“How To Survive Thanksgiving?”

“How To Survive Thanksgiving?”

by Michael Snyder

"This year there have been more news articles than ever about “how to survive Thanksgiving”. If you have not noticed this, I will provide some examples for you in this article. Personally, the idea that Thanksgiving is an ordeal that must be endured is deeply offensive to me. If eating a feast while surrounded by people that love you is too much of a burden, please stay home. Thanksgiving is a day when we our not supposed to be focused on ourselves. Instead, it is a day when we are supposed to give thanks. In fact, according to the original Thanksgiving declaration that George Washington issued in 1789, there is someone in particular that we are supposed to give thanks to on this day. But in our “me-centered” society, that has been completely forgotten.

I love Thanksgiving. When I was a child, we would stop for one day to eat some turkey and give thanks for our blessings. But today the Thanksgiving holiday has become an entire season. The weekend before Thanksgiving is a travel weekend, many take the entire week off, and the weekend after Thanksgiving is the time when people travel home. I kind of like that. The more time that we can take to spend with the people that love us the better.

But many media outlets seem to think that spending time with family and friends is a problem. For example, here is one article about Thanksgiving that discusses “the stresses that a family get-together can create”…"Thanksgiving is an interesting holiday. Some celebrate it as an American tradition. Others look at it as simply an excuse to get together with family to watch some football. And still others just enjoy getting an extra day off from work or try to ignore it altogether. But however you regard it, there are often two areas in which many of us can use help: preparing the traditional Thanksgiving meal and dealing with the stresses that a family get-together can create - especially these days, when conversations around the dinner table may be even more fraught than usual."

Yes, human relationships are complicated. But that doesn’t mean that we should just isolate ourselves. A big part of life is learning how to love imperfect people. Because if you can’t love imperfect people, you aren’t going to love anyone, because nobody is perfect.

Many of the articles about “how to survive Thanksgiving” are focused on how to deal with family members. The following comes from an article entitled “How to Survive Thanksgiving with a Crazy Family”…"Every Thanksgiving, millions of Americans prepare for what just might be the most family time they’ve had in a while. For some this is great. It is a reunion full of hugs and catching up. For most, it’s a politically charged, possibly drunken, exchange of fighting words, news stories, and my favorite, family drama. While my family is, admittedly, crazy, we normally shy away from such emotionally charged topics. But there is always an instigator in each family who enjoys sparring with family, watching the flames come up from the ground and engulf their family until it’s time to eat so much they enter a comatose state, lie on the couch, and forget the pain they’ve inflicted."

Many of these articles suggest that we should just avoid talking about anything important during Thanksgiving. Really? What are we supposed to do? Talk about the weather for three hours?

Political talk at Thanksgiving is something that mainstream news outlets seem to particularly dislike. I found an ABC News article entitled “How to survive political talk at Thanksgiving dinner” to be particularly amusing…"It’s Thanksgiving, you’re enjoying your favorite foods at the dinner table, when a family member brings up who they voted for in the 2024 presidential election. Arguments ensue. The food doesn’t taste as good. And now everyone’s a politician. People have political opinions."

And that is okay. If we can’t learn how to peacefully interact with those that we disagree with, we are going to be in big trouble. If we had a society that actually valued the marketplace of ideas, we would relish the opportunity to chat with those that hold opposing views. But instead we are trained to cringe at the thought of having to do that. Here is an excerpt from a Vogue article entitled “How to Survive Politics-Talk at Thanksgiving (Without Losing Your Mind)”…

"Thanksgiving is upon us, and given that we’re fresh off one of the most contentious and politically charged seasons of our time, it’s probably not realistic to expect a holiday to be totally free of drama. If you’re one of the lucky few whose family is united around political issues, treasure those peaceful conversations at the Thanksgiving table; for the rest of us, it can be challenging to know how best to talk to loved ones (or, to be real, tolerated-out-of-necessity ones) about anything substantive. Besides, for many of us, these issues aren’t “just politics;” they directly affect the way we live our lives and the safety and happiness of our families and friends."

If you disagree with me, that is okay. And if I disagree with you, that is okay too. Today, many people are actually completely cutting themselves off from their families due to political differences. That is so wrong, but it is happening on a widespread basis.

Recently, Oprah Winfrey committed an entire podcast to people that have chosen to go “no contact” with their relatives…"When is it OK to go “no contact” with a family member? And what even is “no contact,” really? Oprah Winfrey explored these questions on “The Oprah Podcast,” in an episode released Tuesday, Nov. 25, ahead of Thanksgiving. In the episode, audience members opened up about cutting off all contact with close relatives − even their parents. “I know this is a tender, hot-button topic,” Winfrey said in the episode. “My hope is that we can open up the heart space and really listen. I’m not on anybody’s side. I just want to hear what everyone has to say.”

A USA Today article about that podcast explained precisely what it means to go “no contact” with someone…“No contact” is pretty much exactly what it sounds like: You cut off all communication with someone. This means no meet-ups, no phone calls, no texting and no interaction on social media. If you happen to run into each other, you either avoid them or keep the interactions short and emotionally neutral."

I know so many children that no longer have contact with their parents, and I know so many parents that no longer have contact with their children. It is a nationwide epidemic, and it is a great tragedy. But this is what our society has become. We have been trained to hate anyone that disagrees with us, and that even includes our own family members. One of these days so many people are going to look back and wish that they could have done things differently. If you find yourself wishing that you had done things differently, this Thanksgiving is a great opportunity to change direction.

In 1789, President George Washington issued the very first Thanksgiving proclamation. He designated the 26th day of November to be a day when Americans were to humble themselves and give thanks to God for the blessings that He had bestowed upon our young nation…

"By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation"

"Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor– and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be – That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks – for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation – for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war–for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed – for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted – for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions – to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually – to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed–to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord – To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us – and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York

 the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789."

The vast majority of the population has totally forgotten what Thanksgiving is supposed to be all about. But it is not too late to reverse course. I would encourage everyone to humble themselves and give thanks at some point over the next few days. You will be amazed at how your perspective changes once you have done that."

- https://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/

"We All Get Plucked in the End"

"We All Get Plucked in the End"

by Bill Bonner

Paris, France – "As our friend Nassim Taleb reminds us, there’s a downside to being a turkey. It’s called Thanksgiving. Every day for 1,000 days, it gets its food. The turkey gets used to it. It feels pretty good about things. Around the feed trough, it is common knowledge that the food “always” comes. And there is no turkey alive who can contradict it.

