JEWISH MAFIA

"There are two sorts of wealth-getting, as I have said; one is a part of household management, the other is retail trade: the former necessary and honorable, while that which consists in exchange is justly censured; for it is unnatural, and a mode by which men gain from one another. The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural."

- Politics, Aristotle, 350 B.C.

"The Jew alone regards his race as superior to humanity, and looks forward not to its ultimate union with other races, but to its triumph over them all and to its final ascendancy under the leadership of a tribal Messiah."

- Goldwin Smith, The Jewish Question, October 1881

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

- President Woodrow Wilson 1916

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

- David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

- Henry Ford 

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”

- Franklin D. Roosevelt, letter to Col. House, November 21, l933

“One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order.”

- The National Educator, K.M. Heaton

"We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers for ever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will for ever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which it is not in your nature to build."

- Maurice Samuels, You Gentiles, 1924

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

- David Rockefeller 


“Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.”

- Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991



















How to Think Clearly

"Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." –Mark Twain

If you want to begin to understand and appreciate the work of Mike Stathis, from his market forecasts and securities analysis to his political and economic analysis, you will first need to learn how to think clearly. For many, this will be a cleansing process that could take quite a long time to complete depending on each individual.

The best way to begin to clear your mind is to first move forward with this series of steps:

1. GET RID OF YOUR TV SET (at least cancel your cable)

2. REFUSE TO USE YOUR PHONE TO TEXT

3. DO NOT USE A "SMART PHONE" (or at least do not use your phone to access the internet)

4. STAY AWAY FROM SOCIAL MEDIA 

The cleansing process will take time but you can hasten the process by being proactive in exercising your mind.

You should also be aware of a very common behavior exhibited by humans who have been exposed to the various aspects of modern society. This behavior occurs when an individual overestimates his abilities and knowledge, while underestimating his weaknesses and lack of understanding. This behavior has been coined the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" after to sociologists who described it in a research publication. See here.

Many people today think they are virtual experts on every topic they regard with relevance. The reason for this illusory behavior is because these individuals typically allow themselves to become brainwashed by various media outlets. The more information these individuals obtain on these topics from the media, the more qualified they feel they are in these subjects, without realizing that the media is not a valid source with which to use for understanding something. The media always has bias and can never be relied on to represent the full truth.

A perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect can be seen with many individuals who listen to talk radio shows. These shows are politically biased and consist of individuals who resemble used car salesmen more than intellectuals. These talking heads brainwash their audience with cherry-picked facts, misstatements and lies regarding relevant issues such as healthcare, immigration, Social Security, Medicaid, economics, science, and so forth. They also select guests for interview based on the agendas they wish to fulfill with their advertisers.

Once their audience has been indoctrinated by these propagandists, they feel qualified to discuss these topics on the same level as a real authority, without realizing that they obtained their understanding from individuals who are employed as professional liars and manipulators by the media.  Another good example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect can be seen upon examination of political pundits, stock market and economic analysts on TV.  They talk a good game because they are professional speakers. But once you examine their track record, it is clear that these individuals are largely wrong, but they have developed an inflated sense of expertise and knowledge on topics for which they continuously demonstrate their incompetence.

One of the most insightful analogies created to explain how things are often not what you see was Plato's Allegory of the Cave, from Book 7 of the Republic.

We highly recommend that you study this masterpiece in great detail so that you are better able to use logic and reason.Although we recommend you read and study The Allegory of the Cave, you can get a flavor for its meaning by watching the following video. 

If you can learn how to think like a philosopher, specifically one of the great ancient Greek philosophers, it is highly unlikely that you will ever be fooled by con artists like those who make ridiculous and unfounded claims in order to pump gold and silver, the typical get-rich-quick or multi-level marketing (MLM) crowd.





