisions of laws and regulations disclosed one area of noncompliance. We also found that IRS’s financial management systems did not substantially comply with the requirements of FFMIA.

We considered the Department of Defense’s (DOD) assertion in the DOD Agency Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2011 regarding its noncompliant financial systems and lack of reasonable assurance that internal controls over financial reporting were effective. In addition, in the DOD Inspector General’s fiscal year 2011 report on internal control over financial reporting, the Inspector General cited material weaknesses in several areas including (1) property, plant, and equipment; (2) inventory and operating material and supplies; (3) environmental liabilities; (4) intragovernmental eliminations; and (5) material amounts of unsupported accounting entries needed to prepare DOD’s annual consolidated financial statements.

“At $275 Billion, Medicaid was by far the largest part of federal grants to states.  however, even when Medicaid is removed, HHS is still the largest disburser of grants to states” (well, HHS also handles welfare, duh!……)

http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648792.pdf

What GAO Found

Federal outlays for grants to state and local governments totaled more than $606 billion in fiscal year 2011. Over the last three decades, these grants have consistently been a significant component of federal spending, but the focus of this spending has changed over time. For example, during this period the proportion of federal outlays to state and local governments dedicated to Medicaid grants more than tripled, rising from 2.4 percent of total federal government outlays in 1980 to 7.6 percent in 2011. The increase in federal outlays for Medicaid and other health-related grant programs was offset by an approximately equivalent decrease in grants to state and local governments targeted for other areas such as transportation, education, and regional development.

GAO’s prior work and the work of others have also shown that the number of federal grant programs directed to state and local governments has generally increased over the last three decades. However, definitively determining the number of such grant programs presents difficulties. The lack of consensus on a methodology for how to define and count grant programs and data limitations in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance further complicates this effort.

GAO and federal inspectors general (IG) have previously reported on a variety of management challenges involving federal grants to state and local governments, many of which can be grouped into the following five topic areas:

• Challenges related to effectively measuring grant performance: A lack of appropriate performance measures and accurate data can limit agencies’ ability to effectively measure grant program performance. This can affect the ability of federal agencies to ensure that grant funds are effectively spent.

• Uncoordinated grant program creation: Numerous federal grant programs have been created over time without coordinated purposes or scope. This can result in grants management challenges such as unnecessary duplication across grant programs and unnecessary overlap in funding.

• Need for better collaboration: A lack of collaboration among grant program participants can impede effective grant implementation in areas such as knowledge sharing and defining clear leadership roles.

• Internal control weaknesses: When internal controls in grants management and oversight are weak, federal grant-making agencies face challenges in achieving program goals and assuring the proper and effective use of federal funds. Effective controls can help to avoid improper grant payments.

• Lack of agency or recipient capacity: Capacity reflects the organizational, financial, and human capital resources available for the implementation of grant programs. A lack of capacity can adversely impact an agency’s or recipient’s ability to manage and implement grant programs.

Parts A, B & C below illustrate the situation

A is short.  B is almost funny.  C is the kicker.

Eye-opening Information lies in these Details.

(Hang in there!)

~ ~ A. In their Honor~ ~

~ ~ B. ~ ~

Industry, California — A Microcosm of the Issue?

Below identifying one of the smallest cities of California (couched in the middle of Los Angeles County, and incorporated, it turns out, for tax reasons, just north of a large section of unincorporated (into a city, that is) land, I’ll explain why the interest.

Here’s a 2007 Almanac of the cities of Los Angeles County.  It took me about 5 minutes to locate this city, which is a pink sliver (oddly shaped) just northeast of Long Beach, along the LA County/Orange County line, cradled by highway “60” (white on green badge) and just north of an expanse of unincorporated land (shown white, here, gray on the other map).

Per WIKIPEDIA:

Industry (also known as City of Industry) is an industrial suburb of Los Angeles in the San Gabriel Valley region of Los Angeles County. Home to over 2,500 businesses and 80,000 jobs,[5] but only 219 residents at the 2010 census—down from 777 residents as of the 2000 United States census—the city is almost entirely industrial. It was incorporated on June 18, 1957 to prevent surrounding cities from annexing industrial land for tax revenue.

The city of Industry had the highest support for Proposition 8 in all of Los Angeles county. The amendment, which banned same sex marriage in California, was supported by a whopping 83% of Industry voters. 17% were opposed. [10]

The few residences in the city either existed before incorporation, are on properties adjacent to either Industry Hills Golf Club, Industry Hills Recreation Center or in a small neighborhood adjacent to City Hall. In addition, there are residents at the El Encanto Healthcare Center, a nursing home owned by the City.[12]

The City of Industry has no business taxes and is primarily funded through retail sales tax from shopping centers located within the city limits, and property tax on parcels within the City. The city has the highest property tax rate in Los Angeles County, at 1.92%.[13] In addition, there is a revenue-generating hillside hotel resort, known as the Pacific Palms Resort (formerly the Industry Hills Sheraton), which is almost completely surrounded by the city of La Puente but actually located in the City of Industry.

The City of Industry is a popular investment area for Chinese businessmen and the city has also emerged as a high-tech import/export center for computer parts, with business links to the Asian marketplace. {{it also, per Wiki, has some famous strip clubs}}.

