Sunday, March 14, 2010

Where is a safe place for cash?

First off let me state that I am not a financial advisor. These are simply my opinions and thoughts.

The banks have a lot of problems that they are not sharing with the public. Big Problems! I wish I owned my home so I could have a hidden safe somewhere, but I don't. Of course a safe can be stolen or robbed also so it would have to be well hidden and NO ONE should know you have one. I would not even let someone install it and I would not let the company I buy it from know where I live. As far as banks go, if your savings account and your checking account are fdic insured then your money is supposedly protected. The problem is that some studies show that the fdic does not have enough money to cover all the losses if the huge banks fail. Also if the fdic has to deal with a huge bank that fails you have to wonder how long until you can get your money back since the fdic has millions of accounts to deal with. A smaller bank the fdic can handle much easier. Usually they just move your money into a healthier local bank. Personally I would reccomend that you use your big bank for monthly bills and find a smaller bank with a five star rating to put your excess money into. For example USAA bank has one of the highest ratings in nevada -- 4 stars at But I would still keep an eye on their ratings throughout the next year. Especially stay away form banks that were big into home and commercial real estate loans over the last few years. Those banks are headed for more trouble. I wonder to myself if putting money into a reliable brokerage firm like Scottrade may be a good idea as they have no exposure to real estate loans. Just a thought. Good luck to all.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Mark to Market, a Painful pill for Banks.

In a letter to the CEOs of Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank asks that the banks admit losses on all the valueless second mortgages that they hold. By doing so the banks would basically be showing how close to insolvency they actually are. But I have to wonder if Franks request are a hint toward things to come. I suspect he knows they will not do this willingly.

This makes me wonder if he gearing up for a reinstatement of mark to market. Mark to market rules would force the banks to value real estate holdings at current market value as was the case about a year ago (At that time they removed the mark to market requirement in the FASB accounting rules to stop the banks from showing how much trouble they were really in).

Currently, as I can best understand it, the banks are able to mark to the value of the current loans against the properties. So if you owe the bank 300k but the current market value is 150k, then currently the bank can show they have an asset worth $300k whereas if mark to market were reinstated then they would have to revalue that asset at $150k.

This rule change about a year ago as well as other factors are what I believe helped fuel the rally from March '09 until now.

Mr. Franks wording in his letter is pointing toward an attitude that the banks need to get back to a reality based accounting standard. If the banks choose to follow the recommendations in the letter, or if they are forced to do so via reinstatement of mark to market rules, either way bank stocks are likely to head for trouble. Keep your ears peeled. If reinstatement ever happens then the banks may lead the market into a new round of pain.


Mr. Brian Moynihan
Bank of America

Mr. Vikram Pandit

Mr. James Dimon
JP Morgan Chase

Mr. John Stumpf
Wells Fargo

Dear Messrs. Moynihan, Pandit, Dimon and Stumpf:

The mortgage foreclosure crisis that began over two years ago, and which continues to be a prime contributor to our nation's current economic downturn, burdens millions of hard-working American families. Congress and the Obama Administration have worked hard to address foreclosures by enabling and encouraging loan modification s, but the private sector's response has fallen far short of the need. Many homeowners are eager to save their homes despite being "underwater," but find that lenders and servicers are unable or unwilling to make necessary modi fications. These homeowners are increasingly deciding to walk away and thus foreclosures continue to mount, deepening the crisis.

To save homes on a large scale, we must move past temporary modifications in interest rates or terms and focus on permanent principal reductions that result in truly sustainable mortgages. There is no more important priority for me in our efforts to restore stability to our mortgage market.

Many investors in first-lien mortgages have indicated that they are willing to accept the fact of significant losses on those investments in order to move on and use their money for other purposes, rather than having it locked in underwater mortgages with a high and growing likelihood of foreclosure. With the interests of homeowners and investors aligned in this way, it should follow that large numbers of principal-reduction modifications could be made relatively quickly. That is not happening. According to investors, Administration officials, and other experts I have consulted, holders of second-lien mortgages are now a principal obstacle to many modifications. The problem of second-lien mortgages standing in the way of successful principal reduction modifications has reached a critical stage and requires immediate
attention from your institutions.