STOP Being Taken

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

King James Bible - Matthew 7:15

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." –Mark Twain

All Viewpoints Are Not Created Equal Just because something is published in print, online or aired in the broadcast media does not make it accurate.  In fact, more often than not the larger the audience, the more likely the content is either inaccurate or slanted. The next time you read something about economics or investments, you should ask two main questions in order to assess the credibility of the source. Is the source biased in any way?   That is, do they have any agendas which would provide any type of benefit accounting for their views? Most individuals either sell ads on their site or are dealers of precious metals or securities. That means their views are biased and cannot be relied upon.

Is your source is credible?  

Most people associate credibility with name-recognition. But more often than not, name-recognition serves as a predictor of bias if not lack of credibility because the more a name is recognized, the more the individual has been plastered in the media. And every intelligent person knows that individuals who have been provided with media exposure because they are either naive or clueless. The media positions these types of individuals as “credible experts” in order to please its financial sponsors; Wall Street. 

Instead of name-recognition or media celebrity status, you must determine whether your source has relevant experience on Wall Street as opposed to being self-taught. But this is just a basic hurdle that in itself by no means ensures the source is competent or credible. More important, always examine the track record of your source in depth, looking for accuracy and specific forecasts rather than open-ended statements. You must also look for timing since a broken clock is always right once a day.  Finally, make sure they do not cherry-pick their best calls. Always examine their entire track record. 

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

King James Bible - Matthew 7:15

The above questions require only slight modification for use in determining the credibility of sources that discuss other topics, such as politics, healthcare, etc.We have compiled the most extensive publication exposing hundreds of con men pertaining to the financial publishing and securities industry, although we also cover numerous con men in the media and other front groups since they are all associated in some way with each other. There is perhaps no one else in the world capable of shedding the full light on these con men other than Mike Stathis. Mike has been studying the indistry for well over a decade. Alhough he has published numerous articles and videos addressing this dark side of the industry, the entire collection can be found in our ENCYCLOPEDIA of Bozos, Hacks, Snake Oil Salesmen and Faux Heroes
At AVA Investment Analytics, we don't try to pump gold, silver or equities like many others you see because we are not promoters or marketers. And we do not receive any compensation whatsoever (including from ads) from our content. We provide individual investors, financial advisers, analysts and fund managers with world-class research, education and unique insight.







Media Lies

If you listen to the media, most likely it is costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost money at minimum over the course of your lifetime. The deceit, lies and useless guidance from the financial media certainly is a large contributor of these losses to the sheep you pay attention.

But a good deal of lost wealth comes in the form of excessive consumerism which the media seeks to impose on its audience. You aren’t going to know that you’re being brainwashed or that you have lost $1 million or $2 million over your life time due to the media, but I can guarantee you that with rare exception this is the reality for those who are naïve enough to waste time on the media.

It gets worse. By listening to the media, you are likely to also suffer ill health effects through the lack of timely coverage of toxic prescription drugs or through the ridiculous medical shows, all of which are supportive of the medical-industrial complex.

And if you seek out the so-called "alternative media" you might make the mistake of relying on con men like Kevin Trudeau or Alex Jones. This could be a deadly decision. As bad as traditional media is, the so-called "alternative media" is even worse.


Why Does the Media Air Liars and Con Men?

The goal of the media is NOT to serve its audience because the audience does NOT pay the bills.

The goal of the media is to please its sponsors, or the companies that spend huge dollars buying ads, and in order for companies to justify these expenses, they need the media to represent their cause. The media does this by airing idiots and con men who mislead and confuse their audience.

By engaging in "journalistic fraud," the media steers its audience into the arms of its advertisers because the audience is now misled and confused, so in the case of the financial media, it seeks the assistance of Wall Street brokerage firms, mutual funds, insurance companies, precious metals dealers. This is why advertisers pay big money to be promoted in the financial media.

We see the same thing on a more obvious note in the so-called "alternative media," which is really a remanufactured version of the so-called "mainstream media." Do not be fooled. There is no such thing as the "alternative media." 

In order to be considered "media" you must have content that has widespread channels of distribution. Thus, all "media" is widely distributed and the same powers that control the distribution of the so-called "mainstream media" also control the distribution of the so-called "alternative media."

