Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

This post references financial reporting formats (CAFRs) for government entities, and the enormous significance of this format to public consciousness of (our) position vis-a-vis those entities.  That information is a real gateway to understanding.  I’ve been considering and posting on CAFRs often since I discovered it in Spring 2012, thanks to, as I recall first, this website CAFR1.com

This post references some material I’ve been working on since I became aware of it over five years ago, with increasing detail.  This is probably, however, not the place for first-time readers of this blog to start! Try instead either the “Vital Info / Sticky Posts” link, the Table of Contents (both links shown right below), or elsewhere!

This post, full title, published 7/17/2017: State-Run Banks? — at Least Two Activists Who Understand CAFRs, How Governments Stockpile Assets, Take Polar Opposite Stances on What to Do About It (Burien, Herman). And Perhaps Why.. (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7gN”) (About 11,500 words) (+ Information + images added to the bottom 7/18 on two authors M. Chussodovsky + M.G.Marshall related to the platform from which one of the pro-State Banking articles I discuss was posted, and other places they are published (such as at truthout.org, RT.com) = about 13,850 words, including all image captions) .

I re-categorized this post as “Sticky” Sept. 27, 2017, during a Table of Contents post update. In doing so, somehow (a WordPress hierarchy, not mine) it assumed top position on this blog, an unintended consequence. I added a background-color to better set off the many images, which tend to be plain white background.

Unless you have major curiosity, interest in financial details (including some relating to the 2008 recession) including reading them in the form of charts, and sustained attention or motivation to pay attention to this type of information, for first-time or new visitors to this blog, I recommend starting on a different page (some links/suggestions provided below). An average post here may take a week to complete, and writing them keeps me on a constant learning curve also.

Picture immediately below:  I took and annotated an image of its tags. For most of this post, and most posts, click to enlarge image if needed (or, a click otherwise is likely to bring reader to the original page from which image was taken).

The same image of tags was added to that 2017 TOC page, (which contains links to the other years’ tables, in both post and paginated 8X11″ (pdf upload) formats, and images of the 8X11 format for browsing, as well) also posted here. This addition means the number and images and pdfs of them painstakingly compiled for another post (also “stuck” to the top of the blog main content area), Vital Info: “Sticky” Posts (Now Listed Here)   [Publ. 2/9/2017, rev. 5/26, 6/19, and 10/1/2017]” or go to Archive date Feb. 9, 2017) no longer has all captioned images (of each such page) and associated pdfs, but it does clearly mark the titles, dates, and direct links to both “State-Run Banks” here and a second one (“Disconnected…” July 18, 2017) newly recategorized as “sticky.”

So, keeping this “State-Run Banks” post within range of the top of blog still emphasizes its importance. However, it’s complex enough that WordPress’s having automatically positioned it as THE top post might not be best — which I discuss briefly right below the image of the tags (subject matter covered) for this post:

TAGS for this post just made Sticky Sep 27 2017. Click image to enlarge.

Notes on realizing making this “Sticky” put it in “Position #1” on the blog, an unintended consequence:

As posted originally (July, 2017):

This post quotes mostly Walter Burien & Ellen H. Brown (“EHB”). I quoted from two different EHB articles, one in June May, 2010, and another in September 2010, and from Burien’s response to the second.

The earlier 2010 article dealt with CAFRs in general and why stockpiled assets couldn’t just be grabbed to pay budget deficits (“Mysterious CAFRs”).  The later one specifically recommends State Banks as a solution to a global economic crisis (“A Solution to the Federal Debt Crisis? Time for Helicopter Ben to Drop Some Money on Mainstream, 9/10/2010, in GlobalResearch.ca”

I already in some detail covered Burien’s response to the June, May, 2010 writing in my 2014 post “A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment.”  I referred to this post in my companion post to this one (“To Identify and UNDERstand…,” link and full title not far below [published 7/19/2017 — see sidebar]), however the topic of state-owned banks continues to come up; others are also promoting it if not from outside the “Web of Debt” circle, certainly with outside institutional and funding help, as shown here (this reference came from the second EHB article):

Bruce Cahan~SilicnValleyAtty (per EHB) 2010Aug29 ~STATE-OWNED BANKS –TO REBUILD HOUSING + RE MKTS~@ STANFORD’S CTR FOR INTERNET + SOCIETY (5pp printed 7-15-2017)

There is much more information available through follow-up on this author, attorney Bruce Cahan, and on the Stanford University CIS from which he posted for about five years (2007-2012). I’m only giving a taste of it here to counter what may otherwise sound like on this post, a theme focused on just a few personalities, without understanding that there is indeed a movement promoting state-run banks outside those personalities.

Put anther way — yes, I’m reporting on articles several years old, but don’t kid yourself that the topic has faded away.  It hasn’t. It’s being actively promoted still.

“The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School is a leader in the study of the law and policy around the Internet and other emerging technologies.”

Our nation’s financial life experience includes state-owned banks. At stateownedbanks.com, I am exploring and sharing the history of banks owned by government for their citizens in the United States and around the world. State-owned banks aren’t socialism. They are precedent from our own Colonial Era, and were familiar to our own Constitutional Congress. The Bank of North America refinanced the Revolutionary War debt amassed in fighting the British for independence. Today, the Bank of North Dakota* is a state-owned bank, serving the state government’s needs for banking services. Ellen Brown, author of Web of Debt has championed this history and precedent for years.

[The CIS  – “cyber.stanford.edu” has been around since 2000, and its famous founder Lawrence Lessig III was for a while, recently a U.S. Presidential contender (Democrat)]

*References to North Dakota’s state bank is a common mantra for promotions of the theme, you’ll find out quickly if you keep reading on the topic.

I would follow up more re: the Stanford CIS and Mr. Cahan, but doing so might quickly capsize the already complex payload in this post.  For the record, while state-owned banks doesn’t seem to be a primary theme at CIS, the blog was posted by at least one of its five-year, non-residential fellows Mr. Cahan, and some of the prominence of this law school and center was certainly part of the article’s general “aura.”

I also took some time (perhaps an hour?) to follow-up on the “StateOwnedBanks.com” reference above, but will save that information for a separate place and time on this blog. There were some significant “finds” which speak to the founder’s character (and, as usual found on a Form 990, organization name “Urban Logic, Inc.”), although the qualifications seem plenty high (Wharton School at U of Pennsylvania and Temple Law School, both in the 1970s), licensed to practice law (per website below) in Pennsylvania, New York, and California.  Note:  The Public Banking Institute (associated with Ms. Brown) at some point incorporated in Pennsylvania, as I recall from earlier blogging.

Having made that point, let’s get down to some concentrated examination of the issues:

See post title again.

While both Brown and Burien are activist for different purposes, and hold polar opposite views of State-Run Banks (among many other things, evidently), the other “activist who understands CAFRs” in writing the title I was thinking of was Carl Herman (posting often on WashingtonsBlog,” domain registered 2009) not Ellen H. Brown (website “Web of Debt” domain registered under the same server (1and1.com) in 2007).

So this post should be read in association with one which has an added middle section in this background-color showing more of Mr. Herman’s clear position as also FOR state-run banks.  That post, my To Identify and UNDERstand is to know how and why to WITHstand...”** written (but not published) in late (October) 2014, and on which I was working on at the time….

**Full title, To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order, [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/2017]  (case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”)

Money Creation in a Finite World Apr2012 Claremt Colleges (CA) presentation (EHB opens, CH closes)

My “To Identify and UNDERstand” post has an update section (in this background color) further establishing Herman’s collaborations alongside Brown on this topic at least as far back as 2012 — for example, both as opening/closing experts on panels at a college-based conference, promotions of Web-of-Debt or websites promoting State-Run-Bank conferences and ideas from his blog when also dealing with CAFRs and Budget issues, and frequent references to the topic in the middle of his articles also).  Some of these also show more of his credentials as an economist and teacher of it.

Why I’m not sure Ms. Brown “gets” CAFRs:  She makes reference to CAFRs in attempting to dismiss Burien’s arguments, but not in a way that convinces me she understands, or cares to acknowledge, their significance.

PREVIEW (because this gets into comparing statement to evidence, with images, quotes, and explanation — in other words, a little complex) Part of this post documents this from the 2010 article showing some confusion of vocabulary, and while citing to a state CAFR (Note:  being an attorney in the same state), and skipped the basic financial statements on the topic she was making a point about to refer instead to their Notes in making a point, doing so, confused a part (CalPERS) for the whole (all Fiduciary Funds, of which both CalPERS and CalSTRS are major parts, but not 100%), and cited numbers referring to the whole as belong to the part (CalPERS).  In a separate paragraph, a rhetorical question about why we couldn’t take “LAIF” (Local Agency Investment Fund) assets held in the PMIA (Pooled Money Investment Account), showing some confusion about the difference between an account managed by others where money is held to be invested, and government accounting by named, categorized funds, not to mention the difference (although it’s usually clearly outlined in both the Management Discussion & Analysis and in Notes to Financial Statements for most CAFRs, including this one) between “governmental funds” for basic government activities, versus “fiduciary funds.”