Large numbers of these second liens have no real economic value - the first liens are well underwater, and the prospect for any real return on the seconds is negligible. Yet because accounting rules allow holders of these seconds to carry the loans at artificially high values, many refuse to acknowledge the losses and write down the loans, which would allow willing first lien holders to reduce principal and keep
borrowers in their homes.

The four organizations you lead are major participants in the second-lien market. Failure to modify these debts has become a major and unnecessary obstacle to thousands of Americans being able to stay in their homes. I urge you in the strongest possible terms to take immediate steps to write down these second mortgages and allow principal reduction modifications of the underlying first liens to take place. If there are legal obstacles to your doing so, we will work with you to remove them.

I will be calling you within the week to discuss what your institutions plan to do to remove the second liens you own or control as impediments to principal reduction modifications.

Bear ready to attack?

Check out this chart showing when cash held by mutual funds is around 3.5% that is often when the market falls.

1) Major rallies occurred in 1974, 1982, and 1990 when the cash levels were greater than 11%.

2) The market sold off in 1973, 1976, and 2000 when cash levels were below 4.5%.

3) The old historical low was 3.9% in 05/1972. The market top was 12/1972 followed by a 46% decline. The next historical low was 4.0% on 03/2000 followed by a 43% decline. New historic lows of 3.5% were set in June and July 2007.

4) Cash levels reached 6.5% in November 2000 but the market declined to a bottom in October 2002.

5) Cash levels reached 5.9% in February 2009 then rolled over sharply.

6) The January 2010 level was 3.6% compared to 3.6% in December 2009 and 5.7% in January 2009. Cash levels are in a very low range. The chart suggests the market is near a top as cash levels are near to the historic low of 3.5%. The next decline should be similar to 2000-2002 and 2007-2009 (50-60%).

7) Cash levels will have to move much higher before the secular bear market ends.

8) Stock funds posted an inflow of $16.34 billion in January, compared with an outflow of $3.53 billion in December. Among stock funds, world equity funds (US funds that invest primarily overseas) posted an inflow of $10.10 billion in January, vs. an inflow of $5.41 billion in December. Funds that invest primarily in the US had an inflow of $6.24 billion in January, vs. an outflow of $8.94 billion in December.

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Bears, don't give up yet!

Odds are, the rally from the March low will become known as the biggest flash in the pan, or sucker rally, since the Great Depression.

Socializing of America

The international forcaster article ends with these words ...

We have been informed by our contracts in Washington that debt failure, the bankrupt or near bankrupt conditions at lenders and the lack of loans available for the past couple of years suit the administration just fine. Mr. Obama believes that the more small and medium-sized companies that go under the better it is for his economic program. That means large corporations and government will supply the jobs and subsequent control of the people. Debt doesn’t matter when the goal is a one-world society, nor does unemployment. These Illuminists are going to rip this country piece by piece. In addition, as we said six years ago, when we said Fannie and Freddie were bankrupt, the government wants to end up owning 40% of US housing in order to completely control 40% of Americans’ lives. Once in full possession they further dictate how Americans will live.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Follow Walkerxdotcom on Twitter

I seem to be twittering my comments more than blogging lately, so after you're done checking out my blog below, and my videos to the right >>>

check out my Twitter page and click Follow when you get there.