The claim that there is an "alternative media" is merely a sales pitch designed to capture the audience that has since given up on the "mainstream media."  The tactic is a very common one used by con men.

The same tactic is used by Washington to convince naive voters that there are meaningful differences between the nation's two political parties. In reality, both parties are essentially the same when it comes to issues that matter most (trade policy, healthcare and war). Anyone who tells you anything different simply isn't thinking straight.

On this site, we expose the lies and the liars in the media. We discuss and reveal the motives and track record of the media’s hand-selected charlatans with a focus on the financial media.  











Why Stathis Was Banned

No one has generated a more accurate track record in the investment markets over the past several years than Mike Stathis. Yet, the financial media wants nothing to do with Stathis.

You aren't even going to hear him on the radio being interviewed.

You aren't going to see him mentioned on any websites either.

You won't read or hear of his remarkable track record unless you read about it on this website or read his books.

You should be wondering why this might be. Some of you already know the answer.

The media has banned Mike Stathis because the trick is to air clowns so that the audience will be steered into the hands of the media's financial sponsors - Wall Street and gold dealers.

And as for the radio shows and websites that either don't know about Stathis or don't care to hear what he has to say, the fact is that they are so stupid that they assume those who are plastered in the media are credible. And since they haven't seen or heard Stathis in the media, even if they come across him, they automatically assume he's a nobody in the investment world simply because he has no media exposure.

Well, if media exposure was a testament to knowledge, credibility and excellent track records, Peter Schiff's clients would be a lot happier when they looked at their account balance.

Others only care about pitching what’s deemed as the “hot” topic because this sells ads in terms of more site visits or reads. This is why you come across so many websites based on doom and conspiratorial horse shit run by con artists looking to cash in on ads.

We have donated countless hours and huge sums of money towards the pursuit of exposing the con men, lies and fraud. We continue this mission but we cannot continue it forever without your assistance.

We have been banned by virtually every media platform in the U.S and every website (mainly because we expose the truth about gold and silver).

We have been banned from use of email marketing providers.

The fact is that the Jewish Mafia has declared war on us because we have exposed the realities of the U.S. government, Wall Street and corporate America.

Note that we only began discussing the role of Jews in criminality by 2009, three years AFTER we had been black-listed by the media, so no one can say that our criticism of the Jewish Mafia has led to being black-listed, not that it would even be acceptable.

You can talk about the Italian Mafia, and Jewish Hollywood can make 100s of movies about it...

BUT YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT THE JEWISH MAFIA.

We rely on you to help spread the word about us. Just remember this. We don’t have to do what we are doing.

We could do as everyone else and focus on making money. We are doing sacrificing everything because in this day and age, unfortunately, the truth is revolutionary. It is also critical in order to prevent the complete enslavement of world citizenry.   

Rules to Remember

On Exposure: No one who has significant exposure can be trusted because those who are responsible for permitting such exposure have allowed it for a very good reason, and that reason does not serve your best interests.

On Spotting Frauds: Whenever you wish to know whether someone can be trusted, always remember this golden rule..."a man is judged by the company he keeps."

This is a very important rule to remember because con men almost always belong to the same network.

You will see the same con artists referencing each other, on blog rolls and so forth.

  • JEWISH MAFIA
  • How to Think Clearly
  • STOP Being Taken
  • Media Lies
  • Why Stathis Was Banned
  • Rules to Remember
  • X close
Alerts

A Closer Look at the Wealth and Income Disparity

Originally published in the August 2012 Intelligent Investor, Part 2 (expanded to include previous publications)

 

The large wealth and income inequality in the U.S. has continued to widen for nearly three decades. Over the past few years the disparity has become even larger. For instance, the top 1% of income earners in the U.S. account for 21% of aggregate income.

Meanwhile, the wealthiest 1% own about 35% of the nation’s wealth. Finally, the top 20% of income earners account for nearly 40% of total consumption (more detail on this topic has been presented in several previous issues).