In doing this, I’m also showing why I’m less than confident this individual, despite ongoing, on-line and conferencing (at least in 2012) help from Mr. Herman and what looks like coordination of web promotions of the state bank solution, actually understands the basic economic terms she refers to.  At least, it’s puzzling to behold.

Below that extended top section are other sections, including Walter Burien’s article responding to one promoting State Banks (both dated September 2010), and some of the documentation in that short statement (two US Treasury reports right after the 2008 recession).  I think these visuals lend some credibility to the concept that that recession was no accident.  I also then take a look at two different websites re-posting each writer’s (Brown’s, Burien’s) articles.

Her training was in law (J.D.); Herman’s in economics and teaching it, and Burien’s in commodities trading (CAFR1bio.htm) and several other areas*, with at one point an office in World Trade Towers 19th floor. The “bio” describes what motivated him to get started on the “CAFR crusade)”:

*[From (CAFR1bio.htm), Timeframe appears to be 1990] … With the help of John and Ken rabble rousing around the clock, within three months the group (Hands Across New Jersey, “HANJ”) had 63,000 volunteers and every county in New Jersey organized. Walter Bubien [birth name, per the bio] took over looking at the Budget report, gross income, and identifying the investments held by the state of NJ. It was not too long before he discovered the true accounting book for NJ State Government, a book called the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report). Upon review this report showed that New Jersey state government had three times the gross income that it was showing on its corresponding budget report.

Three time gross income CAFR vs. Budget Report is an interesting ratio.  In general, and in reference to revenue sources across government funds (not just for NJ), Burien’s position is that taxes only account for about a third.

From CAFR1 main page (scroll down) viewed 7-16-2017. Note para.1 says: “Tax” provides ⅓ and Non-tax (investment income and proprietary (enterprise) projects, ⅔.  Burien’s solution is to combine the types of funds and let that investment income fund ongoing budgets, gradually phasing out need for taxation.

(undated, at http://cafr1.com/Message.html)

TRF – Tax Retirement Funds

Pension funds pay a salary and benefits at retirement. If the same principle to generate annual revenue was used under a TRF, any City, County, School District, or State can implement a TRF to pay their ongoing annual Budget and taxation then can be phased out.

The same government pension fund management teams would be used for the TRF. Instead of a pension funds to meet salary and benefits at retirement, now a separate TRF to meet annual budgetary expenses.

Current rates of return are 16% to 18%, so with a little downsizing and consolidation of government and a  TRF created for any small town or large local state government, taxation can be eliminated in a very short period of time through the use of the TRF.

And again, (2/7/2015, “When there’s a will there’s a way” — this has been his consistent talk over time, although it’s a later quote than 2010):

… Fiduciary trust funds can be set up on every level of local government to meet “their” budgetary needs without taxation. This is not a maybe, it is a definite. You see government has done it 100,000 times over already except they did it for themselves not the population. An example is the collective multi-trillion dollar Government Pension Systems (GPS). A GPS is a fiduciary fund established to generate revenue to meet a specific purpose. In a GPS the purpose is generating billions and collectively trillions to meet paying government employee’s substantial retirement benefits. What I call a Tax Retirement Fund (TRF), a TRF is a fiduciary fund  established to generate revenue to meet a specific purpose, that of meeting local governments operating budgets annually, thus established to directly benefit “We the People” retiring taxation.

In Spring 2010, in one of two parallel (but not dynamically intersecting on either website so I wouldn’t call it a dynamic “exchange,”) web articles (see annotated images), a statement is made by Web of Debt author Ms. Brown, quoting a state chapter of the Government Finance Officers Association (“GFOA,” who was around when the CAFR system and rule-making authority was set up by another entity in the early 1970s), that local governments needing to keep “from 20% to 75%” of their budgets for a buffer. The comment of course ignores the issue of state and the USA (federal) governments and where they have pooled institutional funds, etc.

A complaint that “fruit sold from all fruit-producing trees in at least the state orchard this year earned three times that reported earned from a subset, about one-third of the state’s total orchard, of fruit-producing trees allocated to meeting the state’s budget, based on which one-third figures taxes must be raised to make up the difference (“deficit”)“**  isn’t exactly countered by the “but local (only) apple (only) farmers have to keep from less than ¼ to ¾ of their annual revenues as a buffer” statement.   **(In general a position that is echoed by other CAFR statistics put forth over the years by both Burien, and Carl Herman: that whether at city, state, or county (such as County of Los Angeles) levels, the CAFRs reveal that the discrepancy, the numerical and size gap, between reported budgets on which basis deficits are declared and policy set, and actual revenues from all assets and/or government activities, held is huge))

If that example isn’t clear, be patient — I provide annotated images of the context-switching piece, and more examples, not far below.  This continues the “CAFR1BIO.html”:

Mr. Walter J. Bubien, Jr. upon seeing the NJ CAFR had just learned what he has called ever since: The Biggest Game in Town and he has referred to government ever since as the definition of Organized Crime. When Walter met with governor Jim Florio, when he confronted the governor with the fact that the state was bringing in three times what they were showing to the people of NJ, the governor replied back with: “Yes, I know, I have been trying to do something about that!”

Walter, the day after getting the NJ State CAFR, went to 101.5 and showed it to John and Ken (now DJs in Los Angeles, CA) saying to them: “Here is the holy Grail” let’s hit the air with it!” Well, for the next hour the bottom line numbers in the tens of billions were read off live on the air.. That was the last live interview 101.5 FM did with Walter or for a while with anyone from HANJ. The station came under attack, John and Ken never mentioned the CAFR again, Walter Burien came under attack, all Press articles on HANJ for some period of time stopped. Walter and his friends were threatened and the CAFR was never to be heard about again for the next eight years.         [[end, my quote from CAFR1bio, emphases added]]

Correction: Article date is May 21, 2010. I mistakenly referred to it as a “June 2010” on this post ( published 7-17-2017, corrected 7-18-2017).//LGH

re:

In Spring, May, 2010 (not Fall, September, 2010, which other Ellen H. Brown/Web of Debt article & Walter Burien response will be quoted at length below also) in “The Mysterious CAFRs: How Stagnant Pools of Money Could Help Save the Economy,” Ellen Brown, on her website (next quote and, further below after responding to what’s in it, two labeled images: look for this logo), 

referenced Burien’s claims on the CAFRs, showing an apparent awareness of the need to somehow acknowledge them, then dismisses the entire concept of any government conspiracy without addressing the points raised (as to true or false), while skillfully (unless you believe it was just carelessly… either way, while) narrowing the topic of reference mid-paragraph and then making her point that municipal governments have to keep “from 20% to 75%” of their budget as a buffer — without handling even the claim that assets were being stockpiled at all levels of government, or characterization of them as “slush fund,” and having not dealt with the argument the opening paragraph implies she might be refuting somehow.

This isn’t exactly a rebuttal of the points raised.

The article (Ms. Brown) then goes on to reference her invitation to speak at a state (Missouri) chapter of the GFOA (Government Finance Officers Association), then jumps back to affairs in her (and currently my) home state of California.

Within the paragraph referencing how California’s doing in that regard, she references “pages 83-84” of a California CAFR, provides a link to the whole CAFR.  I looked it up again, and from the Table of Contents easily saw that pages 83-84 that year were not from the main financial statements, but in the Notes — and referencing only one portion of income-producing assets, fiduciary funds.

This is getting a bit ahead of myself (other portions from this article shown below), but after several paragraphs, this heading comes up:

How the CAFR Money Could Be Used Without Spending It

(a section from webofdebt.com/articles/mysterious_cafrs.php = “The Mysterious CAFRs: How Stagnant Pools of Money Could Help Save the Economy,” by Ellen H. Brown in “Web of Debt.”

California, then, is in the anomalous position of being $26 billion in the red and plunging toward bankruptcy, while it has over $70 billion stashed away in an investment pool that it cannot touch. Those are just the funds managed by the Treasurer. According to California�s latest CAFR, the California Public Employees� Retirement Fund (CalPERS) has total investments of $360 billion, including nearly $144 billion in �equity securities� and $37 billion in �private equity.� See the State of California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009, pages 83-84. ***

This money cannot be spent, but it can be invested — and it can be invested not just in conservative federal securities but in equity, or stocks. Rather than turning this hidden gold mine over to Wall Street banks to earn a very meager interest, California could leverage its excess funds itself, turning the money into much-needed low-interest credit for its own use. How? It could do this by owning its own bank.