Here is a sample of my tweets:

Walkerxdotcom Tweets

@TerryGahm if u want learn about bilderberg google bilderberg estulin. Bilderberg is the Oz behind the curtain. Goldman Sachs is their golden goose.
3:19 AM Jul 8th from TwitterFon in reply to TerryGahm

The most important thing we could do to change the course of human freedoms. #bilderberg #federal reserve
2:45 AM Jul 8th from TwitterFon

Must Read! "The Great Bubble Machine". Goldman Sachs manipulates every major market. #finance #politics #bilderberg
10:36 PM Jul 7th from TwitterFon

@KHerriage be careful of inverse etfs as they have built in degradation. Check the 2 yr charts. Good for swing or day but not buy hold.
2:23 AM Jul 7th from TwitterFon in reply to KHerriage

@KHerriage agree about stock market but not so much about gold. I think golds in a fear bubble. Why not just short market instead?
2:20 AM Jul 7th from TwitterFon in reply to KHerriage

I don't agree so much about dollar debasement. But good article. The Freedom to Fail:
8:56 PM Jul 5th from TwitterFon

Watching the Mark Levin interview on Hannity. If you haven't read "Liberty and Tyranny" yet, you should.
6:39 PM Jul 1st from TwitterFon

Mark Levin -"The President's policies are Bernie Madoff times 1,000" "He's dragging us into a SOFT TYRANY" on #Hannity #tcot #gop
6:39 PM Jul 1st from TwitterFon

I will not buy anything new at this point in the economy. As new things will continue losing value in this deflationary time. Saving cash.
7:10 PM Jun 24th from TwitterFon

I moved all my money in my 401k out of stocks and into bonds. Money market could be good too. Big rally will have big fall. Cash is king.
7:04 PM Jun 24th from TwitterFon

Will Amero replace the dollar? Not! Also read this article. Excllnt explanation of everything I say on YouTube.
6:59 PM Jun 24th from TwitterFon

Fianlly some proof. As I've been saying deflation not inflation.
2:39 AM Jun 20th from TwitterFon

@wprins I'm betting it's a bear market rally also.
5:12 AM Jun 17th from TwitterFon in reply to wprins

Who is calling the economic situation best IMO? Robert Prechter and Hugh Hendry are two of my favorites.
10:32 PM Jun 16th from TwitterFon

Swine flu no different than regular flu. Proof at Distraction from new world order. Theft by central bankers.
6:56 PM May 2nd from TwitterFon

The new world order led by federal reserve central bankers was predicted by 5 Presidents. Read before calling me nuts. Http://
3:14 PM Apr 28th from TwitterFon

@Reinhoren maybe not so paranoid. Check out what I've uncovered at
2:38 PM Apr 28th from TwitterFon in reply to Reinhoren

5 presidents warned us about Central Banks

Alex Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh at the time of America's birth, wrote a warning to America in 1787. He observed that the average age of the world's greatest civilizations was about 200 years, during which they inevitably progressed through the following sequence:

Century one:
from bondage to faith,
from faith to courage,
from courage to liberty,
from liberty to abundance,

Century two:
from abundance to complacency,
from complacency to apathy,
from apathy to dependence,
from dependence back to bondage.

In 1776 the declaration of Independence was signed. Here we are coming up on our 233rd year as a country. Articles are popping up around us like one I recently ran across called "TARP, The Criminal Enterprise".

Then there's a radio interview I mentioned previously in my blog, describing what's happening between the government and the bankers. Describing it as a "Fraud of unparalleled magnitude." (click here to listen).

This got me thinking about the conspiracy theorists out there that speak of a "New world order" and that say that the bankers are playing the world to their own benefit as if it was a chess game. They even claim that the federal reserve banking system which the world has been convinced is a necessary and helpful part of our government, is actually a privately owned business, made to look and sound like it's a government institution.

This got me wondering, who exactly are these people who would make such, seemingly, ridiculous accusations.

So I did a little looking around and found some names that, I must say, surprised me.

President Woodrow Wilson (After signing the Federal banking system into law in 1913): "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.

President James A. Garfield: "Whoever controls the money in any country is absolute master of industry [legislation] and commerce".

President Thomas Jefferson: "I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the Federal government their power of borrowing." he also said "I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies."

President Lincoln: “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes.”

President Andrew Jackson: "The Bank is trying to kill me - but I will kill it!" Later he said "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning..." Also .. "The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."

