After the shortest melt season on record, Arctic sea ice extent has grown almost two million km² and is now approaching the highest extent for the date in the last ten years.
The National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado of course fails to mention any of this in their October 6 report.
Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag
Yes, everyone gets a trophy, even fourth place.
2015 Arctic ice extent was below 5M km2 (2014 minimum) for only 28 days. Obsessing over 1 month (September) is just wrong.
Ahh, but remember all of the press reports when the ice cover dipped over a one week period back in March? Never mind the fact that after that dip the ice cover continued to increase. Lots of obsessing over that.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/03/24/science/earth/arctic-ice-low-winter-maximum.html?_r=0
I guess obsessing over that week period was “just right” and if we do see a similar “record” for maximum cover on a date that we will see a similar outpouring of reports from the NY Times and the Guardian highlighting the event.
We can deduce that the Manbearpig is going to gay Parie.
How much fun we will have when it snows in France in the beginning of December.
Le temp dans France aujordhui est tres beaux. Mais, demain je ne sais pas.
Wouldn’t it be great if a number of events prior to the December thing, made it plainly obvious that the AGW crowd are lying about practically everything.
It’s likely only a fond dream. The current long-range weather forecasts don’t support it. However, the idea that the forecasts can drastically change is not without hope.
This just means the Paris-ites will be just that much more desperate to ram through an agreement that strips nations of their National Sovereignty and allows the UNELECTED, TOTALLY CORRUPT UN bureauRats the ability to directly TAX the citizens of the world.
This is the 35 page detailed UN document entitled: Draft outcome document of the United Nations summit for the adoption of the post-2015 development agenda. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (I am waiting for my blood pressure to go down before I read the darn thing.)
The International Banksters of course are pushing this for all they are worth.
Financing the Post-2015 Development Agenda
And out of WHOSE pockets are all those trillions supposed to come? The West is already up to their ears in ‘unsustainable’ debt!
2013: The International Monetary Fund Lays The Groundwork For Global Wealth Confiscation
Do you have 10% of your home equity squirreled away so you can pay this one-off tax? (Remember they will have already raided your other assets and stripped 10%)
***************
Steven Yates, five years ago wrote From Carroll Quigley to the UN Millennium Summit: Thoughts on the New World Order
In short the goals were:
1. A global “peacekeeping force,” publicly endorsed Wednesday by Bill Clinton.
2. An International Criminal Court (It now exists: “..The International Criminal Court
The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the first permanent international judicial body capable of trying individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so…” That is the court where the ClimAstrologists want to haul skeptics. BTW.)
3. A global system of taxation. That is what CAGW has always been about.
4. Global coerced redistribution of wealth and income. That is to be part of the Paris-ite agreement.
8. International public education (Think Common Core)
9. International equivalents of affirmative action and minimum wage laws. (So much for Obama’s $15/hr wage. I wonder if the Unions are aware of this?)
10. Complete absolution of past debts: [Governments should] “cancel the debts of developing countries…” (Realize US tax payers are the major source of funds for the World Bank so this is US tax payer assets being written off — not that we have any claim on those assets anymore, we just get stuck paying the Federal Debt.)
11. Universal gun registration: the UN should “expand the UN Arms register in order to show production and sale of small arms and light weapons. (Obama already Signed this treaty, June 3, 2013.)
12. Strengthening UN power generally: “A major task of the world community in the twenty-first century will be to strengthen and greatly enhance the role of the United Nations in the global context. Governments must recommit themselves to the realization of the goals and mandates of the United Nations Charter.
13. Elimination of veto power. (One nation can no longer over ride the ‘will’ of the rest of the vultures. — A pack of wolves voting to help themselves to what wealth is left in the USA.)
Government can only exist with the consent of the governed. When the costs of government outweigh the so-called benefits, consent is withdrawn. When the laws are applied to the “little people” and the “rulers” appear to be exempt (think Hillary) consent dwindles as the concept of justice starts to look more and more like a rigged shell game.
They (politicians and bankers) really screwed-up exempting themselves from the rule-of-law, nothing loses trust and support faster than a blatant double-standard.