***Next are images (Table of Contents — 2 image, Transmittal Letter from Independent Auditor Outlining WHAT is being audited – 1) from the passing reference (en route to selling point — “we need state banks”).

The Table of Contents shows that Brown wasn’t even quoting from the “Basic Financial Statements” section (the columns of numbers, well-labeled), which clearly outline by name what types of funds (Governmental, Proprietary,* Fiduciary, Discretely Presented Component Units (of the State of California) Enterprise* statements) the charts of numbers are presented.  Taken as a whole, and with the preceding and following explanations, they represent the whole.  Why not quote the actual consolidated figures, totaled, from the whole state, also showing an ability to read labels and the effort to do a little simple math (totaling the totals)? ….

[The terms “Proprietary” and “Enterprise” seem interchangeable, however, some financial statements were presented separately because of which “component units” of government they represented.  See independent auditors’ transmittal letter for more examples).

Click to enlarge. Notice what large % certain types of named funds represent, whether enterprise, government-wide, or other.

The Transmittal letter (“Independent Auditor’s Report”) w/ annotations again shows clear categories of statements audited and which entities’ statements were included, but not audited by this auditor.  Paragr. 1, 2nd blue underline starts the disclaimers listing below which financial statements it did NOT audit, including the one for CalPERS (“Public Employees Retirement System,” next to last bullet).  The two categories of financial statements shown there are “government-wide” and “fund financial statements” as you can see are also separated into “Government-wide” and “Fund” statements.

If the point was to give a CalPERS figure, why not go to the CalPERS CAFR and quote it?

According to California�s latest CAFR, the California Public Employees� Retirement Fund (CalPERS) has total investments of $360 billion, including nearly $144 billion in �equity securities� and $37 billion in �private equity.

Below (further down), I posted images of both pages referenced.  In other words, I checked the “cite.”  The $360 billion is the total shown in “Table 6” (page 83) which refers to ALL Fiduciary funds, NOT CalPERS only.  It does show $143.8B in “Equity securities” and in the same chart, $36.9B in “Private equity” BUT that table was not not CalPERS only.  So this gets down to the (in)ability to read the words at the top of a page, i.e., the title of the numbers one is quoting.

IN fact, the next page (p. 84, Table 7, from the California State CAFR YE June 30, 2009, image also below) which shows investment vehicles, for CalPERS and CalSTRS only (i.e., not all four types of fiduciary funds held by the state) shows that CalPERS holding $78B and CalSTRS $25B — in ‘Fixed Income Securities’ with a footnote on CalPERS that this includes also “fiduciary funds and certain discretely presented units that CalPERS administers.

So, if we are talking (i.e., Ellen Brown was at the time) about how many funds are being held separately, why not include CalSTRS too? $25B is a hefty chunk…

I went back to the “Basic Financial Statements” section, pp. 48 and 49 (Fiduciary Fund Statement of Net Assets, and (next page) Change of Net Assets, which wasn’t apparently of interest for the Mysterious CAFRs article, although it’s a major part of the CAFR referenced.

On those two statements (pp. 48 and 49 and re: Fiduciary Funds) there are four columns (which will become clearer when the Notes are read explaining each column), one for each type of fiduciary fund.  CalPERS would be part (not all) of the second, and largest one.  In three images:

Click to enlarge. Top half of (CAFR Calif FYE2009 Fiduc. Funds/Assets  p.48)

Click to enlarge. Bottom half (Fiduciary Funds/Liabilities) (CAFR Calif FYE2009 p.48)

Can you see the 2008 recession impact here? Meanwhile, I’ve also shown what Carl Herman has been saying re: pension funds — their contributions aren’t fully funding them anyhow. The elephant in this room is why are funds totaling so much, and which lost so much in a single year, even in state hands to start with? (look at last two columns). Note: “Contributions” (green markings) here means public employees, not all private sector employees.

Again, this (next quote, below) is the paragraph, with several undocumented figures (not footnoted, either) and the single link/cite given, a bit unsettling in that it seems the author EHB doesn’t have a concept of how funds are designated within the CAFRs.  The phrase “managed by the Treasurer” isn’t accompanied by a link or reference.

Therefore it seems to me the paragraph gives a flourish, a gesture, of authoritative-sounding, and “let the readers deal with the details” if so inclined, compounded by imprecise labeling, such as “the funds managed by the Treasurer.”  Part of my post, and images/quotes below is straightening out those mixed-up references exhibiting what looks like some fuzzy or careless thinking.

California, then, is in the anomalous position of being $26 billion in the red and plunging toward bankruptcy, while it has over $70 billion stashed away in an investment pool that it cannot touch. Those are just the funds managed by the Treasurer. According to California�s latest CAFR, the California Public Employees� Retirement Fund (CalPERS) has total investments of $360 billion, including nearly $144 billion in �equity securities� and $37 billion in �private equity.� See the State of California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009, pages 83-84.

OK, a second look at the Web of Debt article indicates that “by just the funds managed by the Treasurer” (and based on a link provided — which leads to current, not 2010 figures) Ms. Brown is apparently referring to the PMIA mentioned a few paragraphs earlier, of which only part is the LAIF.

This would be better understood and viewed (like the CAFR itself) starting at the Treasurer’s website, which explains the timeframe, purpose, and function of both the PMIA started in California in 1955, and the LAIF added by legislation in 1977.  The PMIA includes funds from local cities and counties, therefore it would not make sense to be accounted for in a statement for the State financial statements specifically referencing the LAIF as a State level fiduciary fund (and by no means the largest of them)(quotes in blue border, nearby).

Meanwhile, Back in California 

That was in Missouri, but the figures I was particularly interested were for my own state of California, which was struggling with a budget deficit of $26.3 billion[1] as of April 2010. Yet the State Treasurer�s website says that he manages a Pooled Money Investment Account (PMIA) [2] tallying in at nearly $71 billion as of the same date, including a Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) of $24 billion. Why isn�t this money being used toward the state�s deficit? The Treasurer�s answer to this question, which he evidently gets frequently, is that legislation forbids it. His website [3] states:

�Can the State borrow LAIF dollars to resolve the budget deficit?

�No. California Government Code 16429.3 states that monies placed with the Treasurer for deposit in the LAIF by cities, counties, special districts, nonprofit corporations, or qualified quasi-governmental agencies shall not be subject to either of the following:
�(a) Transfer or loan pursuant to Sections 16310, 16312, or 16313.
�(b) Impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency.�

 [[emphases — bold, font-changes, and footnotes added]]

(Image of similar section in the article):

Who (in the “Mysterious CAFRs | Burien POV on CAFRs dismissal” conversation, which led out the article) posed the question about using the PMIA ( or was “LAIF” meant by “this money”?) funds for a State budget deficit?

So far as I can tell, no one besides the author here.  Burien has been talking about taking ALL the investment funds (for each specific government entity) and consolidating them into a single investment fund named “TRF” for the purpose of funding the budget, and maintains that there has been collective government takeover of infrastructure, hard assets, and sticking the population with the debt service when in fact, their own investments could already (from what I understand) service the infrastructure debt AND budgets.

So, he’s talking about restructuring the whole set-up, also for the public to better understand the size and scope of government assets, revenues, income — not borrowing from one investment management account (and “account” =/= a “fund” they are different terms!) to fund a “Budget Deficit” referring most likely to only the General Fund for (in this example) the State.

Look for my blue-bordered quote from the CAFR with this title, much further below (after several images, some large, and near “Overview of Financial Statements” with similar appearance).

Fiduciary Funds (State of Calif. CAFR YE2009, page 17, “Management Discussion and Analysis” (MD&A) section).

My added footnotes (to Web of Debt quote above):  [1] — this is an expired link to the Los Angeles Times used to cite a $26.3 B budget deficit (!); [2] the PMIA is for management of held assets including the LAIF; it is not itself a “fund.” [3] = link http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/laif-statute.asp basically explains the quote above — money given by local (not state) entities, special districts, nonprofits and quasi-agencies for management, can’t be just taken over and appropriate for other than its purpose. If a private person did this with funds given them in trust, it would be called embezzlement (or simply, theft). My recommendation is read the website, and don’t try to construct a sensible connection between the Web of Debt arguments here to reality!

There’s a difference between financial statements governmental fund accounting, and pooled funds drawing from several sources, not State level only in a Treasury-managed account.  CAFR “overview” (from “MD+A” section) explains that fiduciary funds (of which the LAIF are part) don’t support state programs:

Overview of the Financial Statements

This discussion and analysis is an introduction to the section presenting the State’s basic financial statements, which includes four components: (1) government-wide financial statements, (2) fund financial statements, (3) discretely presented component units financial statements, and (4) notes to the financial statements. This report also contains required supplementary information and combining financial statements and schedules.