My first discussion of the wealth and income disparity in the United States began in America’s Financial Apocalypse. This book was released in 2006 when discussion of this topic was considered somewhat ridiculous to those in the investment world. 

Washington likes to remind critics that Americans enjoy the highest living standard in the world. As evidence of this, government “experts” discuss statistics such as GDP growth, wealth, income and wage growth, and other economic indicators without defining exactly what they are referring to (see Chapter Eleven for a detailed discussion).

In fact, when one examines the data, it’s clear that only America’s wealthiest 5 percent have benefited from the credit-driven economic expansion that began over two decades ago.

Shortly after 1980, real incomes of the top 5 percent of Americans soared over the next two decades from about 3.5 times to 5.5 times the median income (in 2001 dollars).

In contrast, real incomes for the bottom 80 percent of Americans barely moved during this period, while inflation for basic necessities (such as healthcare, energy, and higher education) soared. These increased expenses have further reduced the disposable income of the majority of Americans.

In contrast, the post-war economic expansion was much more evenly distributed across all wage earners. This balanced expansion continued until the high inflation period of the early ‘80s.

Even more disturbing is that America’s wealth disparity is much greater, with the top 5 percent having accounted for a much larger percentage of wealth growth from the decade since 1979 than the bottom 95 percent.

Ten years later, the results are even worse, with the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans having on average 23 times the wealth of the remaining 95 percent. The problem is that households with low net worth have very few assets and will therefore be affected more by price increases in basic necessities.

In addition, they will be less able to weather unexpected difficulties, such as medical emergencies or a job loss. Accordingly, Edward Wolff has estimated that 40 percent of households headed by individuals aged 25 to 54 could exhaust all of their financial assets (excluding their home) within 1 week if they lost their income.

While America’s wealthiest 5 percent have received a much greater percentage of the nation’s wealth for over two decades, the remaining 95 percent have benefited very little. When we compare top and bottom income and wealth levels to other nations, America begins to resemble the land of opportunity for only a select few.

America’s poorest 10 percent has less purchasing power than almost every other developed nation. Meanwhile, its wealthiest 20 percent own almost 80 percent of all household wealth (figure 4-5). And compared to other developed nations, America has the largest income gap between the top 10 percent of income earners and the median income, as well as the largest gap between median income and the lowest 10 percent of income earners.

 


 


 


 

 

Finally, the U.S. government does much less to help raise the living standards of its impoverished citizens compared to other developed nations.

What was once a nation of fairness, opportunity and moderation has become a nation of favoritism and extremes. Some view America’s economic strength to be confirmed by the annual growth of new millionaires. However, this has come at the expense of shifting more Americans into poverty or near poverty.

Two decades ago, most Americans began to use credit to purchase goods and services that they couldn’t afford. And during the 1990s, this greed became more intense. Today we see the effects of three decades of economic decline, as many now use their credit cards to pay for basic necessities.

To illustrate these consumption trends, consider the American staple; the house. Three decades ago, the average American family consisted of about 4.5 individuals with an average home size of about 2200 square feet.

Today, with about 3.6 family members, the average family now has a home that’s about 3500 square feet. That represents an increase in size (per individual) of 100 percent. Instead of having fewer bedrooms, the average home now has more. As well, today’s average new home has many additional rooms that didn’t exist in the past such as a study, an entertainment room, Jacuzzi room, and others.

These consumption trends have extended to the number and size of autos, televisions, and other goods purchased by the average American family.

Americans need to ask themselves if they really need to consume so much, and if so, whether they’re producing enough to justify such consumption. Data shows that they are consuming much more than they are producing. And this is gradually causing them to mortgage their nation off to foreigners.

 


 


 

 

Similar to many third-world nations that have an inadequate manufacturing infrastructure, America has reverted to a service economy. It’s becoming a nation of the ‘haves and have nots,’ similar to third-world societies. The ‘have-nots’ continue to reach for what they cannot afford through credit spending. In some cases, we already see a change in the way Americans are using credit; from greed to need—paying for necessities with their credit cards.