Interesting!! Parts of it also are a “FOREIGN TRADE ZONE, which offers duty perks; no duty is paid on foreign items til they cross into the United States, at which time, they are lower. “The City of Industry’s Foreign Trade Zone offers a unique opportunity for companies seeking innovative solutions to the many challenges associated with conducting international trade. A Foreign Trade Zone is an area physically located within the United States, but deemed to be outside the U.S. Customs territory.”

Hopefully some of this registered — whoever started and runs this city did so to favor industry, attract foreign industry through a duty-free zone, and originally incorporated it to keep the neighboring cities from grabbing its unincorporated industrial acreage to increase their own revenues.  I wonder who was running the industries at those times.

It is a very few miles from one of the largest ports in the world, the port of Los Angeles.  It is also in a county known for its corruption already (from multiple sources) and being a port, is also a possible conduit of drug trafficking and human trafficking, at least per “Narco Dollars” articles citing the four largest money-laundering states (NY, FL, CA, TX).  This County also appears to be in good part where the entire family court system started.   Yet here’s this infinitesimal “City of Industry” within it.

(City of Los Angeles Controller, “Fiscal Reports” page)  (both CITY & COUNTY CAFRs are now over at “Cold Hard Facts” on the “by-State” CAFR menu//sidebar).

As of 8/21/2012, Mayor Villaigrosa of Los Angeles sent round a memo on “FY2012-13 BUDGET DIRECTIVES AND EXTRAORDINARY SPENDING CONTROLS.   (found simply looking for the CAFR; there are several links on the page; this was one).    That is, all dept. heads except: Airports, Harbor, Water&Power, LACERS (probably the county employee retirement service), and Fire & Police Pensions) demanding their plans to increase revenues and cut services.  There’s a fiscal emergency on!!  “What are you doing to increase revenues and reduce services?”  Suggestions/goals include: things such as reducing by about 8,000 households (see p. 5), under “SANITATION” those who qualified for reduced Solid Waste Disposal (i.e., can you spell “Sewer”?).  (if the image doesn’t show, see link):

This, despite the fact that (I’m browsing the City’s YE2011 CAFR — the City of Los Angeles, not the entire County of Los Angeles…) which states that their assets exceeded liabilities by $20.4 BILLION, of which $13.3 was capital assets (“net of debt”), $5.6 BILLION (restricted on use) leaving only $3.3 BILLION available for business as usual activities.

Pay attention, then!

In 2009 (I see) a book was written, and may be available at libraries “City of Industry:  Genealogies of Power in Southern California”  I found it @ “Project Muse” which requires affiliation with some subscribing institution… Significance:  The person who incorporated City of Industry (in 1957) was on a REGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE.

Victor Valle

Publication Year: 2009

City of Industry is a stunning expose on the construction of corporate capitalist spaces. Investigating Industry’s archives, including sealed FBI reports, Valle uncovered a series of scandals from the city’s founder James M. Stafford to present day corporate heir Edward Roski Jr., the nation’s biggest industrial developer. While exposing the corruption and corporate greed spawned from the growth of new technology and engineering, Valle reveals the plight of the property-owning servants, especially Latino working-class communities, who have fallen victim to the effects of this tale of corporate greed.

Published by: Rutgers University Press

ANYHOW:

“Industry, California” shows neatly how:

#1, once in office, any government (for example, city council) can start voting into place yet more government structures (for purposes of raising money) and,

#2, even if the rest of us know it’s kept “all in the family,” it’s danged hard to do anything about it!

So, how then could people who don’t act like that (which takes intent to expand, strategy to defraud, and sustained, long-term actions towards that goal) get justice from their own government when there is no balance of power between those who need the justice, and those administering it.

Looking up Mr. Dermerjian {{See bottom of last post and how Carl Hermann (Harvard.edu), who’d heard about CAFRs, I believe, from Walter Burien, although the former had been teaching economics, government and history for several years… the existence, and significance, of CAFRs really has been under-reported}} trying to get a response from some California civil servants on “How can we have a major budget deficit when the CAFRs show the exact opposite?”… Mr. Dermerjian being under the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, who would be prosecuting fraud — if there were any intrinsic fraud in hiding one’s assets from the public while cutting services and raising taxes based on “we’re broke.”  Apparently, there wasn’t. . . ..

So, I found a fascinating article on a Los Angeles city called “Industry” which (allegedly) while 50,000 people work their as daytime commuters, apparently only has 219 residents (88 of which voted) but which owns thousands of acres outside the city, has a $288 million ANNUAL budget, and in 2009 (through mail-in ballots only) voted to approve borrowing $500 million for infrastructure improvements. It was discovered that many so-called residents actually lived in churches, invisible (not found) houses, and a factory.

Naturally, this is affecting the neighborhoods, and someone oughter do something about it. So, here’s Mr. Dave Dermerjian giving approximately the same answer he gave to Mr. Herman above (you really should read the article and decide whether to laugh or cry), from the “Whittier Daily News.”

I also see from the diagram that in 2006, the City Council and another authority (an Authority should show up on a CAFR or have its own) created a third entity, a “Joint Powers Authority” (JPA) which morphed into an “Industry Property Housing and Management Authority” owns the property 4 out of the 5 City Council either live in, or rent.

To me, that all sounds like sticking it to the taxpayers or whoever is going to have to pay off that debt, including possibly tenants. Hope the tenants are not as invisible as some of the voters’ homes…. That’s a lot of authorities for what was acc. to the US 2010 census (per article) “the third smallest city in the state.” Seems to me, the real question is who decided to incorporate “Industry” as a city politic at all?