It is looking like that consent is dwindling rapidly.
Sorry, but us bankers are not to blame. I did not vote for Obama, Clinton, or Carter. And this banker, like most, is for smaller government and transparency.
Note I am distinguishing the small town/state bankers from the INTERNATIONAL BANKSTERS. E. M. Smith said they are no longer ‘just Bankers’ but have branched. I am sorry that you do not like the facts gator, but the big international bankers, especially those controling the IMF, World Bank & The Bank for International Settlements control this world.
Network of 147 Companies Controls Nearly 40% of Global Economic Value of Transnational Corporations
The paper: The Network of Global Corporate Control
Top 25 control-holders from above:
The way these entities control so much is through investing YOUR money and splitting off control while limiting their financial exposure. It is a real win-win-win for them since they not only get control of the stock they also get paid no matter what happens. This is done via mutual funds or the like where YOUR money is invested but THEY vote the stock. SEE A Brief History Of The Mutual Fund
****************************
1 BARCLAYS PLC – a global financial services holding company with 5 business segments: Personal and Corporate Banking, mortgages, investment management, credit card
2 CAPITAL GROUP COMPANIES INC, maintained by Capital Bank and Trust Company (“trustee”), which has retained an affiliate to serve as investment adviser to the trustee for the CITs. comment on the proposed rule known as the “Volcker Rule”
3 FMR CORP Fidelity Investments is a mutual fund owned and voted by the Johnson family.
4 AXA – France, Retail banking, Asset management and other financial services, insurance large multinational companies, IT service provider
5 STATE STREET CORPORATION – world’s leading providers of
financial services to institutional investors
6 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. – a leading global financial services firm and one of the largest banking institutions in the United States , with operations worldwide.
7 LEGAL & GENERAL GROUP PLC – a British multinational financial services company headquartered in London, provides various insurance products and services worldwide.
8 VANGUARD GROUP, INC., – mutual funds
9 UBS AG CH – Financial services for private, corporate and institutional clients
10 MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC. – the wealth management division of Bank of America, provides investment, financing, and other related services
11 WELLINGTON MANAGEMENT CO. L.L.P. – investment management in global capital markets.
12 DEUTSCHE BANK AG – banking products and services like private banking, business banking insurance, investment, wealth management
13 FRANKLIN RESOURCES, INC. – a global investment management organization
14 CREDIT SUISSE GROUP CH – integrated global bank
15 WALTON ENTERPRISES LLC – operates as a financial services company. It is a a family limited liability company used to invest the funds owned by the Waltons, owners of Walmart and Sam’s Club.
16 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP. – Providing financial services to institutions, corporations, and high net worth individuals. (Well they aren’t shy are they?)
17 NATIXIS – the international corporate, investment management and financial services arm of Groupe BPCE, the second-largest banking player in France.
18 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC., – global investment banking, securities and investment management firm
19 T. ROWE PRICE GROUP, INC. – Mutual Funds
20 LEGG MASON, INC. – global investment management firm
21 MORGAN STANLEY – investment firm specializing in wealth management, investment banking
22 MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. – Consumer, Corporate & Investment Banking, Asset Management
23 NORTHERN TRUST CORPORATION – banking to corporations
24 SOCIÉTÉ GÉNÉRALE – French bank
25 BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
– An American multinational banking and financial services corporation. It is the second largest bank holding company in the United States by assets.
Lincoln said,
A Trillionaires Delight
The above article goes on and relates the history of the fight between European Banking interests and the US government on whether or not they would take control of the USA via control of our nation’s money.
This article looks at the Tea Party/anti-IRS tax protesters that the MSM calls ‘crazy’
There is a lot more history and then the article says,
Dodd-Frank is proof positive that banks do not run the world, or this country.
Well I hope your bank has cut their ties to the US Chamber of Commerce. Those butt heads have really shown their true colors over the last few years and they ain’t Red White and Blue for sure.
Actually, we have cut ties with the COC. We found a better association.
It is looking like that consent is dwindling rapidly.
…………
It certainly does, from
The Rasmussen Reports:
19% Think Federal Government Has Consent of the Governed.
26% Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction
59% of GOP Voters Say Republicans in Congress Out of Touch with Party’s Base
April 18, 2014 – Forty-seven percent (47%) of Likely U.S. Voters do not Fear the Federal Government. … 54% consider the federal government today a threat to individual liberty rather than a protector. Just 22% see the government as a protector of individual rights, and that’s down from 30% last November.
September 10, 2015 …just nine percent (9%) of Likely U.S. Voters think Congress is doing a good or excellent job overall, while 63% rate the current Congress poorly. …just 18% think most congressmen care what their constituents think.
July 09, 2015 – Is Congress for Sale? … Voters think most members of Congress do a lousy job and probably have sold their vote for cash or to a contributor. … Only 16% don’t think most members of Congress would sell their vote. ….Just 31% of voters think their local congressional representative agrees with them ideologically. Men feel more strongly than women do that Congress is for sale.
June 18, 2015 Voters Don’t Want Big Government, But They Think It’s Back — Nearly 20 years ago, Bill Clinton declared the era of big government over.(ROTFLMAO!!!) Two decades later, voters wish that were true. …just 18% of Likely U.S. Voters think the era of big government is over
June 17, 2015 Voters see an overly powerful government as a bigger danger in the world than an under-powered one. 62% Say Government Has Too Much Power in America. Today Nearly two-out-of-three Americans believe the government has too much power in this country and that too many of their fellow countrymen are dependent on the government for financial support.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Another method is to look at the actual withdrawal of support for governments. Shadow Economies Grow as People Flee High Taxes and Stiff Regulations
Gail, would that be the same World Bank and IMF that has a 4 step plan for any nation to be taken over and stripped of assets.
Step One is Privatization – which Stiglitz said could more accurately be called, ‘Briberization.’ Rather than object to the sell-offs of state industries, national leaders – using the World Bank’s demands to silence local critics – happily flogged their electricity and water companies at the prospect of 10% commissions paid to Swiss bank accounts for simply shaving a few billion off the sale price of national assets.
Step Two Capital Market Liberalization. – Stiglitz calls this the “Hot Money” cycle. Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation’s reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation’s own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.
Step Three: Market-Based Pricing w/ Step-Three-and-a-Half: what Stiglitz calls, “The IMF riot.” This economic arson has it’s bright side – for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices. A pattern emerges. There are lots of losers in this system but one clear winner: the Western banks and US Treasury, making the big bucks off this crazy new international capital churn.
Step Four of what the IMF and World Bank call their “poverty reduction strategy” Free Trade. Taking a World Bank loan for a school ‘triggers’ a requirement to accept every ‘conditionality’ – they average 111 per nation – laid down by both the World Bank and IMF. In fact, said Stiglitz the IMF requires nations to accept trade policies more punitive than the official WTO rules.
Writen in 2001 with examples of 1995 Russia, Bolivia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Ethiopia and Brazil. Greece is just the latest in line.
Good concise description.
I usually use The Whirled Bank Group’s description of the Structural Adjustment Program
But that one is a better description.
This one is good too:
OUCH!
That isn’t just some nobody economist speaking!
Borrowing money to spend on a solution that won’t work for a problem that doesn’t exist claiming legal authority they don’t have. Sounds like a winner.
RC, best post on the absurdity we face. President Camacho would be proud of the Idiocracy.
Only if you are on the receiving end of all the interest on the debt.
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
Wasn’t Carbon dioxide, aka “carbon pollution” meant to have melted Arctic sea ice completely away by now?
Why then is Arctic Sea Ice currently breaking record growth cycles?
Am I missing something?
Slightly OT, but a great article on JoNova about Chinese CO2
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/10/factories-in-china-produce-four-times-as-much-co2-as-western-factories/
Shows the utter futility and stupidity of any carbon tax or similar that drives manufacturing to China.
It will ALWAYS lead to massively INCREASED global CO2 emissions.
Yes, that was a great article.
Interesting that there is a SUSTAINABILITY push that you should only by locally grown food but everything else (including your job) can be exported oversea with the associated transport costs.
Too bad the Progressive Useful Idiot can’t think their way out of a paper bag.
…..
