Looks like a tide chart. Surfing the incoming tide is like riding a good investment move. Unfortunately I have gone "over the falls" in all aspects of life too!
@jmski52 said:
the chart is just showing the corporate debt to GDP ratio and how that particular debt to GDP ratio seems to be correlated to each bubble.
In other words, each bubble has been caused by too much speculative corporate borrowing
Or....is the chart simply showing that corporate debt has peaked at the beginning of each recession? Corporations borrow money to expand or upgrade, which they rarely do during recessions.
Now now, don't go using logic and an understanding of the interrelatedness of cause and effect to help explain an observable correlation! That's kooky talk
@jmski52 said: Corporations borrow money to expand or upgrade, which they rarely do during recessions.
So therefore you believe that corporate borrowing during expansions doesn't result in an unsustainable bubble when debt/GDP reaches a certain point?
You are trying to create a causality that is incorrect. Recessions happen for many reasons, but a ratio of corporate debt to GDP at some magical number just isn't one of them.
You are trying to create a causality that is incorrect. Recessions happen for many reasons, but a ratio of corporate debt to GDP at some magical number just isn't one of them.
And I would respectfully submit that you refuse to see a statistical correlation that looks pretty strong on the chart. Check with Baley and he can figure the correlation coefficient to see if it's significant. I'm guessing that it's pretty darned high.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
@derryb said:
Recessions are a byproduct of boom/bust cycles created by unstable FED policy. The chart demonstrates this.
So there were no boom bust cycles or recessions,
before there was a Fed?
Yes, and they were generally fueled by irresponsible borrowing and foolish speculation, something the FED, since its creation in 2013 has fully enabled.
@jmski52 said: You are trying to create a causality that is incorrect. Recessions happen for many reasons, but a ratio of corporate debt to GDP at some magical number just isn't one of them.
And I would respectfully submit that you refuse to see a statistical correlation that looks pretty strong on the chart. Check with Baley and he can figure the correlation coefficient to see if it's significant. I'm guessing that it's pretty darned high.
There is a correlation....debt falls when a recession hits. That's the correlation. It's pretty f'ING simple.
The chart is the same as one that would depict snow and cold temperatures. You would interpret the chart as saying the snow causes the cold.
You are free to see whatever you want. You are also free to be wrong.
Reviewing this thread, can't think of a better way to accrue valuable tax losses and reduce over all personal wealth potential, than extrapolating an investment strategy from a sort of ZH, non capitalistic, anti fed, conspiracy theory point of view.
I realize the drama and intrigue of looking at things from this point of view, can be fascinating, but maybe a actual Investment strategy that's successful, could have is it's reward, even if it's not as interesting as a epic tale. IE Lord of the Rings
There is a correlation....debt falls when a recession hits. That's the correlation. It's pretty f'ING simple.
So, you say that there is only a correlation in that debt falls after the recession hits, but absolutely no correlation in that debt rises before a recession hits, correct? If it's so f'ing simple, please help me understand, coho. I want to be able to know how statistical correlations work in only one direction. How about you, Baley? I'm just guessing that you're big into stats. And you, bluelobster - explain the correlation or lack thereof in terms of wood elves, if that's what moves you.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Well jmski, you're the one who talkING about your economics classes, so figure it out. Ive already shown you. If you don't want to or can't learn then that's not my concern
As usual, it's not, IMO, that it has nothing to do with it.
It just may not have everything to do with it.
The moon affects the tides. But so does the sun. And if the water at the shore is high, or low, maybe the weather or plate tectonics played a part too.
No doubt debt building and unwinding affects the economy and its cycles. So does innovation, technology, manias, fear, military activity, and yes the weather and natural and human made disasters of all descriptions, and possibly even visitors from space in the past and/or future.
We're due for a stock market crash and recession, but that doesn't mean one is imminent. Things keep changing all the time.
Baleyville is "Due" for a huge earthquake and wildfire, too.
We won't know if it was "imminent" until after, will we. But odds are, it won't be tomorrow, so that's how I'm betting. Of course, also have "insurance", and contingency plans, just in case the black swan lands..