Government-wide Financial Statements

Government-wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the State’s finances. The government-wide financial statements do not include fiduciary programs and activities of the primary government and component units because fiduciary resources are not available to support state programs.

It then, several pages later, explains that as to Governmental Funds, there are three main ones (continued in an image of p. 15, labeled p. 14 at the top from, obviously, the bottom of previous page):

While here, I’m showing the Transportation Fund and Federal Fund (holds federal revenues for grants within the state, for example, for HHS and Education purposes) and some of their numbers.  Note these are “Major Governmental Funds.”  The second image grabs a portion of “Proprietary Funds” subtitle “Enterprise Funds” which I included to show that the terms are related. Think about it — a store may have a “proprietor,” right?  Proprietary funds are government businesses, or “enterprises.”  Fees for services….

Above: Federal Fund (CAFR YE2009, State of Calif. from its MD&A section)

Above: Transportation + Proprietary Funds referenced (MD&A, CAFR FYE2009)

……All this is laid out in a systematic and organized fashion on the CAFRs.

It seems to me people that become familiar with it, wouldn’t be bouncing from one section, topic, or concept to another in their discussion of what solutions are wanted to a budget deficit not even properly defined within the discussion (again, citing to a Los Angeles Times article??). Other than its disorganization as a possible persuasive strategy, it seems disorganized writing — and from a lawyer.

Footnoted “[2]”  “Mysterious CAFRs” article quote above referenced the “PMIA” (Treasury managed account).

Here’s part of the PMIA piechart (current) showing what percent of the total (now, I DNK about in FY2008) the LAIF holds in the PMIA, and the home page on PMIA explaining at least what goes into it. Probably parallels exist in most states and/or territories.

LAIF (yellow) 30%, GENERAL FUND (maroon) 18%, SMIF (Surplus Money Investment Fund), looks like 50%, “Other” a small amount.

(Click to enlarge, or just visit the website) These are POOLED assets from various sources. Contrast with CAFR fund accounting by categories…

I looked up “Surplus Money Investment Fund” — apparently not many searches on the term, it led right to the definition from the state department of finance, as Fund 0681, (DOF.ca.gov, “Find a Fund” (take a look at the list!) based on statutes from 1945, as of August 2012.  These helpful definitions convey a lot of information in just a single page (here’s that page in two images):

There is also a difference between assets, and revenue FROM those assets. Look at any Form 990PF (and many Forms 990) — in the private sector — and these categories are clearly labeled:  Dividends and interest vs. net gains from sale of assets (by categories — security, non-security). Does the attorney-author here, working closely with economic expert Mr. Herman, “get” that basic concept?  If so, why isn’t it coming out in the writings?

Here, from the “Notes to Financial Statements” is an explanation of the four types of fiduciary funds only (CAFR FYE2009 California).  You can see which are the largest, and the language expressed in terms of decrease of revenue from them and decrease in net value — this being Year 2009.  (Remember 2008? This was Fiscal Year 2008 (the year ended June 30, 2009))

Fiduciary Funds (State of Calif. CAFR YE2009, page 17, “Management Discussion and Analysis” (MD&A) section).

The State of California has four types of fiduciary funds: private purpose trust funds, pension and other employee benefit trust funds, investment trust funds, and agency funds. The private purpose trust funds ended the fiscal year with net assets of $3.0 billion. The pension and other employee benefit trust funds ended the fiscal year with net assets of $306.1 billion. The State’s only investment trust fund, the Local Agency Investment Fund, ended the fiscal year with net assets of $25.2 billion. Agency funds act as clearing accounts and thus do not have net assets.

Quick question — which type of fiduciary funds held more — “pension and other employee benefit,” or “the State’s Investment trust fund (LAIF)?  The answer is underlined and in in that paragraph. (See also “Basic Financial Statements” which these notes refer to, p. 48, I’ve posted the image).

For the year ended June 30, 2009, the fiduciary funds’ combined net assets were $334.3 billion, a $102.8 billion decrease from prior year net assets. The decrease in net assets for these funds was mainly attributable to a decline in investment income that actually resulted in a net loss for the year and a decrease in the fair value of the funds’ investments of $113.2 billion (23.9%).

Did anyone writing to summarize California’s position read this MDA section before getting to page 83 & 84?

Here are pages 83-84 from the State of California, ONE kind of fund only — “fiduciary” [See Table of Contents!] (which the intro describes as including both CalPERS and CalSTRS (State Teacher Retirement System)– she was referring to in the summary quote of by what types of amounts California was “plunging towards bankruptcy” while, “anamously” (by contrast) in possession of several times the amount of deficit under its specific control. (P.84 too small to read from image, click to enlarge, remember the numbers are in thousands (add “000” to any $$ figure shown):

CAFR Calif FYE2009 p83 Table 6 (From Notes/Fiduciary Funds), =table only (not all the text on the page)

CAFR Calif FYE2009 p84 Table 7 (From Notes/Fiduciary Funds) (=complete page except header + page number footer)

Ping-pong points of reference, as part of promotion, is not an actual debate of the truth or falsehood of issues raised (by Burien).  What seems to have been at risk here (seven years back) was an unchallenged platform from which to preach the State Bank formula as a solution to all that debt, IF the CAFR-revealed stockpiles were going to be eventually, even if vaguely, grasped conceptually by the public.

Image 1 of 2, 6-10-2010 WebOfDebt article

Image 2 of 2, 6-10-2010 WebOfDebt article

I somehow got into the middle of all this back in 2014 by submitting a comment asking why was the Public Banking Institute using a strange fiscal agent (Inquiring Systems, Inc. in Sonoma, CA).  The purpose of this post isn’t to re-hash that content, already discussed in a “Different Kind of Attention Leads to Sound Judgment” post (link/reference also in the closely associated post to this one) but to present somewhat later debates (but still in 2010) on the State Bank discussion, and some more sources of relevant information on at least two other websites re-posting both Burien and Brown content, one of them run out of Canada, another out of Florida.

Again, this post should be read in association with another one which has a middle section showing more of Mr. Herman’s clear position as also FOR state-run banks: To Identify and UNDERstand is to know how and why to WITHstand...”** most of which had been written in late (October) 2014, and on which I was working on at the time….

**Full title, To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order, [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/2017]  (case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”)

An introduction (lead-in) to that update became this post…

“Below this line is basically the October 2014 narrative except for:

• except for the added images section in this background-color [now in the “To Identify” post] where I began elaborating on the references to prior Carl Herman’s writings, and in the process was reminded of his “hook-line-and-sinker” position  in favor of public state banking. Since then, another theme, “Postal Banking” is being put out from the same quarters (at least from Public Banking Institute).
  

  No idea what “Postal Banking” is (yet) but I see who’s promoting it…

• On at least state banks (so-called “public banking”), I recall one Walter Burien 2010 article, response to another one, as characterizing the concept as “you can kiss the United States goodbye” and “NWO (new world order) signed, sealed and delivered” (the Government AS orchestrating the NWO through strategically positioned in certain things which can then be “shorted,” using major institutional funds). For which see this next section!
• A search for that article on-line found it here * (scroll below the initial poster’s intro.**)

*The article is short enough to post in just 5 images, which I’ll do before my October 2014 narrative.  It clarifies Burien’s respective position as anti-public state banks, and why, while Carl Herman’s, which I knew then as pro (i.e., I knew he’d fallen into citing to Ellen H. Brown and Web of Debt type information) but now on reviewing more of the links, I see that even back in 2012 using the CAFR data obtained to promote public banks, along with conferencing in and out of state alongside attorney Ellen Brown, was intrinsic to his purposes as a solution to excessive accumulation of government assets for the wrong (illogical) reasons.

I see from the header information# (forwarding the “CAFR1: State-Run Banks” article), he was responding to a 9/10/2010 article posted two days earlier by Ellen Brown on her “Web of Debt” but as cited from a different source, promoting a chapter in a book edited by two men associated with the website “GlobalResearch.ca” (#next image with lime-green border and markings).

So, below the CAFR Statement (in 5 annotated images) and lead-in information (from the website where I found it, apparently a blog by Bob Hurt), I will quote from this “Solution to the Federal Debt Crisis” 9/10/2010 article by Ms. Brown, and show more interesting information available on GlobalResearch.ca’s website operators and the two men who seem primarily to be associated with or running the site.