OH, speaking about Progressives, I wandered onto a site yesterday where they had an bit of news/propaganda and at the end you rated the article by how it made you FEEL. I wandered around the site and all the articles had that type of rating.
Wee bit of psychological experimentation going on there?
(Sorry I did not keep the link)
Shocker that I would actually post and point out some obvious points. But before I do I will admit that apparently Tony and I are operating off of differing government data. He chooses to exaggerate the data for some reason but here is what is also known.
In mid-September when Tony posted one of his first “record arctic sea ice growth” articles, the arctic sea ice anomaly was -1.425 million sq. kms. He posted another a couple of weeks later and the anomaly was -1.533 million sq kms. He now posts another one and I think the anomaly is -1.761. My guess is that it will go up a bit further and may even break -2M sq kms this year, which would, I believe, be the 4th lowest in the last 35 years.
So the sea ice extent is continuing to fall behind the average ice extent for this time of year and yet there is “record growth” and it is continuing. Anybody here intellectually honest enough to admit that the data is mixed and that the claim that there is record sea ice growth isn’t exactly true?
Further, anybody here want to make predictions about sea ice extent in the next few weeks based off of this graph?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.arctic.png
As I said, I think that the anomaly is going to grow (i.e. head to -1.8, -1.9 or even -2.0) in the near future. If there were record growth it will shrink and move to -1.3 or lower rather quickly since Tony says we have had record sea ice growth when the anomaly was -1.425.
The other thing I would point out is that NSIDC recently said that old ice actually shrank. Several people here were saying that it has been increasing and will continue to do so. So is there another metric out there that shows that in 2015 that old ice increased? If so, could somebody show me a link.
Tony wrote “Record Growth”. Growth means rate of increase.
2015 has the steepest incline of any September- October on the ice extent charts going back to 1979. That’s record growth due to the Arctic being very very cold below minus 20C.
NSIDC 2015 chart shows older ice survival has increasing trend since 2007
Most long termers here know a lot of old ice was expelled through Fram Strait in 2007. It appears since then that, from NSIDC data as the Arctic is cooling Y-O-Y, the sea ice age, extent and snow coverage is increasing. It has definitely NOT “All Disappeared” as Al Gore, James Hansen and the UNIPCC require us to believe. Their own data shows it.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/old_icecover.uk.php
http://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index.php?section=234 http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/1999/10/survival.png
Thanks for the links. But I just don’t get the argument.
You say that the arctic extent is increasing year over year. In September 2014 NSIDC has the extent at 5.3M sq kms. In September 2015 it is 4.6M sq kms. That would seem to be decreasing, not increasing.
As for the sea ice age, your third link seems to show that older ice has also decreased the last two years, not increased.
I do get that Tony is using 30% coverage and the data I link to, I believe, is 15% coverage. So at different coverages the data is going to diverge and that is fine. But I must admit that I’m missing something on the difference between the 30% and 15% and would appreciate being shown the error of my thinking.
I thought that NSIDC shows ice coverage that has at least 15% ice. I thought Tony’s maps show ice coverage that is at least 30% in coverage. Since more sea would be at covered at 15% rather than at 30% I would think that the 15% figure would go up faster. But according to Tony’s graphs its not. So I think I’m missing something fairly basic that you all may understand better than I do.
So I guess the question is: why would 30% extent grow faster than 15% extent?
Koop –
The data you frequently refer to is sea-ice area, not extent. As to the discrepancies, the metrics were all over the board this year. Much less agreement between agencies than normal…I don’t understand why.
-Scott
Older ice has increased between 2007 satellite era minimum and now 2015. So what if 2015 year is less that 2013. Is 2015 minimum higher than 2007 and 2012?
Answer – yes. Trend is up.
For clarity, what does record growth mean? It means ice extent is growing at record pace. While below is not DMI data as shown above, which shows 2 million sq km growth since 2015 minimum, you should get the concept.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/arctic.sea.ice.interactive.html
Comparing sea ice area Day 250 vs Day 275
2015 3.11 Mill 3.91 Mill = 0.9 Mill growth
2014 3.57 Mill 4.16 Mill = 0.59 Mill growth
2013 3.57 Mill 4.30 Mill = 0.73 Mill growth
2012 2.29 Mill 2.90 Mill = 0.61 Mill growth
From what I’ve read of your comments, you seem to be very much like David Appell, who constantly trolls this website under multiple persona. As such, maybe the other regular visitors can amuse you.
gees Andy.. likening Chicken-coop to the rotten Appell..