So here we have five presidents of the United States warning about the dangers of having the money supply of a nation LOANED to the government and its people by central banks, who charge interest on every penny in circulation.

Here is a short 8 minute video for more clarity on the central banks relationship to our country.

OK. So it sounds like the conspiracy theorists have a few good names on their petition, so to speak. But then they take things a step further and try to make us believe that The Federal Reserve System (and its counterparts around the world) are driven by more than simple greed. They would have us believe that money is not enough, but world domination, in the guise of a new world order is their true intent. Sounds a bit coo-coo-for-coco-puffs to me. I've always considered myself too savvy and balanced for extremist mentality. I'm the guy who can see a scam a mile away. I've always found the truth somewhere between the pendulum swings. I sold my condo at the top of the housing bubble because I could feel the bubble in my gut.

I think about this gut feeling. I think about Obama, and how much everyone loves him. He always has the right thing to say. His sleeves are rolled up. He's having a beer at the game. He's picking his favorite sports teams. He's making everyone comfortable. He's making everyone smile and excited. He's a perfect, calming, influence amidst an underlying upheaval of society.

Incredible amounts of money are moving to the wealthiest of people, while the working class are being sucked dry to the bone, as unemployment continues its spread across the nation.

Then I catch myself "But wait a minute, why would the fed loan all this money to the banks via government bailouts?" If they were a greedy institution they would keep the money for themselves and say screw the banks. At the same moment that I believe my sanity to be returning, rumblings arise once again from realities around me. Rumblings that some of these bank owners are also owners of the federal reserve bank.

Then a light bulb goes off in my head. They say they are trying to save the banks, yet delayed stress tests have begun to leak into the public consciousness that most of these banks are actually insolvent. I ask myself why would I believe these leaks to be true? Answer: Because if good news was coming, the government would not delay it. They're buying time for a reason.

So maybe this "saving the banks" is just a front. Everyone knows the banks are going to fall. All this is really about is getting the cash into the executives pockets. They don't really care if the businesses fall. Once they have all that cold hard cash stashed away. The banks can fall around them. Big deal!

Yet when the banks do fall, how are We The People affected? do we not have to pay our debt to them anymore? We'll just go bankrupt, right? So we'll be fine. OK, so we go bankrupt. But does that really take the weight of all that debt off our shoulders? Or does it just transfer the debt from personal to national debt. The former, we can go bankrupt to save ourselves, the latter, well, good luck not paying your taxes. I mean, I don't recall signing the loan app, but apparently I'm responsible for the billions I borrowed to give to the billionaires. But it's all good, super Obam's got my back!

Forgive me. I've digressed. So "New World Order?" Let's take a look at some other statements made in our history's past to see if there may be any validity to this concept.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild international banking dynasty 1790: "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes the laws"

Abraham Lincoln: "Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."

President Woodrow Wilson: "If monopoly persists, monopoly will always sit at the helm of government. I do not expect monopoly to restrain itself. If there are men in this country big enough to own the government of the United States, they are going to own it."

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, 1934: "The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International Bankers."

Senator John Danforth: "I have never seen more Senators express discontent with their jobs ... I think the major cause is that, deep down in our hearts, we have been accomplices in doing something terrible and unforgivable to our wonderful country. Deep down in our heart, we know that we have given our children a legacy of bankruptcy. We have defrauded our country to get ourselves elected."

James Paul Warburg before the Senate on Feb. 7, 1950: "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent."

David Rockefeller 1994: "This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order"

Interesting to note here "All we need is the right major crisis." Why do you imagine they need a major crisis to get people to march toward a new world order. Could it be that crisis has been the best way in history to create fear in the citizens of a country. And that when a major crisis occurs, the citizens are more than willing to give up their freedoms for the sake of safety.

Also interesting to note that we talk about fighting terrorism. Wikipedia describes terrorism as "an act which is intended to create fear (terror), and is perpetrated for an ideological goal." If the ideological goal is to create this new world order, and a "major crisis" is a necessary ingredient to this goal. Would it be so far fetched to say that those intent on bringing forth the goal, are in support of the one ingredient that is necessary to bring it about? Does this not invite and support an act of terrorism? Just asking. Let's read further.

