Why the elections in the USA do not matter

Chris Hedges is correct: elected officials are not the drivers of any changes in the US,
or most countries. Thus, the difference in policy and realities on the ground in the USA
will not change much via who is president or controls the Senate and house.

Much more likely economic realities will drive changes for regular working folks in ways
the no President or Federal reserve chair will have any control over. It’s not just the national debt that will cause the upcoming disaster, but continuing expensive policies that do not benefit enough people, while continuing to move jobs overseas. These will be the factors that no one can effectively control.

And with all that going on, there is little impetus to interfere in an already shaky economy by attempting to do anything at all about global warming. Thus nature itself could be a life-and-death factor, and may reduce the earth’s population by 33% or more.

Sadly, only AFTER said reduction will any governments show the leadership to address the pollution problems that are the culprits.

Hence, the “good life” is under attack or siege on more than one front, and I don’t expect the US or any other government to be able to solve these problems before they come home to roost, even in tiny countries like, say Holland. I mean the Dutch are per-capita the richest country in the world. And they won’t stand a chance against these multiple meltdowns.

Ooopsy Daisy.

I sure wouldn’t want to be the winner of this election. Does Obama stink? Yup. Will Romney be given the power to actually solve any of these problems (the list could be longer). NOPE. Because the people behind the financing of the $2.5 Billion spent by these two won’t allow EITHER of them to change a dang thing that might affect their bottom line. Hence, this is good for business. Moving jobs to cheaper labor was good for business also. Hence the stock market (s) are not in a tailspin yet. But how long can 0% borrowing at the “Fed. window” go on before it has no effect? Ask Japan. They’ve had 0% in effect, for over 15 years. just now there are signs that their economy may recover, if the US keeps buying their cars, that is.

But with fewer and fewer people able to AFFORD cars in the US, Japan may well be out of luck.
10 Adam Smiths seven Albert Einsteins, 46 Thomas Alva Edisons, 112 Steve Jobs, and 375 Ben Bernanke’s and one now-crying Bill Gates combined wouldn’t be able to create enough jobs to pull the USA out of its debt crisis: a crisis that started in 1980, of course.

Hence, we are only at the very beginning of our 15 year down cycle. Let’s say 2008 = 1929. In terms of house foreclosures, this is a fair comparison. When the US economy, once responsible for 50% of everything bought on the planet, can only deliver 25% of everything bought, and in combination with a decreasing European ability to BUY, many emerging economies who are doing so by creating profits via cheap labor that used to be “overpaid” labor in the USA, will also crumble. In China, 47 cities have seen anti government rallies in the last two years. It’s because factories are closing.

Think Obama or Romney could possibly deal with the increasing number of mortgages and real estate owned by China in the USA? How about the continuing ruination of the value of the US dollar, does that matter? Neither are talking about it, that’s for sure.

For the 17th time in as many postings, I submit that arable farmland is perhaps the ONLY investment worth more than 25% of anyone’s portfolio. Those lucky enough might want to consider land in one than one place. Hmm, New Zealand, check, USA, check, where else?

You will need a partner to snag more than a 1/4 acre in New Zealand, so start making friends folks. He he?