This is PRECISELY why ALL of just (that are at all able to) should develop the habit of seeking out, and at least browsing ALL the CAFRs operational in our state, AND all those operational in the US Government, beyond the obvious. Sorry, but you give some people an acre, and they will take the planet — and boot you off it if you can’t pay rent!

(please View-Zoom-Out to read the fine print).

That last is an example of VERY good investigative reporting, thank you Mr. Baeder. It really makes me believe that whoever decided to incorporate “Industry” as a city had some long-term vision, ending up approximately here. I note that in 1947, CAFRs began to be required for states, as the reporting tool of choice, after which it was gradually trickled down to smaller localities; the year 1977 was mentioned. This was engineered by a PRIVATE association of Government Finance Officers (GFOA).

That last is an example of VERY good investigative reporting, thank you Mr. Baeder.  It really makes me believe that whoever decided to incorporate “Industry” as a city had some long-term vision, ending up approximately here.  I note that in 1947, CAFRs began to be required for states, as the reporting tool of choice, after which it was gradually trickled down to smaller localities; the year 1977 was mentioned.  This was engineered by a PRIVATE association of Government Finance Officers (GFOA).

City of Industry still has to produce a “CAFR” — it may be one of the shorter ones around.  Here it is.  I notice they have FOUR blended component units, and ONE discrete one.  I suggest just reading it! It has $545 million extra assets YE 2011.  Not bad for about 12 square miles and only a few real residents!

[PDF] 

City of Industry Financial Statement June 2011

The city, as a city, obviously has its own employees and is showing as a section under “CALPERS” one of the larger investment platforms around in the world….They are small, and so their account is pooled with others, but the employer (the city) has to contribute an estimated 31.7% for 2012-2013.  As a city ? they have a contract with CALPERS.  Keep them $$ coming….

NOW FOR THE FUN PART…

~ ~ C.~ ~

United States Government Accountability Office’s statements about the Executive Branch of the United States Government (including 35 federal entities)

 I want us to see what an auditor’s report has to say on the highest unit of government in the USA, as of 2011, I guess:

…….An audit of financial statements and a corporation (or government) is one thing; the financial statements themselves, another.  Just for the record, this is the AUDIT.

Footnote 1 is kinda cute.  A government act of 1994 required that by 1997, the government report on the EXECUTIVE branch of government (financial stuff).  It opted to report on the LEGISLATIVE (who obviously passed that act!) and JUDICIAL as well.  It goes like this:

FN 1. The Government Management Reform Act of 1994 has required such reporting, covering the executive branch of government, beginning with financial statements prepared for fiscal year 1997. 31 U.S.C. 331(e). The federal government has elected to include certain financial information on the legislative and judicial branches in the consolidated financial statements as well.

Anyone ever go through the U.S.C. and know what it is, by “Title” as well as, say (for the religious among us) they can list the 66 books of the Bible by memory, as children are sometimes taught to do, or to quote bible verses by memory?

Maybe it might not be a bad idea.

I didn’t know this by memory, for sure, but Title 31 is about money and finance.  The Department of the Treasury (of the USA, naturally) is supposed to tell us WHASSUP with receipts, expenditures, and fund balances.  Or, it’s supposed to at least tell the Congress — EVERY YEAR!  It goes like this, and makes you think; this is Title 31, section 331, REPORTS:

Please read — notice it’s emphasizing the government’s ability to pay for its operations and liabilities, and how much ASSETS does it hold to liquidate for such liabilities (if necessary), and what is the position of the assets and liabilities.

In short, when this is submitted to the Congress, we (the public, who are providing “receipts” towards all this!) whould be able to know where the USA stands in these matters!

31 USC 331 – Sec. 331. Reports

US Code – Title 31: Money and Finance

 (a) The Secretary of the Treasury shall submit to Congress each year an annual report.

The report shall include – (1) a statement of the public receipts and public expenditures for the prior fiscal year;

(2) estimates of public receipts and public expenditures for the current and next fiscal years;

(3) plans for improving and increasing public receipts to provide Congress with information on ways to raise amounts necessary to meet public expenditures;

(4) a statement of all contracts for supplies or services made by the Secretary during the prior fiscal year;

(5) a statement of appropriations expended to pay for miscellaneous claims not otherwise provided for;

(6) a statement on all payments made from the fund under section 3126 of this title for the prior fiscal year; and

(7) estimates of amounts for payment under section 1322(b) of this title. * *

Just a bit more on this St. E’z / Ezra Pound topic

• April 25, 2009 from “Dept of Homeland Security Watch” quotes Secretary Janet Napolitano having said “We will be headquartered in what is currently St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, which is going to be totally renovated and really converted into a lovely campus with money that was contained in the stimulus bill Congress just passed (i.e. ARRA)…”
• Eustace Mullins book says Pound was kept six months (not a few weeks) in that (Allies) camp in Pisa before being brought home and committed.  The poet spent MOST of his life outside the United States, tried to keep it out of the war.
• Almost none of the literary reviews mentioned Eustace Mullins’ “The SECRETS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE.” which very well may have been one of the most important pieces to have come out of those years…  and important to understand.

ANYHOW, interesting concept, the TRUST that represents this hospital then.

So, WHAT OTHER TRUSTS ARE HELD BY OUR GOVERNMENT, PER U.S.C. TITLE 31, SECTION 1321? Continuing the list (up to #91 we go…)

= END OF “CURIOSITY KILLED THE CAT” SECTION.

Continuing from above, we just finished, under the outline of Title 31 (“Money”), section 331(a)(7), what kind of reports the Secretary of the Treasury must make to Congress every year,  I looked up WTF is Section 1322(b).   Section 1322(b) apparently holds funds to be paid from among the trusts of 1321, which include the 90 listed above.

Reviewing:

31 USC 331 – Sec. 331. Reports

US Code – Title 31: Money and Finance
 (a) The Secretary of the Treasury shall submit to Congress each year an annual report. . .

(6) a statement on all payments made from the fund under section 3126 of this title for the prior fiscal year; and

(7) estimates of amounts for payment under section 1322(b) of this title. * *

. . .

(b)

(1) On the first day of each regular session of Congress, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report for the prior fiscal year on –

(A) the total and individual amounts of contingent liabilities and unfunded liabilities of the United States Government;

(B) as far as practicable, trust fund liabilities, liabilities of Government corporations, indirect liabilities not included as a part of the public debt, and liabilities of insurance and annuity programs (including their actuarial status);

(C) collateral pledged and assets available (or to be realized) as security for the liabilities (separately noting Government obligations) and other assets specifically available to liquidate the liabilities of the Government; and

(D) the total amount in each category under clauses (A)-(C) of this paragraph for each agency.

NOTE:  The USGAO report cites 35 federal agencies….

I wonder where a person would get any CAFRs on the USA before 1997….

ON AUDITS:

The other day, I posted (ColdHardFacts) on a group in Baltimore calling for more frequent Audits. (“Audit Baltimore” is allegedly a nonprofit, though I can’t find it.

Evidence so far as I can see that Baltimore is at least as slush-fund-prone as Washington (D.C.) and can’t even produce a bona fide CAFR since 2009.  Coincidentally it was also around 2007 when complaints around the Mayor’s Office of Children, Youth & Families’ handling of a single HHS grant for only $900,000K, came into question, producing two audits in 2009 & 2010 which reveal, to me, what looks like the usual bunch of crooks.  Smaller scale, but simply not into accountability, and proud of it, too…).

I think, personally, that’s only the least indication of “what time of day it is” around.  yet we continue to give our own government the benefit of the doubt, for lack of better alternatives….

Anyhow, here it goes — “from the horse’s mouth.”  Itemized by me to break up the prose…

It’s interesting that another act on improving federal financial management was passed in 1996…  The “footnote 2″** detail talks about the difference (and  NOT correlatedness) of the items under the bullets below “(1)” at the top of this box.  It goes like this:

The accrual-based consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2011 and 2010 consist of the (1) Statements of Net Cost, (2) Statements of Operations and Changes in Net Position, (3) Reconciliations of Net Operating Cost and Unified Budget Deficit, (4) Statements of Changes in Cash Balance from Unified Budget and Other Activities, and (5) Balance Sheets, including the related notes to these financial statements. Most revenues are recorded on a modified cash basis.

The 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007 Statements of Social Insurance, including the related notes, are also included in the consolidated financial statements.

In addition, in fiscal year 2011, the federal government adopted Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards No. 37, “Social Insurance: Additional Requirements for Management’s Discussion and Analysis {{COMMONLY CALLED “MD&A”}} and Basic Financial Statements,” which calls for a new basic financial statement, the Statement of Changes in Social Insurance Amounts, that is included, along with the related notes, in the consolidated financial statements.

The Statement of Changes in Social Insurance Amounts presents the components of the changes of the open group measure (total present value of future expenditures in excess of future revenue), presented in the 2011 and 2010 Statements of Social Insurance. Both the Statements of Social Insurance and the Statement of Changes in Social Insurance Amounts do not interrelate with the accrual-based consolidated financial statements.

Whatever, and OK.  Some new statements were required with the adoption of a FFA Standard #37, and what caught my attention was “PReSenT value of FuTuRe Expenditures over FuTuRe Revenue.  This sounds an awful lot like the “Advance liabilities” thing that Walter Burien was warning us about.  Keeping in mind that one person formerly over FHA (just one small segment) claims that HUD is losing trillions, as is the Pentagon, and it’s in general being operated like a criminal element.

So say, apparently this law firm who filed the $43 trillion claim for damages, specifically antagonistic to the Obama Administration (I’ve not posted a link yet).   That’s the backdrop of this exact requirements of What the H%ll is going on!

Have been having some issues saving the most current version of the wordpress blogs here.  the segment showing their most Stunning Admissions isn’t in this version.  It has been a long time on this post, and I will seek to recover them from prior saved versions and post, at earliest convenience..  They are really the “punch” behind the message here….

You also could read these yourself simply by clicking on the link; the statement is really not that long.

Religion in the Supreme Court, In Both Houses of Congress, and (in general), In Politics*

*this last link just a reminder, for fun, maybe some perspective….of the similarities between joining (or, being born into?) a religion and a political party:

• These charters and beliefs are claimed by both entities to be divinely inspired.
• Both change these charters and beliefs as times change, as technology improves, as law requires it, and as opposing knowledge and books become more accessible to the public at large.
• Both are registered with the State via their Articles of Incorporation.
• Both write and re-write history; and then edit and interpret their own writings.
• They are both a form of control, both in political and moral correctness.
• Members of both fear excommunication and public ridicule for questioning or acting against these chartered beliefs.
• Political parties make the laws of the land and command consent, while religions teach that members must follow the “law of the land” as God commands.
• Both give power to otherwise powerless men, who dress in robes and judge all people…
• Yet both are well known to hide some of their deeds in the dark; without disclosure, and even against the very ethics they set for themselves.