The more intellectual turkeys spin out theories to explain their good fortune. One says it’s because of turkey exceptionalism: “The food always comes because we’re turkeys, not starlings or pigeons. We are special. We don’t have to peck around on the ground trying to find crumbs or scratch in the dirt to find worms. We’re a superior bird; we have access to unlimited food.”

Another has a different hypothesis – better leadership: “We always get fed because our president has figured out how to make the farmers feed us. He’s the best turkey president ever. If the farmer is a little late, he knows how to make turkey life great again. Didn’t you notice? He takes three steps backward and makes a loud gobbling noise. That usually does it. If it doesn’t, he just keeps gobbling until the food comes. Always works. Always.”

And yet another pipes up: “Oh, enough with your fancy theories. We always get fed because that’s just the way it is. It’s nature.” “No, it’s not nature,” offers another. “It’s because the fix is in. The farmer has to feed us, or he’ll be charged with animal abuse. He has to keep the food coming; he has no choice.”

Bad Feather Day: But then, as the fourth Thursday of November approaches, the theories are put to the test. All are proved incorrect. The food doesn’t come. Instead, the turkeys are ushered into a special part of the farm complex where they’ve never been before. There is something disquieting about it. The turkeys begin to whisper among themselves. One says he hears cries coming from the next room. All of them notice the sounds of machinery… heavy machinery… and a few soft feathers floating through the air. “What’s going on…?” they wonder, one to another. And then, they begin to panic, running helter-skelter, hoping to escape.

Up until that day, the food came every day. Day after day… the sun shone… and along came the farmer with more grain. And then, without warning, everything changed for the turkey. Worse than a bad feather day… it was the final scene. The curtain fell. The court adjourned. We see the turkey’s life from the farmer’s perspective. It is not all gravy and sweet potatoes. But it is very predictable, with a definite beginning and a certain end. And a purpose. Have a nice Thanksgiving."

- www.rogueeconomics.com

"A Virgilian Thanksgiving"

Autumn sunset over the Tuscan hills.

"A Virgilian Thanksgiving"

The great Roman poet on love and loss,

 life and death, man and nature...

by Joel Bowman

"Perhaps even these things, one day, will be pleasing to remember.”

~ Virgil

“A happy life consists in tranquility of mind.”

~ Cicero

“True happiness is to enjoy the present, without anxious dependence upon 

the future, not to amuse ourselves with either hopes or fears but to rest 

satisfied with what we have, which is sufficient, for he that is so wants nothing.”

~ Seneca

Buenos Aires, Argentina - "With the holidays nigh upon us, we count the tasks outstanding against the year’s twilight hours and discover, without surprise, that the former far outnumber the latter. There are deadlines to meet... invitations to send... victuals to prepare... libations to sup... and of course, friends and family to gather near (such as geography and busy schedules permit). No doubt you’ve plenty on your own proverbial plate, too. Allow us, therefore, to relieve one item from your brimming to-do list. Or at least, to offer up a humble suggestion, on behalf of one of our favorite poets...

Publius Vergilius Maro, known more commonly as Virgil, was born in 70 BC in what the Romans knew as Cisalpine Gaul, today’s northern, alpine Italy. Before he passed into the realm of the shades, just half a century later, Virgil had composed three of the most important poems in Latin literature: the "Eclogues" (or "Bucolics"), the "Georgics," and of course the foundational epic, the "Aeneid."

In this second work, which follows the tensions of the seasons and man’s struggle with, and eventual triumph over, the havoc and danger of the natural world, Virgil presents a masterpiece at turns didactic, elegiac, epic and even (as in the tale of Orpheus and Eurydice) epyllion. Loosely modeled on (the Greek poet) Hesiod’s famous "Works and Days" (composed around 700-650 BC), Virgil’s own poem muses on the classic, universal dichotomies of myth and reality, power and politics, cause and effect, heaven and earth, love and loss, life and death...

Under a Tuscan Sun: Many modern moons ago, having once again taken to wandering the world as a homeless peripatetic, your flâneuring correspondent found himself holed up in the ancient township of Città di Cortona, in Tuscany.

Tuscan room with a view. Cortona

The fortified hamlet sits atop a picturesque Italian hillside, which overlooks the same fertile plains as once viewed by the Etruscans... the Romans... perhaps even Virgil himself (who would have traveled south to Rome and onto the port city of Brundisium, modern day Brindisi, where he eventually gave up the ghost).

Perched on a fine little Juliette balcony, we lazed one afternoon under a late Tuscan sun, Sangiovese (literally: “blood of Jove”) within easy reach. Through the wrought iron we scanned the plains below, plowed through the ages by man and beast, tiny clumps and copses scattered between the fields, green and fallow. Virgil’s work lay open in our lap, Book I...

“Wait… where exactly did I leave Jupiter’s blood, again?”

It is from the first book of the Georgics, in part a supplication to the Gods (as well as Augustus himself), that we recite our yearly Thanksgiving toast, remembering always those who went before us... as well as the halcyon days in Virgil’s birth country... and the longed-for future, when we will venture there once more. Please enjoy the immortal poet’s words, below…"

"A Thanksgiving Toast, from Virgil’s Georgics, Book I"

"What makes a plenteous Harvest, when to turn

The fruitful Soil, and when to sowe the Corn;

The Care of Sheep, of Oxen, and of Kine;

And how to raise on Elms the teeming Vine:

The Birth and Genius of the frugal Bee,

I sing, Mecaenas, and I sing to thee.

Ye Deities! who Fields and Plains protect,

Who rule the Seasons, and the Year direct;

Bacchus and fost'ring Ceres, Pow'rs Divine,

Who gave us Corn for Mast, for Water Wine.

Ye Fawns, propitious to the Rural Swains,

Ye Nymphs that haunt the Mountains and the Plains,

Join in my Work, and to my Numbers bring

Your needful Succour, for your Gifts I sing."

(As translated by the English poet, John Dryden, 1631-1700)

- https://joelbowman.substack.com/

Happy Thanksgiving 2025

 

May all the good things in Life be yours in the coming year.

"Alert! Troops Deployed In Washington, Martial Law And SHTF; Civil War And WW3"

Prepper News, 11/26/25

"Alert! Troops Deployed In Washington,

 Martial Law And SHTF; Civil War And WW3"

Comments here:

- https://www.youtube.com/

"People Can Sense Something Major Is Coming And Getting Ready"

Full screen recommended.