Well jmski, you're the one who talkING about your economics classes, so figure it out. Ive already shown you. If you don't want to or can't learn then that's not my concern
When was I talking about economics classes? I was objectively talking about the relevance of the statistics shown by the graph in the OP.
As usual, it's not, IMO, that it has nothing to do with it. It just may not have everything to do with it.
I tend to agree with you in that respect, Baley. In fact, if one were to overlay a chart of the changes in the Feds Funds Rate onto the OP chart, there might be an interesting observation that when the Fed Funds Rate is bumped up, fewer loans are made and theoretically, the economy starts to cool off. But like you say, it just may not have everything to do with it.
The issue here is the cost of servicing an unmanageable level of debt. From what I'm reading now, there is a liquidity crunch developing around the world because the Fed has raised rates and there are too few dollars to service the large overhang of debt that's been issued in every nook & cranny of every central bank around the world that depends on the world's reserve currency, I. e. the US dollar.
So the dollar goes up, and there will definitely be defaults and restructuring when large entities can't get their hands on enough dollars to service their overblown & overleveraged debt load in the face of higher rates. Whoever holds the counterparty debt instruments to all this debt will be very unhappy and if you don't think there will be a debt crisis, I respectfully think you are wrong.
The only way to keep a debt crisis from happening now is to lower rates again and that means keyboarding more $$$$ until the keyboard burns up. That means more free money for the banking cartel who can't survive without skimming something from everyone elses' accounts with the usual absence of accountability for mismanaging their own businesses. Non of it is sustainable.
Now, there's a prof at Michigan State who's saying that he's found another $21 trillion in the government accounting documents that can't be accounted for, the documents have now been reclassified and redacted for "national security" reasons, and that the GAO is now changing their accounting rules to allow moving the accounting entries around so that they can't be reconciled or traced any longer.
I'll leave it to bluelobster to come along and disparage this as a "sort of ZH, non capitalistic, anti fed, conspiracy theory point of view" epic tale from Lord of the Rings.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Now, there's a prof at Michigan State who's saying that he's found another $21 trillion in the government accounting documents that can't be accounted for, the documents have now been reclassified and redacted for "national security" reasons, and that the GAO is now changing their accounting rules to allow moving the accounting entries around so that they can't be reconciled or traced any longer.
I'll leave it to bluelobster to come along and disparage this as a "sort of ZH, non capitalistic, anti fed, conspiracy theory point of view" epic tale from Lord of the Rings.
jmski, Sorry missed your post earlier. no doubt a interesting story, I had read about it a while ago. It really seems to be about hideous and ridiculous accounting by the Army which started in the 90s. The fact is, it has to be a real money, 21 trillion at that. Unless they are hiding it at area 54, doesn't look like that 21 trillion ever existing as real dollars.
REP. WALTER JONES
Of all the articles I've seen about waste in the 22 years that I've been here, probably this is in the top four or five. It's from two years ago [reading] "US Army fudged its accounts by trillions of dollars, auditors find. The Defense Department Inspector General, in a June report, two years ago, said the army made a $2.8 trillion in wrongful adjustments to accounting entries in one quarter alone in 2015 and $6.5 trillion for the year, yet the Army lacks receipts and invoices to support these numbers, or simply made them up." This would be something, I would think, would be under your department's jurisdiction. [...]
DAVID NORQUIST:
Let me address that, that's a very important one. One of the issues you're talking about related to journal vouchers, which occurs after the money is spent. So when you see in the article it says trillions of dollars and you realize we only receive about $600 billion in a year, there's a mismatch in the story. What this refers to is: we have systems that do not automatically pass data from one to the other. The army [and others] goes in at the end of their financial statements, finds the number from their property book and writes it into their general ledger. That is called a journal voucher entry. Depending on the property it could be hundreds of billions of dollars. Because they don't have adequate support for that journal voucher, the whole entry is considered unsupported. Now from a management point of view this is bad. It's not the same as not being able to account for money that the Congress has given you to spend, but it's still a problem that needs to be fixed. Part of that relates to systems that were built as "stove-pipes", and in private sector they don't talk to each other, you wouldn't let them field a system that wouldn't automatically pass up its data. So we are addressing exactly that type of challenge and one of my concerns is — only by eliminating the types of ones that are just an entry issue can you find underlying issues that are hidden among inaccurate data. So it's important, I wouldn't want the taxpayer to confuse that with something like the loss of trillion of dollars, that wouldn't be accurate. But it's an accounting problem that does need to be solved because it can help hide other underlying issues.
