Ganging Up on the Fed

Should we, like the Sons of Liberty, encourage gangs and thugs to incite violence against the rising tide of oppression fueled by rabid Federal power grabs? Maybe. I'm just sayin..

It wouldn't be a new idea, or a particularly unAmerican concept...it has been done before.

The two original Sons of Liberty organizations (New York City and Boston) quickly established correspondence and communications with ever emerging Sons of Liberty groups in New England, the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia. Typically, members of this organization were men from the middle and upper classes of American colonial society. Although the movement began as a secret society, for reasons of safety and anonymity, the organization quickly sought to build a broad, public base of political support among the colonists. Frequently, cooperation with undisciplined and extralegal groups (city gangs) set off violent actions. Even though the Sons seldom looked for violent solutions and eruptions, they did continue to elicit and promote political upheaval that tended to favor crowd action.

"Crowd action". Hmmmmm. Patriot or Terrorist, guess that depends on your point of view.

Carbonized and Ready for the Scrumping

Holy Smokes, or rather, carbon!

We are about to be bamboozled yet again by the greedy parsites of industry and govenmnet. When, I wonder, would it be a good idea to pluck their engorged bodies from our festering wounds and throw them into the flames?? Now might be good. Before they TAX OUR FREAKING AIR...oops, too late.

New Jersey WatchDog states that they are actually planning on creating an entire derivitives market based on carbon credits, as if TPTB haven't completely bent us all over the economic sofa in EVERY OTHER CATAGORY of derivitive. BTW.. isn't a derivitive basically a "bet" on future performance? Shouldn't that be illegal?

Wikipedia says ...A derivative is a financial instrument - or more simply, an agreement between two people or two parties - that has a value determined by the price of something else (called the underlying).[1] It is a financial contract with a value linked to the expected future price movements of the asset it is linked to - such as a share or a currency. There are many kinds of derivatives, with the most notable being swaps, futures, and options. However, since a derivative can be placed on any sort of security, the scope of all derivatives possible is nearly endless.

Thus, the real definition of a derivative is an agreement between two parties that is contingent on a future outcome of the underlying.


(bet [bɛt]
n
1. an agreement between two parties that a sum of money or other stake will be paid by the loser to the party who correctly predicts the outcome of an event.

Jeepers...that sounds like the same thing. Hmmmm.

Referring to derivatives as stand-alone assets would be a misconception, since a derivative is incapable of having value of its own.

THE DERIVATIVE HAS NO VALUE??? IT DOESN'T EXIST AS A COMMODITY???

However, some more commonplace derivatives, such as swaps, futures, and options, (which have a theoretical face value that can be calculated using formulas, such as Black-Scholes), have been traded on markets before their expiration date as if they were assets.

Soooo. Does that mean any fees, interest or other debt associated with the non valued derivative have a value equal to it...ZIPPO?

The financial industry is preparing a marketplace to handle billions and trillions of dollars of deals – a hot new category of investments to make everyone forget about sub-prime mortgages.

Derivative investments vehicles based on carbon dioxide emissions and RGGI permits are already available through two secondary markets – the Chicago Climate Futures Exchange and the Green Exchange.

Those markets are backed by giants in the financial world. The Green Exchange (GreenEx) is owned by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse and other equity partners. The Chicago Climate Futures Exchange (CCFC) was recently purchased by IntercontinentalExchange Inc. (ICE), which operates the world’s largest energy trading platform.

Though Congress failed to pass legislation for a nationwide system, RGGI ensures that cap-and-trade remains alive in the U.S. The scheme has friends in high places, both on Wall Street and within the Obama Administration. EPA Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson was first vice-chair of RGGI in 2008 while head of NJDEP.

RGGI is the prototype for two other mandatory regional systems scheduled to start in 2012. The Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord will bring cap-and-trade to Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Kansas. The Western Climate Initiative adds California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Mexico, Utah and Montana – plus British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec. Manitoba is a member of both cooperatives.

Together, the three regional systems will encompass 23 states with roughly half of population in the U.S. – plus four Canadian provinces with more than three-quarters of that nation’s populace.

The bottom line: A cap-and-trade system that favors secrecy over public disclosure – and Wall Street over consumers – now has the inside track to become the de facto law of the land, even without an act of Congress.

Now that should scare the flaming crap out of everyone in the entire world that exhales carbon dioxide...yea, even you.