My interest is in part, how or why Carl Herman, whose writings on CAFRs within California, mostly at “Washingtonsblog.org,” are I believe known to those aware of the issue, and who may have been mentored on CAFRs by Walter Burien, (whom he has acknowledged as pioneering the CAFR exposures) ended up conferencing so often with Ms. Brown and joined the “State-Run Banks are the Answer” (or at least a major element of the answer) on-line promotion by ongoing referrals campaign, while Burien has promoted Tax Retirement Funds (TRF) for local venues (governments), venue by venue are the answer at least to ongoing unnecessary taxation to stop the inappropriate stockpiling of “out-of-sight, out-of-mind” major income-producing assets by governments, and to put the public/private partnerships with government and the people on the same page as first-level beneficiary of the revenues from ALL held income-producing assets.

In doing this follow-up on where the “Solutions to Federal Debt,” was re-posted, I also saw more participants in advocating for the “State-Run Banks” solution, including (from a reference in her article) to a “Silicon Valley Attorney” which turns out to have been posted at Stanford University’s “Center for the Internet and Society.” (A Solution to the Federal Debt Crisis? Time for Helicopter Ben to Drop Some Money on Mainstream, 9/10/2010, in GlobalResearch.ca)

OVERALL, IN GENERAL, SEEING THIS CAMPAIGN AND PRO/CON DEBATE:

I advise people to get a hold of the options, be aware of the campaigns, and self-educate on what HAS been taking place with all government stockpiled assets (Burien’s article outlines some of this) to the point of being able to say “Yes,” “No” or “None of the Above” to this issue, and understand independently your basis for either answer.

And then, to take a long, hard look at why we should continue paying taxes to hand over control of pooled investment funds to anyone but ourselves and, if it applies, our progeny in this context.

This financial material is a little more complex than just being aware that institutional funds and off-budget assets exist, another reason I think I’ll keep this part “off-[the other]-post” but remind readers that it’s closely associated with it.

(I see the Burien article is in reply — to his mailing list — of an Ellen H. Brown article suggesting a solution for the debt crisis, which is at the top of the link I provided (and on this image): [hdr-info-ehbrown-9-10-2010-article-a-solution-to-the-fed-debt-crisis-to-wbs-9-12-2010-reply-on-state-run-banks ]

01 CAFR1 on State Run Banks (Jun2010, in 5 images)

02 CAFR1 on State Run Banks

03 CAFR1 on State Run Banks || (This image made larger than others for post layout [display], not to emphasize it more than the other 4)

04 CAFR1 on State Run Banks

05 CAFR1 on State Run Banks

Link from (CAFR1 on State Run Banks) image 01 above, a joint OCC + OTS Mortgage Metrics Report: http://CAFR1.com/STATES/US-TreasuryReports/MortgageJune08.pdf
and cover and overview page from the same) (skyblue banner, images mostly text, only one small table only on 3rd screenprint). 

Read top para (this image, pink markings) carefully! Click to enlarge.

Actually, here’s the entire first section of the Burien article (subtitle 1 to subtitle 2). Notice planned defaults, strategic positioning, and focus on events before and after 2008.  “T” is obviously “trillion.” This article is now nearly seven years old…Some emphases added.

Ever hear of the NWO?  A NWO primarily run by corporatist government attorneys.

Government is the NWO. The NWO is not coming from the outside, it is home grown by institutionalized government finance right here.

Over the last seven decades government investments have quietly taken it all over. The mortgage bailout mentioned in the article I am replying to where 1.25 T was used to buy distressed mortgage bonds at the end of 2008 in reality was used: To bail out government’s own investments to keep themselves in the black.

The 7 T mortgages held through investment were primarily government’s own investment capital invested with the banks; mortgage; and insurance industry. Even China admitted to having 350 B invested. To view the bank mortgage holding report (6.5 T) as of June 2008 that show 3% default and 10% delinquent – http://CAFR1.com/STATES/US-TreasuryReports/MortgageJune08.pdf

I note that the economy collapse at the end of 2008 was specifically due to a forced market free fall as derivatives were used primarily through the offshore institutional government accounts being strategically positioned in advance through derivatives initiated, placed within the stock index; interest rate; precious metals; currency; and energy markets.

Here they aggressively shorted several of the domestic and International markets in preparation for the planned bubble bursting in the housing market and then as the bubble burst they perpetuated the collapse through the selling of physical assets held.

As trillions were lost in market value of physical holdings those short derivative positions sucked over 25 T of wealth out of the world populations pockets.

They did it so fast (over two months) that it destabilized the playing field and in consideration for just having stolen 25 T+ the government rams through using a trillion here and a trillion there of “tax payer revenue” to shore up defaults from the intended marks that were created and thus stabilizing there [“their”] own stealing grounds.

So what is this presentation for state run banks? <==<==<==

Link and surrounding text from Image 4/5 (CAFR on State-Run Banks article) above, report: Comptroller of Currency, Adm. of Nat’l Banks, Q1 2008 (Bank Derivatives), followed by some images from the link:

“As an example JP Morgan Chase Bank is a primary clearing operation for government investments. At the end of 2008 being that derivatives were used as the theft tool, looking at the bank derivative holdings report going into the end of 2008 is very revealing (March 2008) http://CAFR1.com/STATES/ US-TreasuryReports/BankDerivatives March08.pdf

In this bank derivative holdings report on page one it notes that five commercial banks were responsible for over 97% of all derivative activity from all banks and the banks at large 93% of all activity totals.  JP Morgan as noted 2/3rds down in the report in “TABLE 1” their notional derivative position was 90 T (Trillion dollars).

How much of that position was being cleared for government institutional accounts for government institutional investment funds for local governments in NY, CT, MA, NJ, PA, FL, CA, IL, etc.? The Lion’s share is the answer to that question.

Take a look at some of the charts!  You have the link for the charts in their context, right above.  Remember they’re dated March 2008, not July 2017 (!).  That link is interesting reading, and with some extra vocabulary help (there’s a glossary but not all terms are explained) also illuminates what was taking place around this time.

I am responsible for any annotations and which ones I selected; as you can see Burien in his article made a general reference to the whole report, to a specific statement within it (underlined) and to JP Morgan’s position in “Table 1.”  Below are Table 1 (Commercial Banks and Trust Companies).  I also included Table 2 (Holding Companies, measuring the same categories).  I annotated to show the difference between JPM and the others in the riskiest areas.  They do not sound like “the good guys” in this activity!

I picked out some other charts from the same document which spoke to me (not a professional investor, trader, or CPA) showing graphic differences by quarter leading up to 2008).

For example, Image #4, “Derivative Contracts by Product” bar chart with the vertical axis being in trillions of dollars shows major change right before 2008 was most dramatic with the product “Swaps.”  One doesn’t even have to know what “swaps” are to see that it represented the largest part of all products listed, and increased heavily right before the recession; the chart title already indicates it’s under “derivatives.”

(My image numbering except for the obvious #1, is arbitrary). Click any image to enlarge).

#1 from USTreasury OCC’s BankDerivatives Rept March08

#2, from USTreasury OCC’s BankDerivatives Rept March08

#3 from USTreasury OCC’s BankDerivatives Rept March08

#4 from USTreasury OCC’s BankDerivatives Rept March08

5th image I made is the table (Derivatives Contracts by $$ Billions, 4th Quarters 1994 – 2007) , actually from the bottom of the page from which #4 was the top (some overlap of the colorful bar chart included to show this):

#5 from USTreasury OCC’s BankDerivatives Rept March08 (bottom half of the bar chart shown in Image #4, showing some overlap above the table)

**Next quote: (note:  I had no idea who the poster, Bob Hurt is, (forwarding the CAFR1 State Run Banks report to a Google groups forum, topic “lawmen“), but took a look at his website/blog, and found under “My Articles” some on “Florida Adverse Possession” (“FAP”) and an individual who had helped low-income families get into abandoned properties under this Florida law. (“Community Mourns the Passing of a Patriot,” see images below also).

Florida Adverse Possession: There seems to be a built-in a conflict whereby exercising civil rights caused people to be subject to — or at least prosecuted for — criminal law.  The word “adverse” refers to against abandoning landlord, however, they are discussing ways to apparently help both homelessness and poverty while reducing blight, under the adverse possession laws, with recommendations to work with the homeowners who have abandoned property, I think it’s describing, in some state of foreclosure.  (Read for yourself; I only heard of this a few days ago.)

So, some of Bob Hurt’s “My Articles” listed below FYI.  One of them also references matters relating to the IRS and the Constitution from someone I’d run across before (and had minor phone contact with several years ago), John E. Wolfgram.  Interesting situations.

Some of the other articles are, apparently, recommending eugenics (Cure for American Stupidity), or other things I want no association with.  However, where people have done the work to look things up, and it’s relevant, I’ll look. As I said, this are selected articles, mostly on the FAP topic, not the whole list which anyone can easily browse on the site.