Because they don't have adequate support for that journal voucher, the whole entry is considered unsupported.
So what took place that triggered the unsupported journal entries amounting to trillions of dollars? No answers. How do you advise your clients who make unsupported large, unsupported journal entries?
It's not the same as not being able to account for money that the Congress has given you to spend, but it's still a problem that needs to be fixed.
No, it's not being able to account for an unsupported journal entry. I think that's a bit worse.
I wouldn't want the taxpayer to confuse that with something like the loss of trillion of dollars, that wouldn't be accurate.
No, I wouldn't want to think that it was a loss of trillions of dollars. It wasn't lost, it was spent and then hidden under gobbledegook. The only "accounting problem" is that it was "stovepiped" and then someone discovered it. Enron would be proud.
@jmski52 said: Well jmski, you're the one who talkING about your economics classes, so figure it out. Ive already shown you. If you don't want to or can't learn then that's not my concern
When was I talking about economics classes? I was objectively talking about the relevance of the statistics shown by the graph in the OP.
As usual, it's not, IMO, that it has nothing to do with it. It just may not have everything to do with it.
I tend to agree with you in that respect, Baley. In fact, if one were to overlay a chart of the changes in the Feds Funds Rate onto the OP chart, there might be an interesting observation that when the Fed Funds Rate is bumped up, fewer loans are made and theoretically, the economy starts to cool off. But like you say, it just may not have everything to do with it.
The issue here is the cost of servicing an unmanageable level of debt. From what I'm reading now, there is a liquidity crunch developing around the world because the Fed has raised rates and there are too few dollars to service the large overhang of debt that's been issued in every nook & cranny of every central bank around the world that depends on the world's reserve currency, I. e. the US dollar.
So the dollar goes up, and there will definitely be defaults and restructuring when large entities can't get their hands on enough dollars to service their overblown & overleveraged debt load in the face of higher rates. Whoever holds the counterparty debt instruments to all this debt will be very unhappy and if you don't think there will be a debt crisis, I respectfully think you are wrong.
The only way to keep a debt crisis from happening now is to lower rates again and that means keyboarding more $$$$ until the keyboard burns up. That means more free money for the banking cartel who can't survive without skimming something from everyone elses' accounts with the usual absence of accountability for mismanaging their own businesses. Non of it is sustainable.
Now, there's a prof at Michigan State who's saying that he's found another $21 trillion in the government accounting documents that can't be accounted for, the documents have now been reclassified and redacted for "national security" reasons, and that the GAO is now changing their accounting rules to allow moving the accounting entries around so that they can't be reconciled or traced any longer.
I'll leave it to bluelobster to come along and disparage this as a "sort of ZH, non capitalistic, anti fed, conspiracy theory point of view" epic tale from Lord of the Rings.
The fact that there are several trillion USD spent "off the books" be the US Gov't should come as no surprise. Percentage wise most nations are likely in a very similar situation. Now $21 trillion, doubling the published figures seems to be stretching it.
"the Yuan’s decline to levels not seen since before the 2008 crisis is principally due to the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) engaging the U.S. in a currency war – in direct response to Donald Trump’s escalation of the inevitable; and now, burgeoning; Sino-American trade war. Few financial markets will benefit from such an event – with sound money alternatives like gold and Bitcoin to experience a huge capital inflow."
.. sound money alternatives like gold ...to experience a huge capital inflow."_
We sure wish this would be right for once more before we croak
since 2011, huge capital inflows to physical gold have been countered by huge leveraged capital inflows to synthetic gold shorts, keeping gold prices down. If you want to kill a snake you have to wait for someone brave enough to cut off the head.
Note that central banks continue to buy hundreds of tons of gold per year, yet price remains depressed.
Reminds me of all the "peak oil" warnings of past recent decades, derryb.