That’s cruel… even if correct.
Once again, due to the format of the comments section, I’ll respond to myself but this is a comment due to Scott.
Scott, good point. You are absolutely correct that I have been posting graphs and speaking of them as extent when they are actually area. That is my bad. It was not intentional and I hope not to make that error in the future. If I do, please call me on it as it can rightly be viewed more as intentional on my part because you have corrected me.
I had read this before at NSIDC but all of us should be clear on ice extent and area. So this is is a description of the difference:
Area and extent are different measures and give scientists slightly different information. Some organizations, including Cryosphere Today, report ice area; NSIDC primarily reports ice extent. Extent is always a larger number than area, and there are pros and cons associated with each method.
A simplified way to think of extent versus area is to imagine a slice of swiss cheese. Extent would be a measure of the edges of the slice of cheese and all of the space inside it. Area would be the measure of where there is cheese only, not including the holes. That is why if you compare extent and area in the same time period, extent is always bigger. A more precise explanation of extent versus area gets more complicated.
Now, that is the scientific explanation. I will have to give it some consideration as to whether my position should change based on the extent vs area difference. I would be welcome to input as to how to properly view this difference especially in light of the disagreement I’ve had with Tony on his “record sea Ice growth” claim and my juxtaposition against sea ice area growth.
David the Appalling is over at Jo Nova’s trying to give Dr David Evans a hard time. (And anyone else who will argue with him.)
@Gail Combs,
Thanks for your amazing research. That quote from Abraham Lincoln got me thinking. How could the founding fathers and “Honest Abe” be so smart and our current rulers so dumb?
Then I remembered that all forms of government tend towards oligarchy. While Gator66 seems to have his heart in the right place the upper levels of the banking fraternity are “Enemies of the People” (Ibsen). Who are the other members of the Oligarchy? Maybe the bankers are the puppet masters.
I am in North Carolina every month but I am so busy that I have not had time to meet with you. Bless you for your energy, passion and common sense.
Hey GC! My heart and brain are both in the right place. The people you call “bankers”, are not “bankers” at all, but very wealthy political players. My grandfather was a banker, and I am a banker, and bankers are not the problem.
The problem is an oversized and out of control government, the wealthy puppetmasters of the world would have no interest in a toothless small government, as it could not advance agendas. And again, Dodd-Frank is proof positive that “bankers” do not run this country.
https://youtu.be/JYNDT2kProU Volume. Volume .Volume…
Gator, please give a brief description of Dodd-Frank, and how it has slowed or stopped over leveraging of investments and restored Glass /Stiegel. I really do not know what Dodd-Frank did.
I simply do not have the time to tell you everyting that Dodd-frank has done, is doing, and will continue to do. If you have not studied the bill, you absolutely should as it is one of the most damaging legislations to ever hit the US economy.
Briefly, Dodd-Frank cut my old departments profits by more than half, and that was day one. It also set up the CFPB, a panel with absolutely zero oversight that continues to write new regulations to this day, five years later. The CFPB was supposed to help consumers, but instead it has made things worse, especially for low income households.
I am preparing my house for company and do not have time to go into detail, but I will say that Dodd-Frank did for our economy what Obamacare did for healthcare. The best thing we could do for our economy today would be to repeal Dodd-Frank.
A big drop in temperatures over the Antarctic.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/temperature/70mb6590.png
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.png
gator69 says: “Dodd-Frank is proof positive that banks do not run the world, or this country.”
I am sorry Gator, but all Dodd-Frank proves is that politicians are very very good at Smoke and Mirrors.
Let me see if I can put my thoughts on this down. First a bit of background.
About 10 years ago a guy by the pen name of Sancho Jones mentioned that his brother who worked for the EPA was told to leave the big boy’s alone and go after the Mom & Pop wildcat oil drilling companies.