Epic Economist, 11/26/25

"People Can Sense Something Major

 Is Coming And Getting Ready"

"In this video we look at what's really happening beneath the surface of the economy and why so many Americans are starting to feel like something bigger is on the horizon. The job market is drying up, especially for young people. The dollar is losing value. Utility bills are doubling overnight. And the official numbers keep telling us everything is fine while regular families are drowning in costs that never came back down. We'll go through real clips and comments from people sharing what they're experiencing, what they're noticing in their communities, and why so many are quietly preparing for what might come next. If you've felt that growing tension between what we're being told and what you're actually living through, this video is for you. Stay aware, stay connected, because the warning signs are real and the choices you make today will matter in the months ahead."

Comments here:

- https://www.youtube.com/

"Regular People Are Being Priced Out Of Life"

Full screen recommended.

Michael Bordenaro, 11/26/25

"Regular People Are Being Priced Out Of Life"

Comments here:

- https://www.youtube.com/

"1,000's Of Stores Warn Of Immediate Collapse"

Full screen recommended.

Snyder Reports, 11/26/25

"1,000's Of Stores Warn Of Immediate Collapse"

- https://www.youtube.com/

"Trump's 'Tariff Dividend' and the New Fiscal Populism"

"Trump's 'Tariff Dividend' and the New Fiscal Populism"

by Doug Casey

"International Man: Trump is pitching a "tariff dividend" that would take revenue from new import tariffs and recycle it into $2,000 checks for Americans - framed not as welfare, but as a patriotic return on America's trade strength. What do you make of this?

Doug Casey: Frankly, it's ridiculous. Whenever Trump talks, it's clear that he knows nothing about either economics or history. Of course, knowledge isn't entirely necessary to steer the Ship of State. It's possible to get by with only luck, bluster, and coercion - but the results tend to be bad. Trump doesn't have any consistent thinking or philosophy, either; it's all seat-of-the-pants feelings. That's a characteristic of populists. They try to get ahead of popular whims, and they'll say or do almost anything that they think the mob wants to hear.

So far, the big reason for Trump's popularity is that he's a cultural conservative. Let's count ourselves lucky in that regard. He doesn't want to overturn the basis of America itself, as many of the Democrats clearly want to do. When it comes to economics, Trump is very comfortable with arbitrarily printing wild amounts of money. I suspect he rationalizes it by thinking it will forestall deflationary collapse in the short run and inflate away the otherwise unrepayable national debt in the long run.

He's mostly in favor of mild deregulation, which is good, of course. But most of what he does is flattery-driven. If he likes somebody and they want to suck up to him, he'll do what it takes to make himself more popular with that person and their constituency.

His tariffs are a tax on Americans who import things. Part of his philosophy with the tariffs is to encourage manufacturing in the US. But since over half of the imports are for further value-added manufacturing in the US, it turns out he's really hurting domestic manufacturing. And he's hurting exports too, because when you don't buy things from people, they're less likely to buy things from you.

Apart from generating revenue to distribute to the capita censi, his objective is to encourage domestic manufacturing by making imports expensive and forcing people to make things domestically. Very much like Argentina under the Peronists, whose similar hopes of self-sufficiency wound up destroying the Argentine economy. Building up domestic manufacturing can take many years, sometimes decades. But along the way, a closed, protectionist America will produce uncompetitive products. This results in a lower standard of living for Americans.

The only way to bring manufacturing back to the US - the only way - is to free the US economy: get rid of taxes, institute a sound currency so that capital can build, get rid of regulation so that producers aren't hamstrung, and remove government from all aspects of the economy. But Trump is doing the opposite. So not only is he not going to get the result that he's looking for, he's going to create a disaster.

It's amusing to see him bragging about cultivating foreign investment. For instance, he expects a trillion dollars from the Saudis, which is almost 100% of the Saudi GNP. Trump's hyperbole on almost everything he talks about is indistinguishable from lying. How can a sensible person take anything he says seriously? When he says something, it's just off the top of his head.

International Man: Do the so-called tariff dividends amount to a new form of money printing - QE without the Fed?

Doug Casey: You mean the $2000 he says he'll distribute to various Americans, with money gained from tariffs? As a giveaway, it's corrupting. But it won't add to the money supply because putting on tariffs doesn't create more money. How many will get this $2000 bonus? Who knows. If it goes to 100 million people, that's $200 billion. Where's the money going to come from? Not from the tariffs, which will greatly reduce trade and income, and be counterproductive in every way.

Trump loves spending. But how will Trump finance his spending? Taxes aren't popular, and Trump wants to be popular. Borrowing in the market is out; it would put upward pressure on interest rates. So essentially, more government debt will be sold to the Fed. They'll buy it with newly created dollars.

International Man: Do you see these tariff checks as a kind of Universal Basic Income for the Right?

Doug Casey: The concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI) is being widely discussed. It's a disaster on every level possible. Elon Musk and others are saying that it's inevitable. When robots and AI do everything, they think mass unemployment is unavoidable. They seem to think that the plebs will have to be maintained like pets, to keep them from rioting. Others think that once UBI frees the plebs from the drudgery of work, they'll become thinkers, artists, and poets. That's a pipe dream.

More likely, UBI will create a population of dissipated layabouts, junkies, and neurotic consumers. Healthy humans have to feel productive. Apart from the fact that it's psychologically destructive, UBI is unnecessary. That's because it doesn't matter how much the AI and robots create, it won't be "free"; there are costs to everything. Besides, people have infinite desires. A person can work 24/7, catering to the unlimited amount of goods and services people want. The idea should be to totally eliminate welfare, aka UBI, not to put everyone on it.

Of course, ultimately, the elite would like to see AI and robotics reduce the population of the world by, they say, 90%. If only to save Mother Earth from hordes of useless eaters. I'm sure they're working in that direction.

International Man: Are these tariff dividends a sign of fiscal dominance - where government financing needs begin to dictate monetary policy - and what would the implications be?

Doug Casey: Trump thinks he's a genius. And as a world-changing genius, he wants to reform the world the way he thinks is best. So, for instance, he's actively replacing members of the Federal Reserve Board who share his ideas on money; no doubt he's very favorably inclined toward what's known as Modern Monetary Theory - the same for the Supreme Court and Congress. Basically, Trump doesn't believe in anything; he just has feelings and instincts.

The bottom line is that we're sure to see a lot more government involvement in the economy. Trump tries to make deals with every person and every group possible; he's opportunistic and very transactional. I think he sees himself as Louis XIV. But I'll wager that before his term is over, he winds up more like Louis XVI.

International Man: The last time the government handed out checks to the average person was during the Covid mass psychosis, and it triggered the worst inflation in 40 years. What are the implications for gold, the US dollar, and other investments if these tariff dividends continue?