Here’s another one, from John Wolfgram (2010), whom I spoke with several years ago; he makes his points better than I could recall them, but here’s an excerpt.  He is responding to an IRS official about the handling of Injured Spouse claim (the Injured (financially) Spouse was his wife, whose (not that large) tax refund was intercepted to repay his earlier defaulted school loan, when they were filing separately.  He is also a Viet Nam Vet and had gone to law school in part to understand how it is that we get involved in unjust wars, done so, and (apparently) started acting on his understanding.  The constant fighting of the IRS, and then false felony charges (which were being repeatedly defeated in court) aggravated other existing PTSD.   My understanding from years ago and conversation is that he was somehow ruled mentally incompetent as an attorney — which his writing and reasoning absolutely did not reflect.

Wolfgram has written on grand juries, and I remember the context may have related to the Center for Judicial Accountability (a link also found, on one of the Bob Hurt articles, “Excise the Bar!”), although he may not agree totally with their assessment of the situation. (Search option on this blog shows I quoted him (from source “Barefoot’s World” 2006) on one of the “Five Featured Related Posts” I’ve been recently mentioning.  See Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update) case-sensitive short-link ending “-7bR” for a link to “Abolishing Representative Government through Regionalism..” where I made this reference to Wolfgram’s writings and State Bar woes. Here’s an image of that quote:

From one of my own posts, this refers earlier to the Wolfgram situation.

I do not remember these specifics, but here the two aspects from this other (BobHurt.com) 2010 account I wish to bring out are the IRS harassment/extortion as systemic, and he also has things to say on legal education..

From LAW – JOHN WOLFGRAM INJURED SPOUSE LETTER TO IRS WITH ACCT REQUEST.PDF (as posted at BobHurt.com under “My Articles”)

Overview:…In August 2004, the Tax Court denied the [Injured Spouse] claim. That should have ended it, except: The position taken by the IRS attorney and the Tax Court were in a bad faith conspiracy to violate the law. That kind of case never ends because it reveals a systematic corruption of the system that rewards arbitrary determinations of law under color of law in perversion of the entire administrative/judicial system.

The corrupt tax court ruling aggravated a Vietnam War related Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which was already intensified by Iraqi War II for which the VA was treating me. I couldn’t deal with the IRS until I recovered, nor would I let my wife do the tax returns. The IRS took an unconscionable advantage by a “Notice of Deficiency” on sale of our home claiming we owed it a quarter million dollars. We proved the sale was tax exempt and not even reportable, but the issue became one of blatant oppression and extortion through repeated threats to get a tax judgment for a quarter million unless we paid $8,000. This was litigated for three years exposing and recording other types of systemic IRS corruption. The IRS extortion ended on the record immediately before trial on my threat to expose it to the tax court in such a way that the court would have to deal with it, and the IRS conceded 97% of its claim before trial as absolutely meritless. Thereafter, another corrupted trial was had on the remaining 3% of the IRS Claim, and again, a corrupted ruling made. That ruling exposes the fact and nature of an officially designed and authorized conspiracy to commit extortion and systematically violate the due process of law involving the IRS Commissioner, the Tax Court Judge and the IRS attorney.

That remaining 3% is now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit. While that is pending I will bring the criminal aspects of that extortion before the federal grand jury, as my duty to the Constitution of the United States requires. And all of this and more because the IRS refused to treat an injured spouse claim fairly. [[pp.1-2]]

and (read p.4 image, then second quote):

Wolfgram IRS ltr, Click to enlarge (if needed), cont’d. on next quote.

(image from p. 4 continued mid-sentence, this is the top of page 5):

…article entitled How the Judiciary Stole the Right to Petition 31 UWLA Law Rev. 257, and then in January 2001, I published Democratizing the Judiciary broadly on the internet, both available by Google to my name or their titles. These two articles describe the judicial problem in the historic, philosophic and legal context and offer an evolutionary solution, which is basically, a solution to Mr. Obama’s quest for transparency and accountability in government.

Why I challenged the DoE Debt: By 1993 I knew enough about how and why judicial corruption occurred and its scope and depth that I could see two separate kinds of “law” in America. One legit, the Constitution and the laws made pursuant to it. The other was illegitimate and in derogation of the Constitution. The problem was that law schools ignored the Constitution as it is written, and neither taught it, nor how to find the Supreme Law of the Land made pursuant to it. Rather, law schools taught a false law, the law of judicial supremacy and stare decisis, and that allowed the courts to make false law out of whole cloth causing massive changes in the direction of the Constitution design. In other words, law schools did not teach law, but rather they taught government propaganda about what the Supreme Court redesigned the law to be. I (and all lawyers) had been defrauded out of a legal education. For most lawyers who were in it for the money, that didn’t matter. But for me, the only reason I became a lawyer was to learn the law to find out what was going on that defeated the Constitutional plan. Oh, I learned that all right, but not from law school. I learned it by fighting a corrupt government toe to toe for four years and taking those cases up to the Supreme Court. I learned through the adversarial process where I could judge the arguments, pro and con, on my own and that cost me terribly.

*** This man, (below) whose long-time companion it says was a real estate agent, was taking significant heat for the activity and being threatened with all kinds of criminal activity regarding his (apparently legal) attempts to help people act on civil rights to occupy abandoned property in exchange for rents, and while maintaining the abandoned properties, finally committed suicide).  Note! By referencing Adverse Possession in Florida (FAP), I’m not taking a position on it, but as so many people know of the robo-signing of foreclosure dockets (incl. in Florida), and are aware of the 2008 recession triggered by major defaults relating to mortgage-backed securities (keep reading, CAFR1 on State-Run Banks, 9/12/2010 article), I thought it was worth mentioning.  Related to the “Community Mourns…” article (title shown in previous numbered article) is an earlier one:

I say that because the last sentence of the lead-in quote to CAFR1: State Bar article, next quote below, may trigger some responses in readers, however notice it’s introduced with the word “besides….” indicating a tongue-in-cheek / expressive reference, not a serious suggestion).

From: https://groups.google.com/ forum/#!topic/lawmen/JnqKTtxYms8

Posted 9/4/2010 by Bob Hurt – http://bobhurt.com – (contact info at bottom of the message) Clearwater, Florida 33763 USA

---

Okay, Economics and Finance Buffs:

Here, Walter Burien makes the point that the US Congress bailout money shored up the US because of its own investments in failing mortgages, and derivatives thereof.

I know that Florida held close to $200 billion in 5000+ indexed securities a couple of years ago.  I have no idea how much of that lay in mortgage backed securities or derivatives thereof.  But multiply that money by about 30 and you have 6 trillion invested by all the states, as reported in their Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports.  And the US government has its own retirement system funds for 2 million employees invested similarly, not to mention other pooled and trust fund money from around the government.  And all of this while running deficit budgets all over the place.

Okay so suppose all the governments in the US have 15 trillion invested, much in real estate-related securities and derivatives.  AND ALL OF THEM support the bailouts to protect their investments, just as they work to stifle water fracturing technology for HHO gas production because,  to support high oil and other energy prices because of the benefit to the tax base, and to support massive indebtedness to the banks.  After all, governments own THOSE ENTERPRISES, through their investments..  It’s bad enough that governments make laws robbing the people through oppressive taxation and deficit spending, without competing directly against the financial interests of all Americans.

So what do you money buffs make of Walter’s analysis, and what do you propose the People do about it, beside shooting every elected official that tolerates the shenanigans?

I’m quoting about half of Ms. Brown’s article; enough to see the basic suggestion (response) to the debt problem of having the US print its way out of the problem, apparently at the state level. (Also see related image with the header info leading into the State-Run Banks CAFR1 response, below):

A Solution to the Federal Debt Crisis? Time for Helicopter Ben to Drop Some Money on Mainstream by Ellen H. Brown, in Center for Research on Globalization (a Montreal-based nonprofit — http://www.globalresearch.ca/about who first established its website after “9/11″<==read!)

(I notice this is also a membership organization featuring Michel Chossudovsky, and to a lesser degree, Andrew Gavin Marshall, based on its membership page)  His “Wikipedia” labels Chossudovsky a 9/11 conspiracy theorist (and professor emeritus of economics at University of Ottawa. (The Wiki is largely negative).  Another search finds him under accusation by the ADL.

More information below this extended quote, with some of my feedback, as posted at GlobalResearch.CA.

Continuing quote from Ellen Brown’s “Solutions” article:

…The Fed’s earlier attempts at QE [Quantitative Easing] involved swapping $1.25 trillion in mortgaged-backed securities (MBS) for dollars created on a computer screen.  As noted in the NPR segment, many of those securities have come due and have gotten paid off, putting cash in the Fed’s till.  The Fed now proposes to use this money to buy long-term Treasury debt rather than MBS.  That means the Fed will, in effect, be buying the government’s debt with dollars created on a computer screen.  The privately-owned Federal Reserve is not actually an arm of the federal government, but if it were, the government would thus be printing its way out of debt – just as Helicopter Ben proposed in 2002.  Recall that he said, “the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press” – the U.S. government, not the central bank that has done all the QE to date.