An illustration of that type of use of laws and regulations can be seen in Shielding the Giant – USDA’s “Don’t Look, Don’t Know” Policy
John Munsell & A Trip To The Woodshed With The USDA
The USDA Allowed ConAgra to poison Americans with tainted meat despite Montana meat processor, John Munsell, trying to tell USDA leadership where the tainted meat was coming. Instead of following up on a very straight forward line of evidence, the USDA drove John out of business. Not on the internet (private E-mail to me) – John had a New York magazine interview him for three days. The editor approved the article but it was stomped on and buried by the owners of the magazine. As a result we got the Food Safety Modernization Act that will eventually drive all independent farmers out of business.
A good explanation of how the law making process actually works: America’s Ruling Class
THIS is the reason the Dodd-Frank Act had to be written and passed July 21, 2010 just before elections. Too many people had seen the wizard of OZ behind the curtain and it was necessary to give the APPEARANCE of not being puppets of the International Banksters. Heck I had a long discussion about the foreclosure mess with a bunch of farmers in the boonies at a feed store, I doubt I could ever find again. Those people had a lot of knowledge and more important they were P.Oed. Even with the passage of that act the Tea Party had the interest of one third of the US voters. April 2010 48% of voters say that the average Tea Party member is closer to their views than President Barack Obama.
More important, the December 2009 Copenhagen Climate Summit had bombed and it was very very important that America’s Ruling Class stay in control. Besides they really don’t give a hoot about what laws are now written in the USA since a World Government is the true goal.
Another very important point on the Dodd-Frank Act . After the Shearing of the Sheeple called the Great Depression, the Glass–Steagall Act of 1932 was passed.
Did that law, put in place to ‘prevent another Great Depression’ save us from the 2008 Shearing of the Sheeple? HECK NO!
The five new banking laws Clinton signed that set up the Foreclosure Fiasco.
BANKING LAWS:
The McFadden Act of 1927 or Amendment to the National Banking Laws and the Federal Reserve Act (P.L. 69-639, 44 STAT. 1224): Prohibited interstate banking.
Law: Negating above:
Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-328, 108 STAT. 2338).
Permits bank holding companies to acquire banks in any state one year Beginning June 1, 1997, allows interstate mergers.
The Glass-Steagall Act or Banking Act of 1933 (P.L. 73-66, 48 STAT. 162): Separated commercial banking from investment banking, establishing them as separate lines of commerce.
Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (P.L. 84-511, 70 STAT. 133): Prohibited bank holding companies headquartered in one state from acquiring a bank in another state.
Law: Negating both of the above laws:
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-102, 113 STAT 1338)
Repeals last vestiges of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. Modifies portions of the Bank Holding Company Act to allow affiliations between banks and insurance underwriters. Law creates a new financial holding company authorized to engage in: underwriting and selling insurance and securities, conducting both commercial and merchant banking, investing in and developing real estate and other “complimentary activities.”
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-242, 105 STAT. 2236).
Also known as FDICIA. FDICIA [b]greatly increased the powers and authority of the FDIC. Major provisions recapitalized the Bank Insurance Fund and [b]allowed the FDIC to strengthen the fund by borrowing from the Treasury.
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550, 106 STAT. 3672).
RTC Completion Act[/b] (P.L. 103-204, 107 STAT. 2369):
implement provisions designed to improve the agency’s record in providing business opportunities to minorities and women.. Expands the existing affordable housing programs of the RTC and the FDIC by broadening the potential affordable housing stock of the two agencies.
Increases the statute of limitations on RTC civil lawsuits. In cases in which the statute of limitations has expired, claims can be revived for fraud and intentional misconduct resulting in unjust enrichment or substantial loss to the thrift.
The Source:
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/important/
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/important/index.html
The topic is Dodd-Frank.
Gator, the Dodd-Frank Act can be just as easily repealed (or modified) as Glass-Steagall Act was when the International Banksters want to set-up another Sheeple Shearing. It doesn’t matter what the law was that was passed in the glaring spotlight of public disapproval. THAT was the point. These people are very long range planners and they sacrificed a bit in 2010 to GUARANTEE they remained in control of the democrats and RINOs with no troublesome third party gumming up the works. They especially needed Obama to stay relatively popular since he has zero problem selling the USA out to the UN and destroying US sovereignty.