Gold apparently is abundant in the oceans, in asteroids, in places heretofore to difficult to mine. Like oil, it's like to be a technology problem rather than an existence problem, so long as people want the stuff badly enough.
Now, there's a prof at Michigan State who's saying that he's found another $21 trillion in the government accounting documents that can't be accounted for, the documents have now been reclassified and redacted for "national security" reasons, and that the GAO is now changing their accounting rules to allow moving the accounting entries around so that they can't be reconciled or traced any longer.
This might be a good place to get more color on the "missing trillions" Those books are likely way messier than the Feds
@Baley said:
Baleyville is "Due" for a huge earthquake and wildfire, too.
We won't know if it was "imminent" until after, will we. But odds are, it won't be tomorrow, so that's how I'm betting. Of course, also have "insurance", and contingency plans, just in case the black swan lands..
Ok, who had "Asian Contagion" in our little game of SHTF bingo?
Comments
Looks like a tide chart. Surfing the incoming tide is like riding a good investment move. Unfortunately I have gone "over the falls" in all aspects of life too!
100% Positive BST transactions
Now now, don't go using logic and an understanding of the interrelatedness of cause and effect to help explain an observable correlation! That's kooky talk
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Observable correlation - exactly what the chart is. Problem is some of you don't see what is in front of your eyes.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Yes...tides are highest during a full moon so it's obvious that the tides cause the full moon---I've observed it, right in front of my very own eyes!!
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Corporations borrow money to expand or upgrade, which they rarely do during recessions.
So therefore you believe that corporate borrowing during expansions doesn't result in an unsustainable bubble when debt/GDP reaches a certain point?
Then, what do you suppose causes a recession? Bad luck?
I knew it would happen.
You are trying to create a causality that is incorrect. Recessions happen for many reasons, but a ratio of corporate debt to GDP at some magical number just isn't one of them.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Recessions are a byproduct of boom/bust cycles created by unstable FED policy. The chart demonstrates this.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
You are trying to create a causality that is incorrect. Recessions happen for many reasons, but a ratio of corporate debt to GDP at some magical number just isn't one of them.
And I would respectfully submit that you refuse to see a statistical correlation that looks pretty strong on the chart. Check with Baley and he can figure the correlation coefficient to see if it's significant. I'm guessing that it's pretty darned high.
I knew it would happen.
So there were no boom bust cycles or recessions,
before there was a Fed?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Yes, and they were generally fueled by irresponsible borrowing and foolish speculation, something the FED, since its creation in 2013 has fully enabled.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
There is a correlation....debt falls when a recession hits. That's the correlation. It's pretty f'ING simple.
The chart is the same as one that would depict snow and cold temperatures. You would interpret the chart as saying the snow causes the cold.
You are free to see whatever you want. You are also free to be wrong.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Reviewing this thread, can't think of a better way to accrue valuable tax losses and reduce over all personal wealth potential, than extrapolating an investment strategy from a sort of ZH, non capitalistic, anti fed, conspiracy theory point of view.
I realize the drama and intrigue of looking at things from this point of view, can be fascinating, but maybe a actual Investment strategy that's successful, could have is it's reward, even if it's not as interesting as a epic tale. IE Lord of the Rings
Don't get me wrong I love Lord of the Rings ;
There is a correlation....debt falls when a recession hits. That's the correlation. It's pretty f'ING simple.
So, you say that there is only a correlation in that debt falls after the recession hits, but absolutely no correlation in that debt rises before a recession hits, correct? If it's so f'ing simple, please help me understand, coho. I want to be able to know how statistical correlations work in only one direction. How about you, Baley? I'm just guessing that you're big into stats. And you, bluelobster - explain the correlation or lack thereof in terms of wood elves, if that's what moves you.
I knew it would happen.
Well jmski, you're the one who talkING about your economics classes, so figure it out. Ive already shown you. If you don't want to or can't learn then that's not my concern
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
As usual, it's not, IMO, that it has nothing to do with it.
It just may not have everything to do with it.
The moon affects the tides. But so does the sun. And if the water at the shore is high, or low, maybe the weather or plate tectonics played a part too.