David Rockefeller to a Trilateral Commission June of 1991: "We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries"

Woh! That last one was both, the most recent, and spooky. So Mr. David Rockefeller what you are saying is you have been discussing behind closed doors, for about 40 years now, and in secrecy, your intention to create a new world order?

I like the statement "But, the world is now more sophisticated" That's very complimentary. But I really have to wonder if that is what David Rockefeller really means. Two things come to mind.

In Century one of our nations existence a central banking system snaked its way into our nation twice, which lasted about 20 years each time before being pushed out by the intelligence, wisdom, and courage of its people. But in the second century of our country, we have not had such luck, the third bank (The Federal Reserve) has lasted much longer, about one hundred years now.

I think about that, then I think about Tylers 200 year sequences that I listed at the beginning of this article. Of the eight sequences within a country's existence, the first one hundred years is marked by a people with faith, courage, liberty, ending with abundance. It was within this framework that the central banking system was subdued, not once but twice.

Tylers next four sequences (or second century sequence) denote a laxadasical tone, complacency, apathy, dependence, ending in bondage. Bringing to mind philosopher George Santayana's "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." It seems to be the natural progression of a nation to forget that which made them great, and to trust the powers that be to make everything better.

Do you really believe that we are "more sophisticated" Mr. Rockefeller? Or does the very next sentence in your statement show what you really think? "The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries." So if you paint yourself as capable of running this planet do to your intellectual superiority, does that not clearly infer that it is not my growing "sophistication" that causes me to fall in line with your plans? For if I was "more sophisticated" than in times past, would that not put me on a more equal plain with you? Clearly in your statement you don't think of me as equal. Even less than that, you find me incapable planning my own way in life. You appear to see me as the mouse running around the maze in the cage, looking for the cheese. While yourself, the god above, musing at my antics.

When power becomes unchecked, it tends to become corrupt. And how interesting to note that the conspiracy theories, as well as the plans of the elite, end in a new world order, while Tylers model ends with "bondage".

The question now is, where are we in the Tyler cycle?

It's really our choice. We can sit still in the seat of complacency, and allow bondage to bind us completely. Or we can say "this bondage will continue no more!"

Let yesterday be the bondage.

Let today be beginning of courage, that tommorrow will be the liberty it once was. Let every man have the power to determine his own way in life, and to discover and follow his passions.

Let today be the day of faith and courage, of standing up, broad shouldered, square jawed, eyes piercing through BS and manipulations. Let those who THINK they have conquered, see the masses stop in their tracks, stand tall, and turn the tides of this current corruption.

Abolish the Federal Reserve.

Friday, July 10, 2009

Can we really print our way to inflation?

I read an interesting article at one of my favorite blogs. He basically came up with the idea that if all countries were to bail us all out of our current debts via printing money, then we could get back to an inflationary scenario, while currencies would remain comparatively unaffected.

The blogger at "Economic Disconnect" (it's a great blog) always gives me food for thought. Here is the article

My reply to the article is what follows:

I was hit by the same thought as you. It is quite the head scratcher. Except for the fact it is not free money that is being printed. It is money we the tax payers will have to pay back.

Also most of this printed money is going into big pockets, not my pockets, yet I who get no benefit, retain all the burden of that debt. The only way the inflation scenario could work is if the bailouts bailed me and the rest of the middle class out of all our debt. If that happened then our money could once again chase products, causing their value to rise, causing demand to rise, causing production to rise, thereby causing inflation to overcome deflation which could lead to a reversal of the unemployment problem.

The only problem is this does not appear to be the true underlying goal. The true underlying goal appears to be big financial takes care of itself and eachother and the rest of us and our children can pay for it although we recieved no benefit.