Some of this list (I’m picking & choosing) are relevant to the post here, especially the next two:

• Both claim to be non-profit…

• And both avoid taxes on their for-profit ventures.

WHICH THE CAFRs will show, and some of the insets below prove:

• Both have been caught many times over in pedophilia related activities…
• Both are very protective of this fact and the people involved in these activities…

PAUSE to VALIDATE & ILLUSTRATE. Sorry, but:

FACE  IT — most people (in the USA) are not going to want OPEN public identification with endorsing viewing child porn, molesting children, (or domestic violence), but nor are they really willing to accept what stopping these as INDUSTRIES would really mean.  There are too many counter-arguments.

SO — let’s just get back to the economic honesty aspect; perhaps we can all agree (even those who feel an uncomfortable male — or female — bonding at confronting certain kinds of violence and abuse towards others)…that at least it’s wrong to steal from the public and launder the money, or to mis-represent actual needs in order to accumulate more assets; which the CAFRs will reveal, IF studied (or at least located!) what those are.  These are where special funds of all sorts are revealed, and local courts’ etc. pay HAS to show up on them.

More on Religion and Politics….

• Both have public relations officers to handle the public’s outrage at these actions so as to ensure the continuity of the corporation…
• And both are protected from these crimes and from any major public scrutiny or punishment by the court system (BAR) and in the mainstream media (Public Opinion).  (obviously, cases in point, above)
• Both rely on the ignorance of their members with regards to their business related and political activities…
• And both despise watch-dog groups. (too bad….)
• Both accept and rely on donations. 
• Both have leaders that wear expensive suits and receive very good pensions.
• Both promise hope and change to the poor and working class, but never quite deliver.
• Both offer a welfare system that’s never quite enough to really make a difference in society… other than to maintain the poverty level.
• “In God We Trust” is the credo of both – after all, it says so on the thing they both worship the most.

Biographies of Current Justices of the Supreme Court

SECTION II.  PART II….

RE: WHERE IS THIS MONEY GOING?

In FACT, IF THIS POWERFUL FORCE IS MY GOVERNMENT,

SHOW ME THE MONEY — ALL OF IT — WHERE IS IT?

I thought, why not start at the top?  So, I looked for the “Comprehensive Audited Financial Report” (Year 2011) for the United States of America.  Why shouldn’t I?  Apparently, as a Citizen, I am a “shareholder” in this enterprise, and as it considers my labor, my kids, and my being its property — we are all schooled and lectured every day, and choose politicians and Presidents on the basis of what to do about the debt, and how to create more JOBS (translation:  while building assets and wealth for corporations, be taxed on our labor to further contribute to all kinds of funds (including funds established for our future welfare we’ve entrusted to management by our own overlords).

It’s relevant to OUR welfare to know what people (running the business which is called “government”) who claim they have it in mind, are actually doing.

All of this pretty well boils down to “assets and liabilities.”  So, what are the assets and liabilities of the country I’m a citizen of, by virtue of being a citizen of a certain State?

And where would I find that?  Because PART — a BIG part — of the business (government) of this country and that state, logically speaking, are the courts.

So I went looking, and while I didn’t yet find that CAFR, I did find a document I believe we should make a note of:

Terms to remember:

• “GAO” (Government Accountability Office)
• “OMB” (Office of Management and Budget)
• the US Treasury
• Annual Financial Statements (which are budgetary tools) vs.
• COMPREHENSIVE Annual Financial Statements (which state net worth — everything — since the beginning of any government body).

Before presenting it, though, I want to show what happened AFTER someone who looked at a state CAFR found (I believe it was him) the $54 million extra funds that preserved the imminent closure of 70 California State parks, which had been threatened.  Department head resigned, there was clear evidence of coverup, and then apparently (apart from this one guy) the momentum or will to follow through on this job was pretty much lost.

To put this in California  (the “Golden State”) terms, it’s like discovering the motherlode, the vein that leads to gold, understanding who might be prospecting for it and profiting from it (although this one being a man-made motherlode of information) and then going back to sleep.

This CAFR information is the “motherlode” and some initial prospectors have begun.  I am also posting STATE level (and a few key city) such reports over at the Cold,Hard.Fact$ blog.  Any help digging these up and submitting links (labeled in similar format) on comments would be appreciated.  I already have a link to the links and am going beyond that and setting the table for those hungry for economic truth to sit down and start eating.  Or at least looking at the menu.  Once you get the taste, the usual menu of lies, coverups and dissembling (I am trusting/hoping) will be less tasty, and the consequence of the bastardized (economic) taste bud, so to speak, will turn sour.

EXAMPLE:  The Benefits of Paying Attention (as opposed to, going back to sleep) is a matter of opportunity, initial resources, and knowing “what time of day” it is — a business sense.

It being a weekend, please look down.  Are you wearing blue jeans today, or are your kids?  Do you recognize this?