Not that the big banks sacrificed all that much.
So the bankers got the foreclosed house AND the foreclosure insurance payment from AIG (Thanks to money supplied by the US tax payer) On top of that the FED got a controlling rope on all the other bankers in the USA via the forced ‘bailout’ moneys.
Another key point is WHERE some of those taxpayer dollars actually went. If you recall the Federal Reserve fought tooth and nail including making threats when Dr Ron Paul tried to get a law passed to track the funds. (Sorry no link just foggy memory from half a decade ago.)
Judicial Watch Sues Federal Reserve for Records Detailing U.S. Taxpayer Bailout of European Banks
Financial Rescue Nears GDP as Pledges Top $12.8 Trillion
**********
Also at this point the International bankers have already sheared the American sheep AND the plans are in place to THIS TIME get the world government they want. Actually the 2008 financial crisis was part of the plan to force individual countries into accepting a world government. CAGW was just for the Great Unwashed. A financial rope is what matters to a country’s business leaders. Western society is now built on debt. Thanks to the Reagan era Leveraged Buyouts the debt free corporations like Gillette were targeted and either torn apart and the assets sold or loaded with debt.
And there is the problem, you conflate “bankers” with the likes of the Rothschilds and Rockerfellers and Morgans and the EU Royals.
They are obsessed and powerful busybodies, and not “bankers”. Language Gail, it’s how they get you.
Sorry Gail, if banks ran the country, Dodd-Frank would never have seen the light of day. You cannot have it both ways.
And a last point on the Dodd-Frank Act.
investopedia has a synopsis of the Dodd-Frank Act. Of interest is the links within the page and at the bottom of the page. If you follow those links you get:
Meet the new boss same as the old boss….
The Federal Reserve is not a “bank”. You cannot open a checking account or get a loan from the Fed.
If banks ran the country, Dodd-Frank would never have seen the light of day.
The Federal Reserve is a Central Bank and control shifted from the government TO THE BANKERS after they instigated “the Accord”
Do bankers believe that they own the Federal Reserve banks.
Yes. — 100% of the “stock” is owned by the private banks.
😆
That is the most ridiculous statement I have seen outside of climate science in a very long time!
We have ZERO CONTROL over the Fed, and we are completely at its mercy.
Gail, they call it a “bank”, but it is not a “bank”, and is not controlled by “banks” or “bankers”. I know, because I am a banker and I have seen what the Fed does to banks.
The Fed is a bank the same way that the IPCC is a scientific organization.
gator69 says: “And there is the problem, you conflate “bankers” with the likes of the Rothschilds and Rockerfellers and Morgans and the EU Royals.
They are obsessed and powerful busybodies, and not “bankers”. Language Gail, it’s how they get you.”
OK Gator, we are on the same page. And I agree, “Language is how they get you.”
The change in definition of capitalism is one that really frosts my tail. Now it just means the Fascist form of Socialism and real capitalism is a completely unknown concept to most people.
Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned with a separation of the state and economics. [stolen from Ayn Rand] It is a system that allows the individual to invest his wealth and labor to create more wealth. Today in the USA the entrepreneur is a slowly vanishing breed thanks to the rapidly increasing red tape, laws, taxes and heavy fines that make trying to do business like mud wrestling a pig (The US government being the pig.)
One study I read showed many small businesses closed, not because they were going bankrupt but because the owners decide the return was just not worth the hassle and that was over a decade ago.
Oh and Turnbull, now Prime Minister, was Chairman of Goldman Sachs Australia.
And still has very close links to them…
That’s why he will probably try to sign us up to an ETS or something similar.
That’s exactly why he was installed. A year out from an election, and Canning by-election about to be a thrashing for ALP & Greens. Only one reason. Paris2015.
What the UN demands, (read World Bank, IMF & CFR) the UN gets. Goldman Sachs is just the conduit. Australian media, particularly “theirABC”, were the useful idiots.