Source: America’s Financial Apocalypse, 2006.

 

In late 2010, I discussed more recent poverty data.  

In 2009 Americans earning more than $100,000, or 20% of the U.S. population received 50.3% of the nation’s total income. In contrast, the bottom 40% of Americans received a mere 12% of the nation’s income. Americans considered below the government’s official poverty line (14.3%) received only 3.4% of the income.

For the nation’s top 20% of income earners, this represents an increase from a decade ago in 1999, when the top 20% received 49.4% of the income. Meanwhile, the nation’s poorest were slightly better off a decade ago, when the bottom 40% received 12.5% of the income.

This is remarkable considering the fact that higher-income earners were likely to have lost a significant amount of their wealth (and income due to dividends and capital gains) from stock market losses, whereas the nation’s lowest income earners were much less likely to have suffered losses in the stock market.

In 2008, the wealthiest 10% of U.S. households received 48.2% of the nation’s total income, up from 34.6% in 1980. Thus, much of this increase was due to the growth of incomes in the top 10% of income earners.

Specifically, the top 1% received a much higher percentage in gains, helping to raise the 20% group. Between 1980 and 2008, the share of the nation’s total income going to the top 1% rose from 10% to 21%. This places the U.S. as one of the most unequal nations in the world.

 

 

I have discussed the fact that real median wages have not increased since 1999 ever since writing about this trend in America’s Financial Apocalypse. The latest data by the Census confirms this trend is alive and well. According to the Census, the inflation-adjusted income of the median U.S. household fell 4.8% between 2000 and 2009.

What does all of this mean? 

As I discussed in America’s Financial Apocalypse and have continued to emphasize since that time, America’s middle-class is becoming extinct.

Meanwhile, the impoverished are becoming poorer. The main reason for this trend is due to the excessive inflation seen in basic goods and services, such as food, energy, healthcare and education, all while Washington partners with corporate America to send good jobs overseas in order to enrich the wealthy elite.  

The topic of U.S. trade policy is one that I have been detailing ever since my first discussion in America’s Financial Apocalypse. Good jobs, millions of them have been exported overseas by corporations only concerned with locating the source of cheapest labor. This has a dual effect on the wealth and income gap seen in the U.S. because the wealthiest Americans tend to have largest investments in U.S. corporations.

As Ford Motor, Dell Computers, IBM, and every other U.S. corporation sends jobs to China, India, and other nations, shareholders of these companies make more money because labor costs have been reduced.

The simple fact of the matter is every time you see someone driving an expensive car or pulling up to a large house, you should by no means envy this person.

Most likely, this individual is either in some way responsible for the job you once had before it was shipped off to India, or else this wealthy individual has profited from your lost job. This is the new never-mentioned reality of America.

So how did the top 1% benefit disproportionately from the gains made by U.S. productivity over the past several decades? 

There are many reasons accounting for the wealth and income inequality in the U.S. Certainly, they reaped tremendous benefits as large shareholders of U.S. equities.

But they also received a large proportion of benefits through the advantageous laws and tax breaks afforded to their businesses, as well as their estates.

Regardless their source of income, personal tax rates have provided a large chunk of the gains from the economic productivity over the past several decades.

There are many other obvious factors, such as suppression of the minimum wage and the effects of globalization (so-called “free trade,” illegal alien immigration, and declining union membership). Among OECD (developed nations) the United States has the highest percentage of workers earning low wages.

In addition, the incidence of low-wage work in the U.S. has been rising for more than three decades. This is great news for domestic-based corporations, but terrible news for those interested in maintaining a strong economy driven by consumer demand. 

Today, nearly 50% of the U.S. population is receiving some form of government assistance, up from 30% in the early 1980s.

In addition to other factors such as declining union membership and globalization, the shift in retirement savings plans from defined benefit to defined contribution has been a significant contributor to the wealth and income inequality. The gradual shift from pension to 401(k) plans has been one of the most commonly underappreciated factors that have led to inequality.