Levi Strauss came to SF during the gold rush, age 24, with “a small supply of drygoods,” and a brother with a store back in NY.  He listened to feedback from a prospector, understood that miners are going to need overalls, and ACTED ON THIS KNOWLEDGE.  “Levi Strauss” got a patent in 1873 for denim, and we got blue jeans (everything inside the next box is just an illustration of what can happen when people are paying attention!)  We also got, in buying them, to help contribute to Levi Strauss & Co’s current 47% profit margin.

Please read, and ask — what’s the “profit margin” on a quarterly (let alone annual) basis of the United States Government?  Of the State governments?  Of all the inbetween government entities?  We are part of that profit margin (despite being continually lectured on what debt we have).  Like this company, our governments have operating revenue, profit margins, investments overseas (and others investing in us FROM overseas).  These governments also have OPERATING expenses (and budgets) which they expect the public to pay every year (or cut product = services delivery) without revealing what the corporate buffer really is.  These governments have their NET income (which is often a loss somehow) but they also have GROSS profit (called assets) which they don’t want to talk about.

And because the government itself is not subject to the SEC, they don’t have to report it in this detail to shareholders.  They do have to report it to each other and to Congress, to an extent — but I have a question:  When they don’t (or manage it badly, decade after decade) who is going to prosecute?  The U.S. Attorney General?

More to the point, how did we get to the point, as a population, of not even WANTING to know about this, or realizing that, perhaps, we could?

Just imagine if our own government were that accountable, and we expected such accountability, and collectively knew how to read the reports with intelligence.  But we don’t — we have gone to sleep on the matter, our grandparents (great-grandparents maybe) “drank the Kool-aid,” got hooked on this economy, and here it is.

Suppose we wanted to opt out (as we might for a public traded company that kept losing value) of this investment?  It won’t help to curse the past, but it might help to understand the past, know what stage of development things are in (and who are the agents) — in order to get more than emotional, or politically spoonfed “reading” on the future, by hired hands.

Anyone who is not independently wealthy (not dependent on a job) for the indefinite future can “opt out of” supporting this management of finances by “opting out of a job.”  However, most people cannot.  And the society is entirely structured around the job mentality and workforce mentality, rather than having just as good a work ethic — but not working for this system which doesn’t like to disclose its holdings!

Or those who have the option to opt out of businesses with employees run in the USA or any of its states (which, since at least 1934, must pay into the Social Security fund (per the 1935 & ff versions of that Act), who must register New Hires (with the advent of the Child Support Enforcement bureau that came with “welfare reform” (as I generally speaking, understand, whether 1996 or earlier), so that the state can act as collection agent for the feds in the matter of garnishing wages for child support.  Of course, there is a complex formula, which affects the courts, as to whether or not the States have to actually distribute what they garnish, or when they “can’t find” the custodial parents and declare it abandoned property (or, don’t clear it abandoned property….).  etc.

That’s a LOT harder to do.

IIA.  CAFRs in CALIFORNIA — the Debate after a Citizen Presents the Evidence to various legislators/county officials:

It’s like the difference between a slice of the pizza and the whole pie.  Also see Carl Herman’s work exposing California’s trillion-surplus assets and trying to get a response from politicians (summer 2012):

(CAFR audit, reform: So-called “pension” and “rainy day” accounts are tragic-comic in non-disclosure and non-performance for budget, infrastructure, and pension funding. For example, Californians have $8 trillion in surplus assets withheld by government in this current structure that 1% “leaders” claim requires our austerity (yes, that’s about $650,000 per household).”  (Articles list HERE)

7/2012 Discussion between Walter Burien & Carl Herman about the “legality” of California’s nondisclosure, paralleled to the SEC (what would happen should a PUBLIC traded company engage in the exact same behavior. Includes non-response from Dave Demerjian, Los Angeles County Head of “Public Intergrity Division,” — check it out:

The failure to disclose cash reserves is not a crime unless there is some evidence that official documents have been intentionally altered or destroyed to accomplish the non-disclosure. He did not respond to my follow-up: Please cite the applicable law(s), please explain how it is not fraud for officials to misrepresent public taxpayer assets by only saying the budget has a deficit and never saying cash and investment accounts have in the case of California 35 times that amount?

Mr. Herman, apparently a Harvard graduate and Los Angeles County resident, I see, didn’t give up when Mr. Demerjian (below) implied it was a mistake, said his office didn’t have jurisdiction to prosecute (suggesting, “try Sacramento”[Northern California/state capital]”) and “this matter is closed.”

Notice in Herman’s response, it mentions 56 courthouses (but only 3 of them family courts) being closed in California (in case we don’t get the connection to “family court matters”).

I think it’s well said.  I feel a little sad that the link to the courthouse closures leads to a Socialist site. I’m no socialist!!– is there no one else who gives a damn around?

It appears (last I heard) the Los Angeles County District Attorney (?) head of Public Integrity Department isn’t interested in any further conversation, at least with Mr. Herman.

Looking up Mr. Dermerjian, I found a fascinating article on a Los Angeles city called “Industry” which (allegedly) while 50,000 people work their as daytime commuters, apparently only has 219 residents (88 of which voted) but which owns thousands of acres outside the city, has a $288 million ANNUAL budget, and in 2009  (through mail-in ballots only) voted to approve borrowing $500 million for infrastructure improvements.  It was discovered that many so-called residents actually lived in churches, invisible (not found) houses, and a factory.