Running the government’s printing presses to pay its bills has not seriously been tried since the Civil War, when President Lincoln saved the North from a crippling war debt at usurious interest rates by printing Greenbacks (U.S. Notes).  Other countries, however, have tested and proven this model more recently.  They include Germany, which pulled itself out of a massive financial collapse in the early 1930s by printing a form of currency called “MEFO bills”; and Australia, New Zealand and Canada, all of which successfully funded public works in the first half of the twentieth century simply by advancing the credit of the nation.  China, Malaysia, Guernsey, Jersey, India, Argentina and other countries have also revived their economies at critical times by this means.  The U.S. government could do this too.  It could print dollars (or type them into electronic bank accounts) and spend the money on the sorts of local public projects that would put people back to work and get the economy rolling again.

(All emphases, except subtitles, added).  Get the picture?  Economy is slothful, pass the debt burden down to later generations, and do more public works projects.

Yegads!, I have to say from the sidelines, with my awareness of the basic money-laundering aspects of HHS grant-making involvements in a “public benefit” (a kind of public good works) national project called, pushing marriage, fatherhood, and abstinence education, simultaneous with ongoing technical assistance and training to reframe “domestic violence” as a treatable behavioral social disease, and not a crime (while laws against it as a felony remain on the books), and as networked public/privately around the family and juvenile court systems, and schools, and prisons, (and so forth).

In other words what about cleaning up what’s already in place, and cutting back the fraud, and by removing the apparently irresistible greed (and access to vulnerable children) temptations to the white-collar criminal element (not to mention the religiously gullible as their pastors, preachers, priests, rabbis et al. continue participating in marriage education, “divorce innoculation” and chastity programs targeting, sometimes, middle-school children programming, promotion of covenant marriage laws nationwide, and supporting an artificial infrastructure surrounding entire court systems, etc.).  For more info on those topics, read the rest of my blog here!!

Pardon the indignant outburst, and pause to point out the philosophy shown in “let the US print money, let’s have another New Deal Era…”  Continuing….

How to Reverse a Deflation:

Do a Helicopter Drop on the States

The government could pay its bills by issuing Greenbacks as Lincoln did, but it probably won’t, given the current deadlock in Congress.

Watch the next sentence.  The word “therefore” would make it clear that when something is deadlocked (won’t pass Congress) there’s a way to get around it “without asking anyone’s permission…”  Wow.  Coming from the mouth of an attorney, too…. Such respect for the people:

Today only the Federal Reserve Chairman seems to be in a position to act unilaterally, without asking anyone’s permission.  Chairman Bernanke could execute his own plan and generate the credit needed to get the economy churning again, by aiming his “quantitative easing” tool at the states.  After all, if Wall Street (which got us into this mess) can borrow at .2%, underwritten by the Fed as “lender  of last resort,” then state and local governments should be able to as well.  Chairman Bernanke could credit the Fed’s account with money created ex nihilo (out of nothing) and swap it for state and municipal bonds at the Fed funds rate.

A “state” might not qualify as an “individual, partnership or corporation” under Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act, but a state-owned bank would.  Bruce Cahan, an attorney and social entrepreneur in Silicon Valley, California, proposes that the Fed could diversify its role by buying long-term bonds in existing or newly-chartered state-owned banks.  These banks, which would have a mandate to serve state and local communities, would more quickly and accountably lend for in-state purposes than private banks do now. They could be required to use accepted transparency accounting standards to trace how the proceeds of their loans flowed into the economy.  Local needs would thus determine how best to jumpstart and keep alive businesses and households that the “too big to fail” megabanks no longer want to fund on fair credit terms.  Adding a state-owned bank would also bring competition to regional banking markets such as that of the San Francisco Bay area, which are now dominated by out-of-state megabanks.  By funding state-owned banks, the Fed could inject “liquidity” where it is most needed, in local markets where workers are hired and real goods and services are sold.

Ellen Brown is an attorney and the author of eleven books.  In Web of Debt, her latest book, she shows how the Federal Reserve and “the money trust” have usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her websites are webofdebt.com, ellenbrown.com, and public-banking.com.

Read Ellen Brown’s chapter on the Economic Crisis  

NEW BOOK FROM GLOBAL RESEARCH
(click for details)
The Global Economic Crisis

Michel Chossudovsky Andrew G. Marshall (editors)

The original source of this article is webofdebt.com

Copyright © Ellen Brown, webofdebt.com, 2010

THESE ARE ABOVE-REFERENCED SEARCH RESULTS on the TWO AUTHORS BEING PROMOTED (one who appears to run) the Canadian Website GlobalResearch.ca which reposted Ellen Brown’s “Web of Debt” article, “Solutions…”

Again, this post should be read in association with my other one which has a middle section showing more of Mr. Herman’s associations with Ellen Brown and clear advocacy FOR state-run banks: To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order, [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/2017]  (case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”)” which I was working on at the time….

Zionist ADL Attacks Scholar Michel Chossudovsky  (posted at “redicecreations”)
 B’nai Brith Canada files complaint over ‘wild theories’ that blame Jews for 9/11
2005 08 22 Pauline Tam | Canada.com (The Ottawa Citizen)

A Jewish group has filed a complaint to the University of Ottawa against one of its professors after the discovery of content on his website that blames Jews for the terrorist attacks on the United States, and claims the numbers who died at Auschwitz are exaggerated.

“The material on the site is full of wild conspiracy theories that go so far as to accuse Israel, America and Britain of being behind the recent terrorist bombings in London,” said Frank Dimant, executive vice-president of B’nai Brith Canada. “They echo the age-old anti-Semitic expressions that abound in the Arab world, which blame the Jews for everything from 9/11 to the more recent tsunami disaster.”

The organization singles out a discussion forum, moderated by Mr. Chossudovsky, that features a subject heading called “Some Articles On The Truth of the Holocaust.” The messages have titles such as “Jewish Lies of Omission (about the ‘Holocaust’),” “Jewish Hate Responsible For Largest Mass Killing at Dachau,” and “Did Jews Frame the Arabs for 9/11?” …..© The Ottawa Citizen 2005 Article from:

http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=daad3a9e-c2a0-48ea-9680-713f341e0d7a&page=1 

Someone evidently tracked the IP addresses and owners of related or “partner” websites to GlobalRearch.ca, under “KremlinTrolls”  — notice one of the “partner” website was Washingtonsblog (where Carl Herman posts frequently):

Globalresearch.ca:..Old School Wingnuttery with a decided leftward cant (2 Aug 2015)

…The Partners

A good place to start digging into the network is at the sites Chossudovsky lists as “Partners”

• projectcensored.org
• rickrozoff.wordpress.com
• strategic-culture.org
• corbettreport.com
• washingtonsblog.com
• 4thmedia.org
• claritypress.com

Of the above, 4thmedia.org is fun. Operated by Kiyul Chung. The following is his bio, verbatim, from the website of Tsinghua University School of Journalism and Communication, China:  (etc.)  …..

Personnel associated with 4thmedia.org are as follows:

The 4th Media’s International Team
Editor-in-Chief (Korean-American), Kiyul Chung (PhD, Visiting Professor, School of Journalism and Communication, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)

International Advisory Board
Chair: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky (Canada)
Mr. Abayomi Azikiwe (USA/African-American)
Prof. Anis Bajrectarevic (Austria/Former Federal Republic of Yugosaliva)
Dr. Christof Lehmann (Germany/Denmark)
Prof. James M. Craven (USA/Canada/The Blackfoot Nation)
Prof. John C. Raines (USA)
Prof. Kwame Akonor (USA/Africa)
Prof. Murray Hunter (USA/Malaysia)
Dr. Tim Beal (New Zealand)

© 2015 Andrew Aaron Weisburd

Here comes yet another quote, this one from “Syrian Free Press” and also dated 2015. These color schemes, by the way, do not match the original sites where found, some of which had black backgrounds, some white. I’m simply distinguishing the quotes relating to GlobalResearch.ca from others on this post…//LGH.

https://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2015/05/20/terrorism-is-usa-made/

Prominent academic and author Dr Michel Chossudovsky warned that the so-called war on terrorism is a front to propagate America’s global hegemony and create a New World Order.

Dr Chossudovsky said terrorism is made in the US and that terrorists are not the product of the Muslim world.

According to him, the US global war on terrorism was used to enact anti-terrorism laws that demonised Muslims in the Western world and created Islamophobia.

Elaborating on his argument, Dr Chossudovsky said that NATO was responsible for recruiting members of the Islamic state while Israel is funding “global jihad elements inside Syria”.