No doubt debt building and unwinding affects the economy and its cycles. So does innovation, technology, manias, fear, military activity, and yes the weather and natural and human made disasters of all descriptions, and possibly even visitors from space in the past and/or future.
We're due for a stock market crash and recession, but that doesn't mean one is imminent. Things keep changing all the time.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
We're due but it's not imminent. LOL
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Baleyville is "Due" for a huge earthquake and wildfire, too.
We won't know if it was "imminent" until after, will we. But odds are, it won't be tomorrow, so that's how I'm betting. Of course, also have "insurance", and contingency plans, just in case the black swan lands..
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Well jmski, you're the one who talkING about your economics classes, so figure it out. Ive already shown you. If you don't want to or can't learn then that's not my concern
When was I talking about economics classes? I was objectively talking about the relevance of the statistics shown by the graph in the OP.
As usual, it's not, IMO, that it has nothing to do with it. It just may not have everything to do with it.
I tend to agree with you in that respect, Baley. In fact, if one were to overlay a chart of the changes in the Feds Funds Rate onto the OP chart, there might be an interesting observation that when the Fed Funds Rate is bumped up, fewer loans are made and theoretically, the economy starts to cool off. But like you say, it just may not have everything to do with it.
The issue here is the cost of servicing an unmanageable level of debt. From what I'm reading now, there is a liquidity crunch developing around the world because the Fed has raised rates and there are too few dollars to service the large overhang of debt that's been issued in every nook & cranny of every central bank around the world that depends on the world's reserve currency, I. e. the US dollar.
So the dollar goes up, and there will definitely be defaults and restructuring when large entities can't get their hands on enough dollars to service their overblown & overleveraged debt load in the face of higher rates. Whoever holds the counterparty debt instruments to all this debt will be very unhappy and if you don't think there will be a debt crisis, I respectfully think you are wrong.
The only way to keep a debt crisis from happening now is to lower rates again and that means keyboarding more $$$$ until the keyboard burns up. That means more free money for the banking cartel who can't survive without skimming something from everyone elses' accounts with the usual absence of accountability for mismanaging their own businesses. Non of it is sustainable.
Now, there's a prof at Michigan State who's saying that he's found another $21 trillion in the government accounting documents that can't be accounted for, the documents have now been reclassified and redacted for "national security" reasons, and that the GAO is now changing their accounting rules to allow moving the accounting entries around so that they can't be reconciled or traced any longer.
I'll leave it to bluelobster to come along and disparage this as a "sort of ZH, non capitalistic, anti fed, conspiracy theory point of view" epic tale from Lord of the Rings.
I knew it would happen.
And we wonder why some kids just get passed along through the education system.
If I have 10 employees and 8 are doing well while 2 just don't get it, should I focus more attention on the 8 or the 2?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Well, you could just let the 2 continue the free ride by not focusing on them. After all it is the American way.
Or, you could hold them accountable.
Better yet, involve the 8 in bringing the 2 up to snuff.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
First choice costs the company, second costs society and the 3 could cost your busness.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
It's not rocket science, it's called making a decision.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
jmski, Sorry missed your post earlier. no doubt a interesting story, I had read about it a while ago. It really seems to be about hideous and ridiculous accounting by the Army which started in the 90s. The fact is, it has to be a real money, 21 trillion at that. Unless they are hiding it at area 54, doesn't look like that 21 trillion ever existing as real dollars.
https://youtu.be/NoOFhjDjGqU
REP. WALTER JONES
Of all the articles I've seen about waste in the 22 years that I've been here, probably this is in the top four or five. It's from two years ago [reading] "US Army fudged its accounts by trillions of dollars, auditors find. The Defense Department Inspector General, in a June report, two years ago, said the army made a $2.8 trillion in wrongful adjustments to accounting entries in one quarter alone in 2015 and $6.5 trillion for the year, yet the Army lacks receipts and invoices to support these numbers, or simply made them up." This would be something, I would think, would be under your department's jurisdiction. [...]