Naturally, this is affecting the neighborhoods, and someone oughter do something about it.  So, here’s Mr. Dave Dermerjian giving approximately the same answer he gave to Mr. Herman above (you really should read the article and decide whether to laugh or cry), from the “Whittier Daily News.”  I also see from the diagram that in 2006, the City Council and another authority (an Authority should show up on a CAFR or have its own) created a third entity, a “Joint Powers Authority” (JPA) which morphed into an “Industry Property Housing and Management Authority” owns the property 4 out of the 5 City Council either live in, or rent.  To me, that all sounds like sticking it to the taxpayers or whoever is going to have to pay off that debt, including possibly tenants.  Hope the tenants are not as invisible as some of the voters’ homes…. That’s a lot of authorities for what was acc. to the US 2010 census (per article) “the third smallest city in the state.”  Seems to me, the real question is who decided to incorporate “Industry” as a city politic at all?

(see next post!)

The government as a business is in the business of raising revenues in exchange for providing services.  In a just world, it would be operating without a huge surplus, engaging regularly in war, international banking, the support and overthrow of other governments, etc. but in the best interests of its citizens.  However, like any corporation, it likes to accumulate assets while doing this — the mo fre the merrier.

UNlike public-trade companies, however, there is no “Securities and Exchange Commission” regulating the government’s own selling and buying of debt, or others who sell and buy ITS debt.  There ought to be.

The only trouble with that model is when it gets out of hand, which is what most governments and institutions (and religions) throughout the history of the world, by nature, DO.  They get “out of hand.”    When challenged on this, they tend to engage in bloody wars, and redistribute land and profits afterwards.  Religions — and/or social science theories about life, poverty, families, and “welfare” (these days) or almost anything else– are handy for justifying the wars.

SECTION I.

TANF/WELFARE ASSETS used to WAGE WAR ON POVERTY/FATHERLESSNESS.  In order to divert these funds, and give grants to some, not to others; someone first had to obtain these funds.  

But whoever still questions HOW that happened, with a view to getting some of it back in the form of valid money (not “dollars”) instead of continually fighting about provision of what kinds of services from the same source?  In other words, how to change the conversation?  Did “the Occupy” movement entail exposing this?

Note:  the US government only has this weapon to use because it was able to accumulate the assets through, among other means, setting up the Federal Reserve Board & income tax (1913) BEFORE World War I, passing the War Powers Act, and only deactivating part of it (1921) declaring a state of emergency (1933),  having appropriated the people’s excess gold (under “Trading with the Enemy Act”) and, having collected through threat an abundance of gold, getting it OUT of others’ hands, suddenly raised the price of gold; then having passed the Social Security Act (1935) taxing not just individuals, but also employers to set up such a trust fund, and so on, and so forth. (some of which is in the last post here).

In other words, the dynamic of the government as our “hero” against foreign enemies and large corporations (therefore hand over the loot) was set up long ago.  Of course there are long-term consequences to centralized control of the economy in private hands!   Now, lo and behold, post- 2001, we (any American, potentially) is the potential enemy, as well as the domesticated cattle being farmed.  Thanks to the internet, it’s a little easier for some of us to learn more about this, however thanks to the same internet it’s also easier for the pace of this expansion (of government/corporate alliances) to accelerate.

Currently some of us are reeling from the war on poverty and fatherlessness in the family courts, which often results in a shifting of the poverty to the other parentage (family line) and motherlessness, which taxpayers are helping with — because this money comes from welfare diversions, some of which are to specifically help fathers get children away from mothers, including mothers that separated from fathers because of a lethality situation.  Period.   To pretend otherwise is to have immunized oneself against proof.

By now even fathers know this; fewer mothers do because mothers, through the DV and “protect the children” advocacy groups (some of who collaborate with fatherhood groups on the same grants’ streams) have intentionally silenced discussion on that topic leaving it to individual bloggers (many of us parents) to publicize.  We do not generally speaking, as the federal government does, have $7 million surplus sitting around to further a media campaign and divert MORE money into government programs, where it (to be honest) is often simply lost.  I wonder where that “lost” money goes to.  Even though through some due diligence, we can find out where (at which organizations, and who their owners are) some of the trails goes cold, and we do see the patterns, it would take some serious software — and internal controls, good data, etc. — to get the scope of it:

Just a sample reminder from Anne Stevenson’s Huffington Post blog, link to the right:

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) program it created transformed welfare policy by drastically reducing and shifting federal assistance away from the homes of mothers and children and into the homes of violent offenders. In an article entitled “How Federal Welfare Funding Drives Judicial Discretion in Child-Custody Determinations and Domestic Relations Matters” fathers and rights activists Lary Holland and Jason Bottomsly explain that this policy has backfired because the incentives are structured so that the state will only benefit if children are removed from loving homes:

“In essence, the federal guidelines wanted the states to function as collection agencies,** recovering financial support from parents who had willfully abandoned their parental responsibilities to their children. The result, however, was different from the intent and has caused the state welfare programs to adjust their environment to have a greater need, . . .

…

Good morning, afternoon, evening, or night (see Feedjit)

FYI, I added a few links to the  “Vital Info/Alpha by Link” menu to  the right, including one called “Musicians4Freedom” (a little bit “out there” including visually, but with some very interesting information, including the first pyramid graphic below here) and “USA vs US” and which is a chart relating more to, for example, creation of the USA, Inc., which cannot be ignored for much longer, and a link to  “Clint Richardson (“realitybloger“) writing on “Contracts,”  who I quoted at length on yesterday’s blog.  

Read the rest of this entry »

(this actually, it says, is from a Renaissance festival in Louisiana).

Some people may now not know the term “Dog and Pony Show” referenced in my Election Day posts.  I think the above communicate the message — taken from image search on “dog and pony show” where the original links for these may be found.

While these are easily identified in re: the word “SHOW,” or “Entertainment” or “novelty” etc., perhaps this type of material may NOT be:

(incomplete Election Map — Florida not in (again.  Fancy that!  Remember 2000?))

NY TIMES ELECTION RESUTS MAP (SHOWING RED & BLUE STATES) 2012

QUITE DIFFERENT WHEN ONE LOOKS AT THE COUNTIES (MORE RED THAN NOT)

Please look at the “States” map and then opt on the “Counties” map.  See what a mosaic of counties is across the country?

Be aware that every single one of them (the counties) is a governmental entity which has an associated “CAFR” and it’s my intent to locate and post them all (unless I can get some help with that!).  And that’s just the start.

Anyhow, thanks to modern technology, the Christian Science Monitor already has the racial breakdown of the election, informing us what should be obvious by now — when it comes to popular vote, the era of “white male supremacy” is probably over.  Which probably (in great part) is what the marriage/fatherhood promotion is all about anyhow — because it immediately (welfare reform, I mean) targeted the base prejudices of the human nature — welfare queens, etc., low-income people (what is a “low-income” person???  Is that a genetic descriptor???    Or did the offspring of eugenics have something to do with who had more income than others, based on racism?

This is entirely a different matter than who, REALLY, is the United States of America?  Because I’ve been spending the last few days looking at more utter chaos, fraud, dishonesty and stupidity in the handling of money around certain federal programs that I’m beginning to believe we’ve had stupidity programmed into the entire country.  It’s definitely in the school systems, and in the public-consumption version of who is government, and for all I know, it may be in the water, too!

Election results 2012: Who won it for Obama? (+video)

Exit polls find that a key to Obama’s victory was winning 93 percent of African-Americans, 71 percent of Hispanics, and 73 percent of Asians. Mitt Romney took most of the white vote, which is 72 percent of the electorate. But it wasn’t enough.

By Peter Grier, Staff Writer / November 7, 2012

President Obama was reelected Tuesday night in large part because of strong support from women and minorities. The lesson of his victory for both parties, but particularly Republicans, may be this: The primacy of white male voters has passed. In the modern era, it takes a diverse coalition to win the White House.

Look at the basic breakdown of Mr. Obama’s victory, according to exit polls (which may yet be revised). He won 93 percent of African-Americans, 71 percent of Hispanics, and 73 percent of Asians. He took 55 percent of the overall female vote, down only one percentage point from his comparable 2008 showing.

Mitt Romney, meanwhile, won about 59 percent of the white vote. That’s the best a GOP nominee has done among whites since 1988, and not too long ago such a performance might have guaranteed a winning margin of 270 electoral votes. After all, whites still make up 72 percent ofUS voters. …

Mr. Romney would have needed the support of even more whites to win – and Obama did well (or well enough) among white women, particularly single and young white women.

Romney won white men by 25 points. It wasn’t enough.”

Women, in this election, didn’t have a real good choice.  I do know some who voted for Romney, but I wouldn’t characterize this as too smart.  Notice it’s single and young ones.

Others, like me (I’m single and not young, and also a mother, obviously from this blog) know more by now about Social Security, Welfare Form (and diversions into marriage/fatherhood) and Clearinghouses paid for with tax monies.  Of course, I learned the hard way that parents are only temporary custodians of children, until the state sees it differently.  This may be why politicians keep speaking about “OUR” children.  It turns out to be, literally (and legally) true as a corollary of citizenship.

While we may not be guilty or cognizant — up front — of the “sins of our fathers” (I should say, mothers and fathers) in giving us birth certificates and, for the most part, sending us off to compulsory education in state schools, while going off to work in a corporation and get paid in what’s not really, bona fide money, such that the KIDS primary relationship is with a procession of teachers (some who teach them, some who molest them, some who at least make competent babysitters) and the PARENTS relationship is so frazzled — but, I’d have to say, with their corporate masters (or institutional, if incarcerated) — and trying to get the day-time babysitters (called schools) to do a decent job — all of this is a interlocking directorate of HOW WE SPEND OUR DAYS.

What I’m blathering on about here is the birth certificates, marriage certificates, drivers’ licenses, and all that stuff that did not USE to be routine.  I am old enough to remember when kids were not issued social security numbers (not claiming to have been alive then, but — read between the lines).
I tried (again) to explain the “Baltimore” situation, recently, but ran across the faith-based thing, and how Ohio’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (the first round) was simply steering HHS grants to cronies, after which the person stepped down in 2007 (as apparently did the person involved in the Baltimore Mayor’s Office of Children Youth and Families (a.k.a. “Baltimore Rising, Inc.” which called itself a nonprofit, apparently filed a tax return twice, but which — I simply don’t see, at least in Maryland.  This also parallels behaviors of other groups in New York State, and in California — they get the grants, and they don’t comply with the state laws of charities or corporations, AND THEY KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT!

And quite honestly, it’s rather discouraging.  If someone has regurgitated the Kool-Aid as not sustaining life (and tastes bad) it’s very hard to drink it again.  I have done this, and am having one HECK of a time justifying why to hang around and feed any part of the system anything.

Read the rest of this entry »