Even if my better scenario actually could come to pass, and we the people were bailed out, we would not really be bailed out. If we were in a system where the treasuries of all the countries printed more and bailed us out then it could possibly work, for all money would devalue at the same pace, as is true with our past. (todays dollar is worth a nickle comapared to 1930's).

But We are not in a system where the treasuries can print and bailout.

We are in a system where we borrow the bailout money from the Central banks. Therefor in our current system even if we did bail out ourselves, it would not be a true fix because our taxes would have to be raised by extreme amounts to pay back the central banks to keep this party going.

The only true fix is to take our punishment, suffer through the correction that needs to take place, stop borrowing (enslaving ourselves to the central banks), and Abolish the Federal Reserve.
Sign the petition here.

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Next Leg Down Dow Below 6000?

I found a very interesting article by Bob Chapman whose blog can be found in my bloglist on this page. I agree with his assesment of market direction but not so much his inflationary predictions. A very interesting article none-the-less. Here are some excerpts.

Bob Chapman
Tuesday, 19 May 2009 09:13
16 May, 2009 International Forecaster

On the near term the Dow will return to 6600. Looking for another rally there will be buyers, but the rally will not appear again and we’ll fall into the 5,000 to 6,000 level. Higher real interest rates will win out as will hyperinflation; at least for a time. Consumer confidence may be somewhat ebullient now, but once further signs of higher inflation manifest itself that confidence will fall again. The same will happen with capital investment.

Once real estate bottoms in 2011 and 2012, we will probably be half way to the overall bottom. We have 2/3’s of the way to go before credit card debt is purged. We are just beginning to see failure of commercial and industrial loans and that could last another 3 to 4 years. Presently we are about 40% to the bottom. Then the question arises how long do we bump along the bottom – probably 5 years or longer – dependent on how bad the structural damage is, whether we still have a Federal Reserve; how many banks are left; whether we have WWIII or whether we have revolution. America and the world are in for a difficult time.

S&P says companies cut $77 billion in dividends in the first quarter and that is worse than during the Great Depression. That is part of the reason we declared a depression in February.

Prior to the beginning of the recent fall and that of 1929 both events occurred after a long period of optimism. Most observers do not believe that this depression will be accompanied by global protectionism, nor do they see ultimately a deflationary depression and price deflation. How can they be so near sighted? The Fed and the Treasury cannot inflate indefinitely. The events we’ve witnessed and continue to witness, and those that we project, can only lead to hyperinflation and then deflation. Since 2000 these forecasts have been easy and we’ve been right, but few else have. They are all bound up in what is financial and political correctness. We are going to 3,800 to 4,200 and we’ll be lucky if it stops there.

Incidentally, Stephen Friedman recently cashiered from the NY Fed has returned to his roost at Goldman Sachs. He was caught in a conflict of interest after having purchased 52,600 shares of Goldman on inside information. It is now very obvious Goldman Sachs controls our country. The only mission of the Fed is to rescue banks, brokerage firms and insurance companies.

John Taylor: "the whole house of cards collapses. He says the risk is systemic."

Saturday, May 2, 2009

The swine flu. Distraction or Real Threat?

This post will make more sense if you read the previous post first.
"5 presidents hinted at new world order by central bankers"


Central Bankers: Hey! People are really starting to take notice of the trillions of dollars we are stealing from them. We've got to do something to distract them.

Elites: Shoot! You're right man. Hmmm ....Hey I got it! OK, try to follow me here. A new influenza strain comes out every year, right?

Central Bankers: Yeah.

Elites: Well, every year the new strains kill tens of thousands in the U.S. alone, not to mention how many accross the world.

Central Bankers: OK, so?

Elites: What if we focused on the next strain that came out, we gave it a special name, and we reported every death that occurred on a daily basis. Then we could say it's a world wide pandemic. That way people would forget about us and worry about the "pandemic."

Central Bankers: Genius good chap!

REGULAR flu has killed thousands since January

Scientists: This swine flu relatively mild in comparison to ‘regular’ flu

U.S. Swine Flu No Worse Than Seasonal Flu, Experts Say