Dr Chossudovsky, who is also the founder of the Centre for Research and Globalisation, further emphasised that the global war on terrorism is a fabrication, a big lie and a crime against humanity.

Echoing Dr Chossudovsky’s arguments, Malaysia’s prominent political scientist, Islamic reformist and activist Dr Chandra Muzaffar said that the US has always manipulated religion to further its global hegemony on sovereign states.

7-18-2017 additions on reviewing the post….

One more reference on Chossudovsky — RT.com “Op-Edge” author.

Click image to go to website. Chussodovsky is an RT Op-Edge author (See RT About Us page for significance, as well as “Management” (only two people)

Click image to enlarge; #1 of 2, https://www.rt.com/about-us/

Click image to enlarge; #2 of 2, https://www.rt.com/about-us/

Another current (7/15/2017) RT Op-Edge article on NATO aggression and the evils of Western capitalism, with the USA as the head of the imperialist Western, planet-endangering bloc.

Click image to go to article. note author credits.

Displayed on RT.com’s Op-Edge” page, along with several other articles.

As the author William Blum puts it in the preface of the 2014 edition of his bestselling and classic work, Rogue State: A Guide To The World’s Only Superpower, “The American Empire has become the world’s greatest threat, not only to peace but – thanks to its military-industrial-Wall Street-complex – to prosperity, and to the environment as well. The empire has become the world’s greatest weapon of mass destruction.”

The real motive behind Washington’s drive for global dominance was provided by George Kennan, the US State Department mandarin credited with devising the policy of containment vis-à-vis the Soviet Union after the Second World War, which he laid out in an internal memo in 1948: “We have about 50 percent of the world’s wealth,” Kennan writes, “but only 6.3 percent of its population…Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity.”

Maintaining the enormous but contracting disparity of wealth that Washington still enjoys today underlays its foreign policy in our time. NATO’s role in this regard is a sword to advance US foreign policy and economic interests around the world rather than the shield designed to protect and uphold democracy its adherents assert.…. The very existence of NATO is an affront to justice.

And two references (Truthout in CA and Hampton Institute in NY) to Andrew Gavin Marshall

I did not review Andrew Gavin Marshall before publishing this post, just noted that he was mentioned prominently with Chossudovsky on the “GlobalResearch.ca” website.  Here’s a bio blurb from “Truthout” as well as an image, which will give a general idea.  There’s a long list of articles on the same site.  The dates are not displayed, but top one around Dec. 2015, bottom one, 2012.

ANDREW GAVIN MARSHALL
Andrew Gavin Marshall is an independent researcher and writer based in Montreal, Canada. He is Project Manager of The People’s Book Project, head of the Geopolitics Division of the Hampton Institute (see below), Research Director for Occupy.com’s Global Power Project and hosts a weekly podcast show at BoilingFrogsPost.

[From the Hampton Institute website, “Get to Know: Andrew Gavin Marshall,” a more personal narrative on how he got involved in politics.  Born evidently in the mid-1980s, raised in “upper middle class white suburb of Vancouver,” and was 14, with an Afghan friend, at the time of 9/11 (2001 obviously), and,

…As a white male in a Western country, I have had opportunities that do not exist for most people in this world. The only major aspect which can be said to ‘separate’ me from most of my peers is the fact that I am gay, which perhaps has provided me with a broader understanding of what it means to be a ‘minority’, and to know more personally concepts of repression, whether internal or external. I wouldn’t say this was ‘defining’ for my political views and understandings, but it certainly aided their development.

I just (quickly) skimmed through (read) this fairly long article (at Truthout).

The Propaganda System That Has Helped Create a Permanent Overclass Is Over a Century in the Making Wednesday, April 17, 2013 By Andrew Gavin Marshall, AlterNet | News Analysis

…

The development of psychology, psychoanalysis, and other disciplines increasingly portrayed the “public” and the population as irrational beings incapable of making their own decisions. The premise was simple: if the population was driven by dangerous, irrational emotions, they needed to be kept out of power and ruled over by those who were driven by reason and rationality, naturally, those who were already in power.

The Princeton Radio Project, which began in the 1930s with Rockefeller Foundation funding, brought together many psychologists, social scientists, and “experts” armed with an interest in social control, mass communication, and propaganda. The Princeton Radio Project had a profound influence upon the development of a modern “democratic propaganda” in the United States and elsewhere in the industrialized world. It helped in establishing and nurturing the ideas, institutions, and individuals who would come to shape America’s “democratic propaganda” throughout the Cold War, a program fostered between the private corporations which own the media, advertising, marketing, and public relations industries, and the state itself.

I have said similar things in general, in my blogging.

Where these individuals (State-Owned Bank promoters, GlobalResearch.ca) seem to differ with Burien is one is pointing at the private sector, corporations, as the bad guys, whereas Burien is pointing out that the government is by collective investment controlling most of the assets.  See also Bentley Top 500 list (I know I may overuse that reference, but still!!  it makes a point!).  The U.S. Civilian and Military combined — referring to federal government only — would be the largest on the planet.  Bentley used to list them combined, but recently began breaking out civilian from military — and both are still on the Top Ten (hard) Asset Infrastructure Owners of the world.

---

……….The entity Truthout shows up in California (per Charitable Trust Registry) about 2004, with decent income (close to $1M, and thereafter, pretty much over $1M revenues; its registration is current with an occasional “missing documents” or “Schedule B info missing” notice.  The State of California OAG declined to upload, however, about seven years of its earlier tax returns (or RRFs) and any founding documents.  EIN# is 200031641.

Interesting, but here is not the place to show. (Some points: formed 2003 in California; unusual in that it doesn’t acknowledge ANY “program service revenues” (Line 2 for Part VIII) throughout the tax returns, on either page 1 or on the statement of revenues, in other words, per the tax returns, it’s NOT selling subscriptions or other product.  This is unusual, and it’s also reflected in their so-called “Financial Report” embedded within an Annual Report.

Also earlier boards of directors included Marc Ash (paying himself well over $200K for some years), with other directors and officers, ran the organization into the negative, then resigned, leaving Maya Shenwar to pick up the pieces, which was done, apparently in part by cutting her own salary to less than ⅓ of his, and cutting other expenses.  Meanwhile expenses simply listed “Outside Services” in large amounts (at least once over $500K) in earlier returns show up on Line 24 abcde of Part IX, instead of where they would seem to belong, non-employee, professional services, or independent contractors (paid over a certain amount).

I’ll post some excerpts here, but only one (the “Other Expenses over $500K in a budget o $1.6M) is annotated.  Anyone who is more curious may retrace my steps — simply locate the tax returns by EIN# at Form990 finder, then backtrack (altering the YEAR in the URL) and scroll through or skim the various parts of different years’ returns.

The “Truthout” website posts  “financial statements” (so-called — not independently audited, and are within promotional annual reports), and I notice among the advisers is William Ayers. which is likely Chicago area’s Bill Ayers (another supporter/adviser is actor/director Mark Ruffalo.  Current board member Henry A. Giroux received a Paolo Friere award. I have one of his books.  Points made here are partial, see Forms 990 for more info. Notice, you won’t be offered these on the website, that I can see (standard progressive practice…).

https://www.henryagiroux.com

@ http://www.HenryAGiroux.com. (Truthout Bd of Directors) There’s more on the page). Public Intellectuals Project has support from Social and Humanities Research Council of Canada (or similar — click, see bottom of page fine print). NB: Carnegie Mellon, Boston U degrees, 12 yrs at Penn State U, then moved to a Canadian university (McMaster) in 2004, still there.  His status as one of “top 50 educ. thinkers of the modern period” (Routledge honor) happened thus while at PSU.

Truthout (990 description too), shows it’s a political progressive newsletter, and some prominent people, including authors I’ve read, either endorse it or are (now) on the board.  Oh well!

I see also that Andrew G. Marshall is a young man (The Hampton Institute in NY “not yet achieved 501©3 status, though formed in 2013 and clearly flourishing as to contributors, departments and articles, says “26 years old” and chairing their Geopolitics department).  It has a socialist feel, for sure, class struggle, American corporate imperialism, working class radicals, etc.  Below are several images, including a bio of Mr. Marshall.

Images from “HamptonInstitution.org”

Andrew G. Marshall, Image from “HamptonInstitution.org”

Images from “HamptonInstitution.org”

from “HamptonInstitution.org” (“don’t have 501©3 status yet…”)

Images from “HamptonInstitution.org” “WORKING CLASS THINK TANK.” See drop-down menu. When will “501©3” status be achieved? Sounds like they are well up and running….

NY Corporations Search shows “The Hampton Institute” only incorporated Feb. 2017.  It did not show under “CharitiesNYS.com” under a name search.