Doug Casey: It's not just the proposed tariff dividends, it's his whole economic approach. Trump isn't a free-market believer; he's a narcissist, he thinks he's a genius, and he'll impose his will whenever he can. This adds a thick layer of uncertainty to a very shaky economy.

I don't, therefore, think there's any way around higher gold prices - despite its all-time highs. Since gold is the only financial asset that's not somebody else's liability, more and more people will move to gold. But also to commodities in general; relative to their production costs and historical prices, they are very cheap.

Pay attention to the government starting to invest in mining companies - including MP Materials (one of our picks), Lithium Americas, and Trilogy Metals. Not to mention Intel and US Steel. This is in the worst "state capitalist" tradition of picking favorites. Right now, Rare Earths are the flavor of the month. The result will be corruption and massive distortions. Speaking as an economist, I find it stupid and deplorable. But speaking as a speculator, this foolishness is likely to spark interest in mining companies, which makes me happy.

How about real estate? Commercial real estate prices are said to be off about 25% across the country. Even condominium prices are dropping, off 10 to 15%. Houses aren't selling because so many people locked in low-interest, 3% or 3.5% 30-year mortgages a few years ago. If they sell, they'll have to refinance at twice those levels, which many can't afford. With mortgages at 6.5%, a lot fewer people who want to buy can't buy - the property market's in trouble across the board.

In the stock market, all the gains have basically been in high-tech. We're in a multi-trillion-dollar AI super bubble. The financial world is very unstable. The only places that make sense are commodities, resources, and the companies that produce them. The good news is that though they've been moving up, they're still very cheap. And have a lot of upside from here. I remain very concentrated in the resource markets."

- internationalman.com

Musical Interlude: Vangelis, “Beautiful Planet Earth”

Full screen recommended.

Vangelis, “Beautiful Planet Earth”

An Inspiringly Different Musical Interlude: The Jacksons, "Can You Feel It"

Full screen recommended.

The Jacksons, "Can You Feel It"

"A Look to the Heavens"

"These two mighty galaxies are pulling each other apart. Known as the "Mice" because they have such long tails, each spiral galaxy has likely already passed through the other. The long tails are created by the relative difference between gravitational pulls on the near and far parts of each galaxy. Because the distances are so large, the cosmic interaction takes place in slow motion - over hundreds of millions of years.

NGC 4676 lies about 300 million light-years away toward the constellation of Bernice's Hair (Coma Berenices) and are likely members of the Coma Cluster of Galaxies. The featured picture was taken with the Hubble Space Telescope's Advanced Camera for Surveys in 2002. These galactic mice will probably collide again and again over the next billion years so that, instead of continuing to pull each other apart, they coalesce to form a single galaxy."

- https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap211004.html

"Do You Want..."

"Do you want to live life, or do you want to escape life?"

- Macklemore

The Poet: Wendell Berry, “Leavings”

“Leavings”

“In time a man disappears

from his lifelong fields, from

the streams he has walked beside,

from the woods where he sat and waited.

Thinking of this, he seems to

miss himself in those places

as if always he has been there.

But first he must disappear,

and this he foresees with hope,

with thanks. Let others come.”

- Wendell Berry

○

“Perhaps as he was lying awake then, his life may have passed before him – his early hopeful struggles, his manly successes and prosperity, his downfall in his declining years, and his present helpless condition – no chance of revenge against Fortune, which had had the better of him -neither name nor money to bequeath – a spent-out, bootless life of defeat and disappointment, and the end here! Which, I wonder, brother reader, is the better lot, to die prosperous and famous, or poor and disappointed? To have, and to be forced to yield; or to sink out of life, having played and lost the game? That must be a strange feeling, when a day of our life comes and we say, “Tomorrow, success or failure won’t matter much, and the sun will rise, and all the myriads of mankind go to their work or their pleasure as usual, but I shall be out of the turmoil.”

- William Makepeace Thackeray, “Vanity Fair”

“Rescreening Dr. Strangelove”

“Rescreening Dr. Strangelove”
By Hugh Iglarsh

"A friend of mine saw Stanley Kubrick’s “Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” when it first opened in Paris in 1964. He and his American army friends were rolling on the floor throughout. The French audience, however, sat in stony silence. It wasn’t a comedy to them; it was a documentary. What is it now? In general, Hollywood is America dreaming – but Strangelove is something different, a “nightmare comedy,” in Kubrick’s words. It is prophecy disguised as farce – the finest dramatic analysis we have of the paradoxes of deterrence, that strange world of interpenetrated enmity and overriding common interest. What follows is a look at Kubrick’s masterpiece as satire, history and cultural critique.

Watching the film today, one realizes that Kubrick was exaggerating only the details and personality quirks, not the fundamentals. Peter George’s somber novel "Red Alert", upon which the film is based, evolved into a comic script of its own deeper nature, almost without intervention. As Kubrick said, “The most realistic things are the funniest.” In the Strangelove universe, the serious constantly morphs into the humorous, which then reveals itself as deadly serious.

Historian Margot Henriksen, author of "Dr. Strangelove’s America," describes the movie as a kind of expose – a frontal assault on “the cherished seriousness and rationality of America’s nuclear ethos and establishment Strangelove showed the previously disguised cold war reality for what it was: immoral, insane, deadly – and ridiculous. Distinguished critic Lewis Mumford defended the film’s blackly humorous take on nuclear holocaust as an example of deadpan Swiftian wit: “It is not this film that is sick: What is sick is our supposedly moral, democratic country which allowed this policy to be formulated and implemented without even the pretense of public debate.”

Strangelove’s literary antecedents go back even further, to the Old Comedy of Aristophanes – the comedy of Periclean Athens, which was ribald and irreverent and deeply political. It’s a theater of living, participatory democracy, of a citizenry involved in every matter of state. Also, it’s a comedy grounded in the body and nature, as for instance in Lysistrata, in which the women of Athens bring the bloody and stupid Peloponnesian War to an end through a brilliantly organized sex strike, or in other plays, where the chorus of frogs or wasps or birds comments on human affairs from an ironic inter-species distance. The film’s insistent “strange love” sexual subtext places it firmly in the Aristophanic tradition.

The characters in Strangelove embody social hierarchies; they are flattened, if highly compelling, and command a very different kind of response than does the typical Hollywood character – a critical reaction, rather than an emotional identification. It is similar to what Bertolt Brecht describes as the alienation effect, forcing the viewer to see characters in terms of what they represent, coloring the subjective perception of objective reality, and creating the psychological conditions for both detachment and enlightened re-engagement.

Historically, 1963 was a year after the Cuban Missile Crisis and a couple of years after the Berlin Wall crisis. It was the last moment that some Pentagon brass and nuclear strategists believed that the USA would have a significantly superior strategic position vis-à-vis the Soviets, allowing the possibility of a first strike. President Kennedy was surrounded by such thinking. From the book "JFK and the Unspeakable," by James Douglass, regarding events in 1961: “His military advisors continued to ride hard toward the apocalypse. Kennedy was appalled by Generals Lemnitzer and LeMay’s insistence at two summer meetings that they wanted his authorization to use nuclear weapons in both Berlin and Southeast Asia. His response was to walk out of the meetings. After one such walkout, he threw his hands in the air, glanced back at the generals and admirals left in the Cabinet Room, and said, ‘These people are crazy.’ ”

Only one month after the terrifying Cuban Missile crisis, the Joint Chiefs of Staff requested a buildup of strategic forces to the level of a disarming first-strike capability. On November 20, 1962, they sent a memorandum to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara stating, “The Joint Chiefs of Staff consider that a first-strike capability is both feasible and desirable.” Their studies showed that a first strike would kill at least 140 million Russians – but that American casualties could be kept down to a “manageable” 10 or 12 million. This is almost exactly what General Turgidson says in the movie. (“Mr. President, I’m not saying we wouldn’t get our hair mussed. But I do say… no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh… depending on the breaks.”) In September 1963, Air Force General Leon Johnson said to Kennedy, “I have concluded from the calculations that we could fight a limited war using nuclear weapons without fear that the Soviets would reply by going to all-out war.”

Kennedy understood the real but unstated objective. Knowing that the Pentagon was gaming him, he responded, “I have been told that if I ever released a nuclear weapon on the battlefield, I should start a pre-emptive attack on the Soviet Union, as the use of nuclear weapons was bound to escalate and we might as well get the advantage by going first.” Again, it’s precisely the gambit attempted by General Turgidson in the War Room regarding the “unpublished study” about the correct (i.e., murderous) response to a nuclear “accident” – a study apparently not shared with the president.

Kubrick’s mind was legendarily omnivorous and retentive. He subscribed to the "Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists" and had read just about every book ever written on deterrence and thermonuclear war. His imagination is so rooted in hard fact that he could intuit what was taking place behind closed doors. Lyman Lemnitzer, Curtis LeMay, Edwin Walker, Herman Kahn, Henry Kissinger, so many others – like Kennedy, Kubrick realized it was a cast of maniacs that kept the nuclear show going. Kubrick and co-screenwriter Terry Southern encapsulate that insanity in the characters of Ripper, Turgidson and Strangelove – an alliance of the psychotic, the narcissistic and the psychopathic, each bizarre in his own way, but all ultimately collaborating in a genocidal groupthink.

Good satire goes directly for the insoluble contradictions, and Kubrick hits so many of them – for instance:

    * Only those with a superhumanly developed self-restraint and sanity could be trusted to be in control of nuclear weapons – but only a madman could create and support the logic of mutual assured destruction and its associated concepts of “overkill” and “megadeath.”

    * Also: The effectiveness of nuclear deterrence depends on a hair-trigger response to attack – so a system ostensibly intended for preventing war is constantly provoking fear, creating a spiral of suspicion in which defense and aggression become indistinguishable.

    * Also: To deter, the system must be rigid and flexible at the same time, robotic and humanly controllable. An engineer will tell you that any system designed around fundamentally opposed qualities is an accident waiting to happen. It is a doomsday machine, an idiot system of world-destroying power.

    * Also: While the rhetoric is that of war avoidance – “Peace is our profession” – the underlying mentality is that of total victory over an evil enemy. So “accidents” are programmed in, as the pretext for a first strike with “acceptable” American losses. But the extent to which the possibility of a first strike is countenanced gives the lie to any ethical superiority over the other side. The system is morally bankrupt.

    * And finally: The bomb supposedly exists to protect freedom and democracy, but at moments of crisis (which in a balance of terror means every moment), we see how the system actually functions – as the ultimate expression of elitism, accepting the very real possibility of human annihilation as the cost of dominance and control. It is the apotheosis of what C. Wright Mills, writing a bit earlier, described as “crackpot realism,” the thought process of a paranoiac. The system is politically self-deconstructing, reducing itself to rubble here before our eyes, in 90 real-time minutes.

All of these contradictions are embodied in the character of Dr. Strangelove, the crippled, fragmented machine-man who hovers like a dark angel in the corner of the War Room and our consciousness. He is the ultimate accomplishment of the film: a rich and open-ended symbol – a key to understanding both an aspect of human nature and a specific moment in time. He has become a permanent part of our culture, graphically revealing the surreal, fascistic energy that permeates the inner workings of the military-industrial complex.

In the end, Strangelove walks – he regains his potency – because this Nazi technocrat has finally become the voice of authority in the putative democracy that helped defeat his first fuhrer. He no longer needs to conceal his nature and desires. These boil down to a sadomasochistic scenario of female sexual slavery, in which the sickest members of the military-industrial patriarchy are given exclusive right to the most nubile women. It is a eugenics-inspired rape fantasy, out-Hitlering Hitler. And the gathered War Room crowd salivates over the prospect.

We realize that the narrative arc of the movie is that of coitus interruptus, which begins with Turgidson’s painfully suspended tryst with his secretary and is consummated with the final orgasm of destruction. At last, with the end of the world, the sexual suspense is broken and we can breathe; the relief is palpable. The only kind of sexual satisfaction that can exist within the mechanized and disembodied world portrayed in the film involves violence and the projection of power, which compensates for the inner emptiness and lack of feeling in a militarist wasteland.

This is the crux of Kubrick’s and Southern’s irony in Dr. Strangelove: that the higher the stakes, the greater the megatons and megadeaths wielded by these nuclear warriors, the more diminished and enfeebled and grotesque they become. A system that grants godlike powers simultaneously denies real humanity. In the end, loving the bomb means losing the soul.

Strangelove reveals the nuclear standoff as more than a political problem – it is also a symptom of self-alienation, of an imbalance between life and death, Eros and Thanatos. Underneath the antic surface – for instance, in the close-ups of General Ripper’s lined face and haunted eyes – there’s a tragic half-awareness of something terribly wrong. Something that may have to do with communists or fluoride or precious bodily fluids, or maybe something deeper that we no longer have the spiritual or emotional capability to understand or confront. The film is an attempt to regain that capability by seeing the situation as a whole, from a comically human perspective. The belly laughs that the movie elicits come from our core and bring us back into our full, social selves, away from the isolated, phobic, hyper-rationalized world of General Ripper and his compatriots.

Dr. Strangelove offers no solutions to the nuclear quandary. It just shows us where the logic of the system points, in terms of both origins and outcomes. By casting the nightmarish absurdity of the system in a comical light, he strips it of its metaphysical terror. Once we have seen Dr. Strangelove – the ghost in the war-making machine – as he is, we can begin the process of freeing ourselves from him."

- http://counterpunch.org/iglarsh02042011.html

•

Bomb run sequence...

Major Kong rides the bomb...

The Daily "Near You?"

Brighton, Colorado, USA. Thanks for stopping by!

Kahlil Gibran, "The Madman"

 

"The Madman"

"It was in the garden of a madhouse that I met a youth with a face pale and lovely and full of wonder. And I sat beside him upon the bench, and I said, “Why are you here?” And he looked at me in astonishment, and he said, “It is an unseemly question, yet I will answer you. My father would make of me a reproduction of himself; so also would my uncle. My mother would have me the image of her seafaring husband as the perfect example for me to follow. My brother thinks I should be like him, a fine athlete. And my teachers also, the doctor of philosophy, and the music-master, and the logician, they too were determined, and each would have me but a reflection of his own face in a mirror. Therefore I came to this place. I find it more sane here. At least, I can be myself.” Then of a sudden he turned to me and he said, “But tell me, were you also driven to this place by education and good counsel?”

And I answered, “No, I am a visitor.”

And he answered, “Oh, you are one of those who live in the madhouse on the other side of the wall...”

- Kahlil Gibran

“Here’s The Real Story About Thanksgiving You’ve Never Heard”

“Here’s The Real Story About

 Thanksgiving You’ve Never Heard”

Especially the parts about Squanto the “friendly Indian.”

by Nick Bauman

“The Thanksgiving story you know probably goes a bit like this: English Pilgrims, seeking religious freedom, landed in Plymouth, Massachusetts, where they found a rich land full of animals and were greeted by a friendly Indian named Squanto, who taught them how to plant corn. The true story is more complicated. Once you learn about the real Squanto - also known as Tisquantum - you’ll have a great yarn to tell your family over the Thanksgiving table.

I asked historian Charles Mann, the author of “1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus”, and Paula Peters, a member of the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe and an expert on Wampanoag history, to tell me the real story. “This is not revisionist history,” Peters promised. “This is history that’s just been overlooked because people have become very, very comfortable with the story of happy Pilgrims and friendly Indians. They’re very content with that - even to the point where no one really questioned how is it that Squanto knew how to speak perfect English when they came.”

Here’s what really happened. In 1614, six years before the Pilgrims landed in modern-day Massachusetts, an Englishman named Thomas Hunt kidnapped Tisquantum from his village, Patuxet, which was part of a group of villages known as the Wampanoag confederation. (Europeans had started visiting the northeast of what is now the United States by the 1520s, and probably as early as the 1480s.) Hunt took Tisquantum and around two dozen other kidnapped Wampanoag to Spain, where he tried to sell them into slavery.

“It caused quite a commotion when this guy showed up trying to sell these people,” Mann said. “A bunch of people in the church said no way.” Tisquantum escaped slavery - with the help of Catholic friars, according to some accounts- then somehow found his way to England. He finally made it back to what is now Massachusetts in 1619. As far as historians can tell, Tisquantum was the only one of the kidnapped Wampanoags to ever return to North America, Peters notes.

But while Tisquantum was in Europe, an epidemic had swept across New England. “The account that’s recorded by Gov. Bradford of Plymouth Plantation is that there’s a shipwreck of French sailors that year on Cape Cod,” Mann said. “One of them carried some disease and it wiped out a huge percentage of the population in coastal new England. The guess is it was some kind of viral hepatitis, which is easily communicated in water. It exploded like chains of firecrackers.”

When Tisquantum returned to Patuxet, he found that he was the village’s only survivor. “Into this bumbled the Pilgrims,” Mann said. “They had shown up in New England a few weeks before winter. Up until the Pilgrims, the pattern had been pretty clear. Europeans would show up, and Indians would be interested in their trade goods, but they were really uninterested in letting [Europeans] permanently occupy land.” Often, armed native people would even force Europeans to leave if they attempted to stay too long.

This time, the Europeans wanted to stay, and the disease that had decimated Patuxet ensured that they had a place to settle. “Patuxet ultimately becomes Plymouth,” Peters explained. “They find this cleared land and just the bones of the Indians. They called it divine providence: God killed these Indians so we could live here.” A website Peters helped create for the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrims’ arrival puts it even more bluntly: “The graveyard of [Tisquantum's] people became Plymouth Colony.”

Massasoit, a local Wampanoag leader, didn’t trust Tisquantum. “He looks at this guy and smells trouble,” Mann said. Massasoit kept Tisquantum under what was essentially house arrest until the Pilgrims showed up and promptly started starving to death.

Patuxet wasn’t the only native village decimated by the plague. The entire Wampanoag confederation had been badly hit – as much as 75 percent of the Wampanoag population was wiped out, Mann said. But the Narragansett, a rival neighboring group, basically weren’t affected by the disease at all. That put the Wampanoag in a precarious strategic position. Massasoit had an idea. “He decides we’ll ally with these guys, set up a good trading relationship, control supply of English goods, and the Narragansett won’t be able to attack us,” Mann said. On March 22, 1621, Massasoit went to meet with the Pilgrims. He brought Tisquantum along to translate.

Mann described the meeting in a 2005 article in Smithsonian Magazine: “Tisquantum most likely was not the name he was given at birth. In that part of the Northeast, tisquantum referred to rage, especially the rage of manitou, the world-suffusing spiritual power at the heart of coastal Indians’ religious beliefs. When Tisquantum approached the Pilgrims and identified himself by that sobriquet, it was as if he had stuck out his hand and said, “Hello, I’m the Wrath of God.”

Massasoit was right not to trust Tisquantum, who soon tried to pit the Pilgrims against him. But the plan didn’t work: Massasoit “is just pissed off and demands the Pilgrims hand him over because he’s gonna execute him,” Mann said. The Pilgrims didn’t. Instead, Tisquantum stayed in the colony with them, helping them prepare for the next winter.

“Never did the newcomers ask themselves why he might be making himself essential,” Mann wrote in Smithsonian. “But from the Pilgrims’ accounts of their dealings with him, the answer seems clear: the alternative to staying in Plymouth was returning to Massasoit and renewed captivity.”

It’s all a lot more complicated – Machiavellian, even – than the story you might have learned. Mann in Smithsonian again: “By fall the settlers’ situation was secure enough that they held a feast of thanksgiving. Massasoit showed up with “some ninety men,” Winslow later recalled, most of them with weapons. The Pilgrim militia responded by marching around and firing their guns in the air in a manner intended to convey menace. Gratified, both sides sat down, ate a lot of food and complained about the Narragansett. Ecce Thanksgiving.”

So what does this all mean? “While it was by far not the first occasion of human trafficking conducted by European explorers to the new world, the capture of Squanto and his fellow tribesmen would forever alter the course of history for people on two continents,” Peters wrote on the anniversary website. “We learn about Columbus landing in 1492 and it’s as if nothing happened for over 100 years until the Pilgrims landed,” Mann added. “But the Tisquantum story gives you this tiny peek into that all the people involved had been interacting for more than a century. And today, of course, the Wampanoag are still around.”

- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

"Rules of Engagement: Thanksgiving Edition"

"Rules of Engagement: Thanksgiving Edition"

A helpful guide for avoiding rhetorical pitfalls over the holiday dinner table...

by Joel Bowman

Buenos Aires, Argentina - Our American readers are celebrating Thanksgiving this week. Many years have passed since the Pilgrims celebrated their first harvest of the New World, back in 1621. The holiday has been commemorated, on and off, since George Washington declared it a national day in 1789, but it wasn’t official until Honest Abe made it so, proclaiming...“Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens,” calling on the American people to also, “with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience .. fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation...”

On the subject of perverseness and disobedience, just while we’ve got you, your Australian-born editor has always had a special affection for this most American of holidays, known to him as the day when families come together to flesh out irreconcilable political differences over too much cider and victuals.

Though our quasi-American wife assures us this behavior is not exclusive to Thanksgiving (“some families drag their frivolous disputes on until Christmas, or even beyond...”), we recall with fondness many a fracas in which tipsy uncles clashed with college student nephews and nieces over the controversial topic du jour.

Of course, there are certain ways of getting one’s point across that are more helpful than others... and some that are downright harmful. And so, with the holidays just around the corner, we thought it might be fun to examine a few of the dos and don’ts of artful dinner table rhetoric. Please enjoy a light-hearted guide for Turkey Day veterans and newcomers alike, below...

"Rules of Engagement - Thanksgiving Edition"

By Joel Bowman

"The first, and perhaps most obvious, rule for maintaining civil discourse (even within the family) is to never resort to ad hominem. Essentially, this means turning to personal attacks, rather than sticking to matters of logic. “Playing the man and not the ball,” as sportsfolk are heard to say. It’s just bad form, mate.

So even if Aunt Joan is a prattling old windbag with decidedly dated views... and even though Cousin Charlie is a well known charlatan who deserves to have lost his money on scammy meme stocks... and even if Uncle Jeffrey is a dipsomaniacal bore whose third wife is even more insufferable than the previous two... best not to say so.

Also steer clear of labels like “fatso,” “dunderhead,” “moron,” “millennial,” “skinflint,” “feckless pest,” “half-wit,” “jackass,” etc. Oh, and if Niece Elly decides she now identifies as a fern and asks to be referred to using gender/species neutral neopronouns, just nod along and go with it. You can lament the downfall of Western Civ and traditional values at the Chick-fil-A drive through on your way home.

Now that you’ve holstered the nasty slurs, a close second on the “Logical Fallacies to Avoid on Holidays List” is the Hasty Generalization trap. This occurs when one interlocutor summons a few, often anecdotal instances to make loose and sweeping claims, often on a subject they know precious little about. For instance, just because every single person you’ve individually encountered with blue/pink dyed hair happens to have proven themselves a brainless weirdo, that doesn’t mean there isn’t someone out there eager to establish themselves as the exception to the rule.

Recall Nassim Taleb’s Black Swan analogy: while a thousand sightings of white swans is not sufficient to prove once and for all the statement “all swans are white,” a single sighting of a black swan is adequate to disprove it. In other words, you are just one friendly, witty, well-informed, empathetic, self-aware, blue-haired Starbucks barista away from having all those harmful and triggering stereotypes disproved. Rejoice!

Pot, Meet Kettle: Next we have the notorious Appeal to Hypocrisy tactic, wherein the speaker defends himself against a particular charge by pointing out the obvious and demonstrable fact that the accuser is similarly guilty. Also known as the “pot calling the kettle black” gambit.

For instance, don’t say “Well, Republicans also lie, cheat and steal” as a way of defending Democrats from doing likewise (or vice-versa). Simply agree that both political parties are chock full of ratbags and that anyone who seeks office ought immediately to be disqualified from holding it on reasonable suspicion of hubris and delusions of grandeur. You and your new ally may wish to commemorate this novel common ground with a toast to liberty and apolitical enlightenment.

Next up we have the popular Circular Argument ploy, a favorite of cutesy, tag-teaming couples (think honeymooners, newlyweds, college sweethearts, etc. who don’t yet know what they’re in for). Infuriatingly, this often occurs when said saccharine duo completes one and other’s sentences. “Smoking pot is wrong because it’s against the law....”

“... Exactly, babe, and that’s precisely why it’s against the law; because it’s wrong.”

“You got it, babe!” (*Breaks for conspicuous canoodling*)

Textbook circular argument. Rather than getting between the pawwing pair, better to just annoy everyone present by saying something like, “While not a smoker myself, I happily defend every same-sex couple’s right to guard their personal weed stash with their firearm of choice.”

Which brings us to the popular False Dilemma ruse, whereby the speaker offers (always generously) two equally poor options as if no others existed. (We covered this in last week’s Sunday Session, "The Illusion of Choice", which garnered quite a number of, ahem... enthusiastic responses.) Recall George W. Bush’s classic line, “We will fight them over there so we do not have to fight them over here.” Boy oh boy did they misunderestimate Dubbya! Never mentioned was the apparently ludicrous idea that “we” might not fight “them” at all, something one might have expected to occur to a man who also said, “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.” Umm...? Moving along...

I, Bernanke: Another classic holiday ploy is the Argument from Authority. Someone out there, possibly one of our dear readers, will find themselves this year seated across from a man recently awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics. When the subject of the economy inevitably comes up, likely introduced by the faux-modest laureate himself, you may be sure the Argument from Authority is lurking close by. (So too the aforementioned False Dilemma.)

“It took a certain ‘courage to act,’ I freely admit,” Mr. Bernanke will hold forth, “but our economy was on the brink. In fact, were it not for my deep knowledge of financial meltdowns, and of course the bravery with which my name has since become synonymous, we may not be gathered here today, enjoying this sumptuous feast, brought to us by Julia and Maria in the kitchen. Gracias señoritas. In fact, we may not have an economy at all...”

If, by some twist of fate or punishment, you do happen to be seated at the above table and on the receiving end of said sermon, please do us all a favor and refuse to accept such balderdash. Call the man out. Herewith, some suggested notes: “Facts do not care for your prizes and positions, my dear man. Fortunately for us all, reality is not subject to opinion. Your tenure as Fed Chairman, unblemished by a single instance of success or real insight, was objectively disastrous. Indeed, your much lauded actions led us into the mess in which we presently find ourselves mired. True courage would have involved thoughtful inaction. Now, unless there is another round of those delicious cookies... thank you Julia and Maria for a delicious meal, thank you Mrs. Bernanke for the invite, and good evening to you all.”

Although there are a great many more Rhetorical Weapons of Mass Destruction (too many to cover in one pithy Sunday Sesh), we would be remiss if we didn’t conclude with the oft-misquoted Godwin’s Law, or Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies. Always a cheerful party favorite, especially after a round or two of Moscow Mules, you’ll hear this one invoked when one or another dinner guest inevitably falls to reductio ad Hitlerum to prove a point. It is usually then said that “the first person to bring up Hitler loses the argument.”

But this is a misnomer. Introduced into the common vernacular by American attorney and author, Mike Godwin, back in the early ‘90s, the eponymous law simply asserts that, as online discussion forums grow, the probability that someone will veer into Nazi territory increases, eventually approaching a near certainty. Crucially, this tendency was observed regardless of the group’s participants and regardless of the topic under discussion.

So when Aunt Molly calls Cousin Mike a “fascist” for his views on the midterm elections... or Grandpa labels Grandma a “Nazi” for insisting that the menfolk eat leftovers at the table instead of on the couch in front of the game, know that it’s nothing personal. It’s just Thanksgiving."

-https://bonnerprivateresearch.substack.com/

"How It Really Is"

Bill Bonner, "Your Loyalty And Your Submission"

"Your Loyalty And Your Submission"

by Bill Bonner

"Your money's no good here."

Clint Eastwood, "Any Which Way You Can"

Baltimore, Maryland - "It’s Thanksgiving week. And in the spirit of our fake money era, we give fake gratitude. Comes this gem from USA Today: "Trump proposes 50-year mortgage." Bless his heart. POTUS is trying to be helpful. He’s trying to solve the problem caused by too much credit...with more credit! Housing has never been so un-affordable. The average family income is around $80,000. But the income needed to buy an average house is around $120,000. What are America’s families to do? Drink muddy water and sleep in hollow logs?

The cause of this problem is not hard to find. The Fed caused the first mortgage finance crisis by dropping its key rate from 6% in 2001 to only 1% in 2003. This set the housing market a-tingling. Remember the ‘lo-doc’ mortgage loans? All it took to get a mortgage - guaranteed by the feds - was an application. Then, when the Fed tried to bring rates back into a normal zone, it triggered widespread bankruptcies, defaults and foreclosures.

So, the Fed cut rates again...from over 5% in 2007 to under 1% in 2009. Adjusted for inflation, rates remained under zero for most of the next fifteen years. This led to a huge new bid for housing...much of it coming from institutional buyers able to tap into the Fed’s low rates. The new demand led to the highest prices ever - now averaging about $100,000 more than the typical family can afford.

As to Trump’s solution, Charlie Bilello comments: "So the very cause of the problem is being proposed as the solution? Correct. And on top of that, a 50-year mortgage would more than double the amount of interest paid compared to a 30-year. And only 5% of payments in the first 10 years would go towards principal with 95% going towards interest. Doesn’t sound like a panacea to me.

You can check the math easily. Just go to one of the many ‘mortgage calculators’ on the internet. They’ll show you that an average house today costs $420,000...and an average 30-year mortgage rate is 6.24%. You would have to make total interest payments of $407,000 before you were mortgage-free. Raise the term to 50 years and the interest rate goes to 6.72%, with total interest payments of $837,000...and you never own the house."

Thank you, Mr. President?

Today, we’ve interrupted our romp through the funny money world...exploring the link between crooked money and crooked behavior...to give thanks for the whole funny money system. Also in the news, the money supply (M2) in the US just hit a new record high, at $22 trillion. That’s up from just $650 billion in 1971, when the Funny Money Era began. In that year, GDP was around $1.2 trillion; it’s now $28 trillion. In other words, the money supply has grown about half-again-as-much as the supply of goods and services.

And public and private debt - the dark side of credit - has gone up even more...from 125% of GDP in 1971, it is now around 260% of GDP. In other words, for every dollar’s worth of GDP in 1971 (before the Funny Money Era began) there was $1.25 of debt. Today, there is $2.60. That’s an additional 135% of GDP - or $38 trillion worth of spending that is untraceable to any increase in output. Naturally prices have gone up to absorb the additional liquidity.

But we’re not here to kvetch. Not today. We’re here to give thanks. And our gratitude overfloweth. Fortune: "Trump promises to send $2,000 tariff dividend checks ‘probably the middle of next year..."

In ancient Rome the ‘annona’ was a system of giving out free grain to buy the loyalty - or least the submission - of the urban proletariat. In Argentina, Eva Peron handed out Christmas presents to poor children. And now in 21st century America, there’s a turkey on every table and a $2,000 ‘dividend’ check in the mail.

Calling it a dividend is in keeping with the whole fraudulent project. ‘Dividends’ come from earnings. But there are no earnings involved. Just the tariff revenue...which is more like a sales tax on Americans than a levy on foreign producers. At best, you might call it a tax rebate. But the tariff tax is only expected to bring in about half the cost of the ‘dividend’ checks...which means, the bulk of the expense will be borrowed...added to the national debt...and will ultimately show up in more inflation.

This is the same policy followed by Mr. Trump in his first time at bat. And what a success that was! A home run. His Covid-era stimmies added as much as $3 trillion to US debt...and drove up the inflation rate to 9% -  the highest in forty years. Then, of course, prices never went back down and now are about 25% higher than they were in 2020. Muchas gracias. Merci beaucoup. Thanks a lot."

- https://www.bonnerprivateresearch.com/