Oh, but we have had capitalism here; it's been replaced. The funny money caused that, too, you know.
I think you should try to get a refund for your education. You've been cheated... or was it just indoctrinated?
We haven't been able to enjoy the benefits of capitalism because we haven't had capitalism. If you knew anything about economics and economic systems at all, you would know that.
John Maynard Keynes, a communist and homosexual pedophile, as well as the fellow that we attribute ongoing economic theory to, said that it wasn't necessary for government to own the factors of production in order to have a communist system. All that needed to occur was for government to closely control the factors of production for it to be a communist system. Over which of the factors does government NOT exert close control?
That and the simple fact that ALL 10 planks of Marx's communist manifesto are already in place in America.
They aren't teaching you boys squat are they?
I often tell folks that in the contrived crash of '29 that it was the PM industry that led the rest out of the toilet.
What do you think of the deal?
My take is that it is structured rather uniquely, but that is perhaps required by the situation.
But more importantly it would seem to reinforce the idea that SLW management really does believe they will come out of top in the tax dispute. Otherwise wouldn't they be martialling their finances in preparation for the hit?
The article on Zero Hedge indicated that the COMEX is still able to deliver the "unregistered" gold. Perhaps that's why banks are removing the gold. When the defaults begin (and there have already been some in the nickle market) things could get interesting.
We both know the culprit. One day soon they'll slink off in the muck to be heard from no more.
Guess who gave the thumbs down to a legitimate news story.
In a dynamite interview, Richard Fisher, former president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, gave what may be the biggest confession you’ll ever see and hear from a Federal Reserve insider: the Federal Reserve knowingly “front ran” the US stock market recovery (i.e., manipulated the market) and created a huge asset bubble. Fisher expresses certainty that the “juiced” stock market will come down and is coming down now that the Fed has taken its foot off the accelerator … and that it has a long way yet to go.
While that is no news to readers here whose eyes are wide open, a “market put” has been denied by the Fed and by many market advisers. That the market was an over-inflated bubble created by the Fed has been denied, too; but Fisher clearly and gleefully admits the Fed created a bubble that will have to deflate now that the Federal Reserve’s stimulus is off.
As one of the members of the Federal Reserve’s FOMC (the Federal Open Market Committee, which sets US monetary policy), Richard Fisher participated in and voted on all of the Fed’s policies of zero interest and quantitative easing, so he has inside knowledge of all the discussions behind the scenes at the Fed.
Here are the significant quotes from Richard Fisher on CNBC’s video:
What the Fed did — and I was part of that group — is we front-loaded a tremendous market rally, starting in 2009.
It’s sort of what I call the “reverse Whimpy factor” — give me two hamburgers today for one tomorrow.
I’m not surprised that almost every index you can look at … was down significantly. [Referring to the results in the stock market after the Fed raised rates in December.]
Basically, we had a tremendous rally, and I think there’s a great digestive period that is likely to take place now, and it may continue.
We front-loaded at the Federal Reserve an enormous rally in order to accomplish a wealth effect.
I wouldn’t blame [what is happening in the market’s now] on China. We’re always looking for excuses.
If what you suggest turns out to be true, we'll all know it when they reduce or suspend the dividend to accumulate the necessary funds to pay the tax, penalties, & interest.
I marvel at the idea that it makes sense for SLW's accounting team to think that they could slide something that enormous past the Canadian tax man. The ramifications of just such a bet are enormous. Somewhere, and we will obviously find out what, there has to be some clause that the company can hang it#$%$ on.
The IRS screws up. The CRA can screw up, too.
The Fed, according to the nefarious Federal Reserve Act, is required to print bills in denominations up to $10,000. However, in practice, they haven't printed anything larger than $100 since 1969. At the same time, a $100 bill in 1969 buys the equivalent of $646 today! That's how much The Fed has destroyed our purchasing power. So why don't they print larger denominations? It's certainly called for. It's because the push is for all electronic currency (that they control, of course). All financial transactions under their surveillance. More at the link: The War On Cash Leads To Total Financial Surveillance
The Food Stamp program was designed ostensibly to keep those on the plantation from revolting. Hungry people, especially those with hungry children, have a consistent habit of doing exactly that as history shows. Here it is a socialist palliative for a socialist created problem.... one that ultimately just exacerbates the underlying problem. Maybe it is just physical evidence of "fraud vitiating everything it comes in contact with". I'm inclined to think so.
You really ought to speak with your mom so that you can learn about the ever rising costs of groceries which is accompanied by the ever shrinking package size. Cars and trucks haven't been getting any cheaper either.
Why are so many on food stamps?
Actually, the dollar is legally defined in terms of grains of silver. The bimetallic system, especially with designated dollar values instead of simply bonafide weights, created more turmoil than it was worth.
Perhaps, but what does the day of vindication mean for the share price?
I won't use new money (at least for the short term), but I will continue to reinvest dividends.
There are no "findings," only assertions. Seeing this move into a judicial venue is a plus. If they feel confident of vindication, laying out a framework to pay something that isn't owed would seem to be a waste of time.
Management's statement regarding their ongoing stock repurchase program looks like flicking boogers on the tax man to me.
Words mean things and which group of minds do you suspect to be more shrewd, the company's CPA and legal staff or that of the CRA?
There's still the likelihood that the CRA's assertions are unfounded. Given the global situation as well as the growing costs of the socialist environment in Canada, money grubbing by governmental shrews seems all the more the course of action we should expect.