Over the past three decades, U.S. corporations have reduced or eliminated their private pension plans (defined benefit plans), replacing them with less expensive defined contribution or 401(k) plans.

Today, defined benefit pensions now make up only 3% of private sector pensions in the U.S. Public employee pension programs are also in decline and will continue to shrink due to budget pressures.

Why is the issue of income inequality significant? 

Besides its importance as a foundation of equity, societies with high levels of income inequality have historically instituted economic policies that have fallen short of their long-term economic growth potential.

But there are many additional side effects seen in nations with high levels of income inequality, such as the formation of a “class society,” reduced intergenerational mobility and so forth.  These are issues that can lead to social unrest and political uprisings if not civil war.

Short of radical domestic and foreign economic policy changes, the easiest method to mitigate income inequality is through implementation of progressive tax and transfer policies. However, this in itself is not necessarily an effective approach.

For instance, U.S. tax and transfer policies are among one of the least effective in reducing income inequality. Thus, specific allocation of basic resources is to low income groups is also needed to ensure they can focus on improving their economic status.

The most common method used to measure income inequality across nations is the Gini coefficient. This is an index ranging from 0 to 1, with a value of 0 corresponding to equal incomes across the population, while a value of 1 corresponds to all of the income being received by one household.

Although most nations have changed their economic policies over the decades resulting in various changes to income inequality, it is thought that one of the leading driving forces behind an increase in income equality throughout the globe over the past four decades has been due to skill-based technological change. According to this theory, the middle class has received the brunt of the effect of technological innovations due to their replacement in the work force with machines, robotics and other automated devices.

 

 

 

 

We believe that the primary factor that has contributed to the largest increase in income inequality in developed nations over the past two decades has been globalization. When economists attribute the impact of globalization to increases in income inequality in the developed world, they usually distinguish between globalization, reduction (relative to inflation) in minimum wage, and the decline union membership and influence. As you can appreciate, these latter two factors are really offshoots of globalization.

Increased access to low-income nations due to the mandates of globalization has caused corporations to gain much more bargaining power over employees. As a result, wages have been selectively suppressed at the lower end of the labor force due to the competitive effects of outsourcing.

As well, this same dynamic of so-called “open competition” has led to the decline of unions and other vehicles for collective bargaining. For instance, the percentage of private sector workers covered by unions in the U.S. declined from over 20% in the mid-1970s, to less than 10% in 2010.

Unions have also been weakened by the increased use of illegal immigrant labor. Furthermore, minimum wage increases have not kept up with inflation for many years. In part, illegal immigration has helped suppress cost-of-living increases to minimum wage. This has been a problem in many nations in addition to the U.S.

Of course, the competitive effects utilized by corporations have not been adjusted for other economic factors from nation to nation. As a result, globalization has permitted nations in the advanced world to exploit various macroeconomic disparities in developing nations for their own benefit, leaving domestic workers in the dust.

Some of these disparities include different trade laws and regulations, differences in government social transfers between nations, differing laws regarding collective bargaining, employer-based versus universal healthcare, national versus employer-based pensions and so forth. 

Finally, the rapid growth and exorbitant compensation plans seen in the financial sector have also been responsible for rising income inequality.

 

 

 

 

 


Print article

Restrictions Against Reproduction: No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner and the Publisher.

These articles and commentaries cannot be reposted or used in any publications for which there is any revenue generated directly or indirectly. These articles cannot be used to enhance the viewer appeal of any website, including any ad revenue on the website, other than those sites for which specific written permission has been granted. Any such violations are unlawful and violators will be prosecuted in accordance with these laws.

Article 19 of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.


Cheaters Never Win: The Case Against Ethanol

I find it ridiculous that Washington has led America into another trap by supporting ethanol. By now, we all know how expensive it is to produce ethanol from agricultural sources. This is especially t...

0:00
0:00