DAVID NORQUIST:
Let me address that, that's a very important one. One of the issues you're talking about related to journal vouchers, which occurs after the money is spent. So when you see in the article it says trillions of dollars and you realize we only receive about $600 billion in a year, there's a mismatch in the story. What this refers to is: we have systems that do not automatically pass data from one to the other. The army [and others] goes in at the end of their financial statements, finds the number from their property book and writes it into their general ledger. That is called a journal voucher entry. Depending on the property it could be hundreds of billions of dollars. Because they don't have adequate support for that journal voucher, the whole entry is considered unsupported. Now from a management point of view this is bad. It's not the same as not being able to account for money that the Congress has given you to spend, but it's still a problem that needs to be fixed. Part of that relates to systems that were built as "stove-pipes", and in private sector they don't talk to each other, you wouldn't let them field a system that wouldn't automatically pass up its data. So we are addressing exactly that type of challenge and one of my concerns is — only by eliminating the types of ones that are just an entry issue can you find underlying issues that are hidden among inaccurate data. So it's important, I wouldn't want the taxpayer to confuse that with something like the loss of trillion of dollars, that wouldn't be accurate. But it's an accounting problem that does need to be solved because it can help hide other underlying issues.
Come on bluelobster... don't squash a good conspiracy theory. They gotta keep the hopium flowing.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Because they don't have adequate support for that journal voucher, the whole entry is considered unsupported.
So what took place that triggered the unsupported journal entries amounting to trillions of dollars? No answers. How do you advise your clients who make unsupported large, unsupported journal entries?
It's not the same as not being able to account for money that the Congress has given you to spend, but it's still a problem that needs to be fixed.
No, it's not being able to account for an unsupported journal entry. I think that's a bit worse.
I wouldn't want the taxpayer to confuse that with something like the loss of trillion of dollars, that wouldn't be accurate.
No, I wouldn't want to think that it was a loss of trillions of dollars. It wasn't lost, it was spent and then hidden under gobbledegook. The only "accounting problem" is that it was "stovepiped" and then someone discovered it. Enron would be proud.
Explain where I'm wrong. You're advocating large, unsupported journal entries? Interesting!
I knew it would happen.
The fact that there are several trillion USD spent "off the books" be the US Gov't should come as no surprise. Percentage wise most nations are likely in a very similar situation. Now $21 trillion, doubling the published figures seems to be stretching it.
The coming Historic Yuan Devaluation
"the Yuan’s decline to levels not seen since before the 2008 crisis is principally due to the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) engaging the U.S. in a currency war – in direct response to Donald Trump’s escalation of the inevitable; and now, burgeoning; Sino-American trade war. Few financial markets will benefit from such an event – with sound money alternatives like gold and Bitcoin to experience a huge capital inflow."
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
.. sound money alternatives like gold ...to experience a huge capital inflow."_
We sure wish this would be right for once more before we croak
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
since 2011, huge capital inflows to physical gold have been countered by huge leveraged capital inflows to synthetic gold shorts, keeping gold prices down. If you want to kill a snake you have to wait for someone brave enough to cut off the head.
Note that central banks continue to buy hundreds of tons of gold per year, yet price remains depressed.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
How many new tons of gold are produced each year?
Answer: over 3000 metric tons of new gold mined each year, rising steadily since 2005.
Maybe central bank buying keeps gold prices... elevated ...
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
More importantly how much gold is estimated to be left for mining. At the current production rate it is expected that all remaining gold will be removed from the earth in less than 20 years. Of course the current rate of production cannot continue as in ground supplies are depleted. So look for your annual production number to start quickly tapering off. Most of us know what should happen when supply becomes more limited each year. Apparently central banks know as well.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Reminds me of all the "peak oil" warnings of past recent decades, derryb.
Gold apparently is abundant in the oceans, in asteroids, in places heretofore to difficult to mine. Like oil, it's like to be a technology problem rather than an existence problem, so long as people want the stuff badly enough.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Maybe central bank buying keeps gold prices... elevated ...
And maybe central banks value gold as a real asset, because they know where the fractional reserve scheme and fiat currency lead.
I knew it would happen.
This might be a good place to get more color on the "missing trillions" Those books are likely way messier than the Feds
https://reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-audit/pentagon-fails-its-first-ever-audit-official-says-idUSKCN1NK2MC
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Ok, who had "Asian Contagion" in our little game of SHTF bingo?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry