Bitcoin Trader

Bitcoin Trader is one of the latest online trading software that deals with crypto currencies. Trading in crypto currencies have been quite lucrative because the enhanced returns these trades promise. This website manages to successfully earn good profits for the investors. This platform is a good option for beginners as it has the auto-pilot function which places the trades on its own after identifying positive financial propositions.

The software was created by a group of experienced and skilled forex traders and therefore the software has proven to achieve the best results in this sector. It guarantees an unmatched success rate of 99.4%. Investors can be rest assured that their money is safe and will generate a decent income for them. People looking to earn some good money via online trading should definitely sign up to this website to experience the incredible profit generating capacity of this tool.

Majority of the investors are still skeptical about the profit earning ability of these online trading bots. This system is built on complex algorithms coupled with the latest technology. Thus it is able to identify the market patterns and predict the price movements of the assets accurately. The work of the trading robot is not over with the identification of such opportunities, it also places timely trades to help the investors earn maximum profits. Like the other competitors, even this website offers both the manual and automated trading options to the investor. The manual option is for the experienced trader who is well-versed with the crypto market and is able to formulate his own strategies to make the trade more profitable.

The registration to this amazing software is free and it also does not require any download. It works on any browser. The users can trade from anywhere in the world if they have internet, a computer or smart phones. The software is also designed to work on smart phones. With the increased use of smart phones and internet mobile trading is becoming the order of the day.

The software requires the users to deposit a minimum amount of $250 dollars to fund the initial trade. This amount is not a fee or charge rather it is the amount required to start the trade. The online software guarantees good customer support through their 24/7 customer service centers. The support system is also available via E-mail, live chat and telephone. The potential investors need not fear about the authenticity and legitimacy of this platform. Further information on the authenticity and trustworthiness of this platform is available on the internet.

Brussels attacks Americans must realize dont muslim immigration problems europe avoid eu mistakes

Litecoin is the second largest cryptocurrency after Bitcoin. It is the silver to the crypto market after Bitcoin which is considered as gold. It is a decentralized and open source cryptocurrency. Litecoin has many similarities with Bitcoin and some features are considered an improvement of Bitcoin. In 2013 it had reached USD $1 million market cap and its growth is unstoppable after that.

It has many similarities with Bitcoin but is more advantageous when comes to transaction, mining, speed, and accuracy.  Let us discuss them

  • Segregated witness process which is used in Litecoin increases the rate of transaction verification. Time of payment confirmation is also reduced from 10 minutes to 2.5 minutes.
  • The speed also comes with security which reduces the hacking attacks.
  • Litecoin has coin limit of 84 million compared to its market rival bitcoin, that has a limit of 21 million coins.
  • Scrypt hashing is used for Litecoin compared to SHA-256bmining which is used for Bitcoin.
  • Litecoin has also secured its wallet from viruses and Trojans, it also performs sanity check before making any transaction. Click on the full review to know more.

Litecoin can use in the same manner as Bitcoin, one can use it anywhere Bitcoin is used.  Merchants are adopting this currency since it has occupied the second position after its release in the market. Merchants like health and beauty product, financial consultants have started to accept it.

It is a lot easier to pay and Litecoin compared to any other cryptocurrency. Steps for payment with Litecoin are discussed as under.

  • In your wallet information enter the person address or simply scan the QR code that matches the address.
  • Next, enter the amount that you intend to send.
  • Click on send, your money is transferred.

It is that simple to do Litecoin transaction.

The growth of Litecoin will not slow down in the near future, which will lead many more merchants to accept it either along with bitcoin or chances are there it may completely replace bitcoin. Many companies are installing ATMs to switch to Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast should consider buying Litecoin as it can give them good returns.

Bitcoin may have grabbed all the attention of the market but Litecoin is also growing at a faster rate to give it a good competition. The growth of bitcoin has boosted up the cryptocurrency market and has opened the door for other cryptocurrencies like Litecoin, Ethereum, ripple to mark their presence in the market.



Online Trading

Online trading is the hot topic that goes among the people in the news and magazines. So, trading has developed with an emerging trend in the recent times. Many women are willing to involve them in some sort of work from home from which they can easily earn money. Trading is the best way to earn money for those women. The trading software attracts the people to join the software by offering them a discounted registration fees and low price for each trade. There are some hottest trends in the trading technology. You can look here to know more about those trends.

Advanced charting tools:

The charts and graphs are the best methods to deliver the raw data and information to the traders. Usually, they do not want to spend their time sorting out the columns to get the data. So, they can use the charting tools to get that data quickly in an easy way. Charting tools are not new, it was already used in the trading technology. Nowadays, it has been improved and the traders can use their smartphones to deliver the fast data. The trading software provides various charting tools which will provide many attractive features as given below.

  1. Analysis of real-time markets
  2. It provides the customizable alerts to the traders
  3. Snapshot of the trader’s information can be taken quickly
  4. Potential to send the orders directly
  5. It provides many options to the customers
  6. Time-based and trade based options are available
  7. Automated trades are incorporated into the charting tools

User customization:

The traders will always expect flexibility and reliability from the trading software. So, there are many features added to customize the user’s expectation. The main goal is to make the trading method easy to use and the traders should not feel very hard while using.

Super-fast transactions:

The main feature is it provides the high speed for the transactions of the users. The speed will save the cost and the money of the traders. An e-trade transaction costs thousands of dollars for each and every second. So, when the trading process gets slow, the traders may spend dollars and dollars of money. To avoid this issue, the trading platform provides the super-fast transactions.

Mobile and cloud-based functionality:

The trading platforms should be fast and also mobile. Many trading platforms use cloud-based technology to download the software applications. But, the mobile apps need some security for the financial services and the personal details and information.

Research tools that use big data:

The market research tools provide the users to earn money in the market without paying any commissions to the brokers. There are many tools which use the big data to provide the weather conditions and give the access and analyze the new stories.




Many traders are wishing to choose crypto currencies for doing trading. There are many reasons behind it. Let us visit the following site to know more in detail about the crypto CFD trading. Forex trading is highly regulated and highly trade. But cryptocurrrencies are very different from them since it is a decentralized trading, that is there will be no central bank interference. The risks and the chances of trading crypto currencies are greater when compared with the forex trading. If the traders wish to speculate the value of crypto currencies like ethereum and bitcoin, they can spread them by betting or CFD trading. The traders can see and know about them first without buying any currencies.

The potential growth of the traders who are trading crypto currencies is too high and they have more and more opportunities for the new traders. The rise in the profits will make the traders do trading in a new way to earn more profits in future. The high profits will sometimes create the risk of high losses when the traders trade in a wrong way. The traders should always have a risk management strategy to overcome the risk in trading crypto currencies.

One can compete against many bank institutions in the traditional market trading. They can hire some professional traders, the analysts and they will purchase the latest software to compete with them. But the smaller traders are not able to compete because they will not have many resources to compete against the banks. There are some obstacles before entering into the crypto currency world. But when the traders use betting or CFD trading, they can go on without high risk. The high-level rail mainly includes the discontinuation risk.

Features of crypto currencies:

The new comers to trade crypto currencies need to know about the features of crypto currencies. Let us take a closer look at those features.


The volatility is crazy in crypto currencies. It is about 32000 in bitcoin. The value of the dollar is much greater for forex pairs. So, the traders should be very conscious about the position sizing of how much they are going to bet.

24/7 market:

There is no leave for the cryptocurrency market since they are traded between the private individuals. There is no central bank and no daily market hours like in shares trading. The traders can trade all 24 hours and 7 days a week. There will be a shutdown of two hours on Saturdays for the platform maintenance purpose.


Thus conclude that there is only limited institutions are involved. Most crypto buying and selling are done only by the private investors. So, the traders can use CFD trading for trading crypto currencies.


Bitcoin is one of the famous cryptocurrency. After the development of digital currency market, it emerged as the first digital currency. It is a decentralized currency that means it is not controlled by any government or any financial institution.

Bitcoin was created in the year 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto. For Bitcoin transaction, no middleman is required.  It can be used as same as fiat money. One can use it to book a hotel or to but furniture. One can make money by trading Bitcoin; the value of Bitcoin skyrocketed in the year 2017. international transactions with Bitcoin is cheaper because it is not controlled by any bank.

One can buy or exchange Bitcoin at many digital marketplaces called Bitcoin exchange. Mining Bitcoin is famous nowadays. The miners have to solve the complicated mathematical puzzle and can earn from it. A miner can earn up to 12.5 Bitcoin in just 10 minutes by mining Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is stored in the digital wallet which is similar to storing money in real life wallet. The wallet can be divided into two types. One can be stored in users’ computer which has very less chance of hacking but it has the chances of virus corruption or accidental deletion and another is stored in the cloud computing, this wallet is prone to hack by the unauthorized agents. Using the wallet one can send and receive payments. To send a payment receivers wallet address is necessary. one can also [pay for goods using the wallet. The Bitcoin wallets are not insured.

All the Bitcoin transactions are stored in the blockchain, but names of the people doing the Bitcoin transaction never gets revealed the only one can come to know about the recipient’s wallet ID. This is why Bitcoin transaction is highly secured and one buys or sell Bitcoin without getting tracked by anyone.

It is a decentralized and unregulated currency but many countries have started regulating it but still, the future of Bitcoin code is unknown to us. . it has become a matter of concern for the government of many countries as they don’t have any control on it and it is non-taxable.

Among all other cryptocurrency Bitcoin has made its mark in the market and is one of the expensive cryptocurrency today. It is one of the sought after cryptocurrency among the traders as they make good money by trading it. There are various types of Bitcoin available in the market like Bitcoin gold, Bitcoin private.


Police Shootings Data

The data on police shootings from recent years is clear and overwhelming with what it tells us: 1.) police haven’t been this safe since the 1870s (not a typo: yes, that is the 19th century), 2). far more Americans are killed by police than criminals kill police, 3.) black Americans are shot and killed in far higher proportions by police than white Americans, 4.) African-Americans are killed far more often in situations where they are not a threat and/or deadly force is not called for, and 5.) American police regularly use lethal violence when it is inappropriate to do so.  The problems are systemic, consistent, and nothing new, but new data highlights these disparities more intensely than ever before, giving those who would deny these problems or drag their feet on urgent and needed reform (particularly police and Republican leaders) fewer excuses than they have ever had before.  Below is the most in-depth analysis of the new data you will find in a single article.  Whether you favor the slogan “blue lives matter” or “black lives matter” or both equally, to not act now will cost more black and blue lives, as I have pleaded before.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

AMMAN — After recent events (the shootings of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, of police in Dallas,, and, most recently, the terrorist assault on police in Baton Rouge) the time for action is now.  But when acting, an examination of data is the best way to chart a sensible path forward and to provide a real understanding of what is going on.  When it comes to police shootings, both by and of police, a look at the available data can tell us some very important, very clear, wholly indisputable things about the state of both police shooting and killing other people and police being shot and killed by other people.  Below are some of the clearest trends, among others, from the available data, in this exclusive analysis of the data and the most in-depth available in a single article:

 1.) Cops have never been safer from criminals in modern American history

AEI/Mark Perry/Newsweek/Daniel Bier

The past few years in America have seen the fewest number of police officers killed by criminals in the line of duty in American history since the 1870s.  This is true on multiple levels: it is true as far as the absolute number of police officers being killed, the percentage of all officers being killed, and the proportion of police officers killed in respect to the overall population; all this is also true regarding assaults and injuries sustained by police officers, except the rate of injuries is going up slightly from a historic low.  But taken together, clearly, it has never been safer to be an officer of the law in the United States of America, at least for all of our modern history in terms of being attacked by criminals.  In fact, being a cop, you have a slightly lower chance of being murdered than the average American and are far safer than residents of cities like Baltimore,

Baltimore is an important city of Maryland and birthplace of America’s national anthem. It is a port city of historic importance. It has an area of 239 sq. km. It is the 21st largest metropolitan city in the country. It is located 40 miles away from Washington.  Click this to know more.

Maryland, New Orleans, Louisiana, and St. Louis, Missouri.  The number of police killed in the line of duty fell to a record-since-the-19th-century-low 27 officers in 2013, and all recent years averaged together are at a historic low since that period as well.  So the idea that some articulate that there is a “war on cops” is false.


2.) Being a cop in America isn’t even one of the top ten most dangerous jobs in America

There are dozens of professions in America that are more lethal than being a police officer, including pretty normal ones like farming, driving taxis or trucks, construction, mining, roofing, collecting garbage, and landscaping.


3.) Police officers kill others far more than they are killed by others

Something that has been irritating for many people trying to point out the problems and disparities that the African-American community faces in its interaction with law enforcement is that people often respond by seeking to downplay the concerns of African-Americans, in part through trying to equate the threats and deaths of police officers in the line of duty with the threats African-Americans face from law enforcement.

There are good records of how many police officers are killed in the line of duty each year, but the same has not been true not true for how many people are killed by on-duty police officers; there is no comprehensive database on those killings, and those statistics are currently mainly supplied voluntarily to the FBI by a small number of the over 18,000 police departments nationwide; less than 3% have been doing so in recent year, the rest choosing not to submit data, but the FBI is planning to dramatically improve this and to implement a new system beginning 2017.

Still, even the data we do have is telling: only 27 police officers died of wounds inflicted with malicious intent (“feloniously killed”) in the line of duty in 2013, the lowest year on record since the 1870s, and while that number went up to 51 in 2014, that, too, was part of an overall trend that is historically low in recent years (48 in 2012, and preliminary data has 41 such police deaths in 2015).

When it comes to people killed by police, as I noted, there was only very incomplete data.  Yet finally, over the past few years, various independent organizations/journalistshave begun filling in the gaps; the most systematic and comprehensive appears to be The Washington Posts, which took it upon itself to systematically compile data on police shooting other people since there had, shockingly, been no such successful effort to do this; it started keeping track of all shootings from January 1st, 2015, forward.

For 2015, the Post was able to find and verify over twice the number of killings that were reported by the FBI’s voluntary reporting system, producing a statistic of 990 people killed by on-duty police; compared to the 41 police murdered on duty in 2015 from the FBI’s preliminary data, that, that means that over 24 times more people were killed by police than police were killed by criminals.  This number was more than twice the number of shootings that the FBI was able to uncover under its present, very incomplete system.  Moving onto 2016, thus far there were 20 police killed by criminals through the first six months of the year, while the Post verified that at least 491 people were killed in the same period, roughly the same ratio for all of 2015.

In other words, far more people are being killed by police than the other way around.

And we can also look at this proportionately in a rough but still quite informative way:  there are about 900,000 police officers in the U.S., which means police had about a 0.0045% of being killed by a criminal in 2015.  The general U.S. population was estimated at 320 million for the beginning of 2015; removing 900,000 police officers we will say that roughly there are 319 million non-police Americans, and that police killed about 0.0003% of the these Americans in 2015, but it should be reminded that police exist to deal with criminals and protect the citizenry, so this should not be surprising.  Still, that means that, again roughly, police are about 15 times likelier to be killed by non-police Americans than non-police Americans are likely to be killed by police.


4.) Black Americans are killed by police in far higher numbers proportionately than white Americans

But now it’s time to bring race and ethnicity into the equation.  Of the 990 people killed by police in 2015, 494 were white (a tad under 49.9% of the total), 258 were black (a little over 26%), and a little less than 3% were “unknown.” Non-Hispanic whites made up about 61.6%* of Americans in 2015 or about 196.5 million Americans; this meant that your typical white American has a bit over a 0.00025% chance of being killed by on-duty police; for African-Americans, who comprise about 13.3% of Americans, or a little over 42.4 million Americans, this means that they have a bit over a 0.0006% chance** of being killed by police and are about 2.4 times more likely to be killed by police than white people are (* and **: see Appendix).

Thus far in 2016, 522 people have been killed by police, including 242 white Americans (less than 46.4% of the total) and 129 black Americans (24.7%), comparable to last years’ disproportionate proportions.

Now, for the following statistics taken by the from the Post dataset, keep in mind that African-Americans are only about 13.3% of the U.S. population!

5.) Black Americans are more likely to be shot and killed while unarmed, both proportionately and in absolute terms in 2015, than white Americans

LM Otero

Out of 93 people who were unarmed when shot and killed by police in 2015 (almost 9.4% of those of all who were killed that year, or approaching 1 in 10 of all lethal police shootings, but not including 34 people “armed” with toy weapons), 38 were black (almost 40.9% of all unarmed people killed by police), which is more than the 32 white people who were unarmed when killed (34.4% of all unarmed people killed by police); all this makes a black person killed by police in 2015 18.9% more likely to have been unarmed than a white person killed by police, and in absolute terms well over 18.7% more black people were shot dead unarmed than unarmed whites.

Another way to look at the data is that of the 494 whites killed by police, the 32 killed while unarmed represent about 6.5% of all whites killed by police, while of the 258 African-Americans who were killed by police, the 38 who were killed unarmed are over 14.7% of all blacks killed by police, meaning that an African-American who was killed by police in 2015 was over 2.26 times more likely to have been unarmed than whites people killed by police.

Thus far in 2016, 35 people have been killed by police while unarmed (not including 23 who had toy guns), representing 6.7% of all deaths; 18 were white and 12 were black.  This means whites represented over 51.4% of all unarmed people who were killed by police and over 7.4% of all whites who were killed were unarmed; blacks made up almost 34.3% of unarmed people killed and 9.3% of all blacks killed were unarmed, still numbers that are disproportionately bad for African-Americans.

6.) Black Americans are significantly more likely to be shot and killed when not a direct threat than white Americans

LM Otero

Of the 730 people who were killed in the process of attacking either police or someone else in 2015 (about 73.7% of the total killed by police), 394 were white (nearly 54% of this category and a bit less than 79.8% of all whites killed by police), while 183 were black (not quite 25.1% of this category and over 70.9% of all blacks killed by police), but, of the 216 people not categorized as attacking people at the time when they were killed (over 21.8% of all those killed by police, with an additional 44 falling under “undetermined:” 17 white, 12 black), 83 were white (over 38.4% of this category) and 63 were black (a bit less than 29.2% in this category). First of all, just the fact that well over 1 out of every 5 Americans who are killed by police are not in the process of committing an attack while they are killed is quite telling as to the overuse of lethal force by American police by itself, but the racial dimensions make it even more troubling when considered proportionately.

To look at this data in another way as with the last set of statistics, the 83 whites shot and killed when they were a not direct threat out of the 494 whites who were shot and killed overall represent over 16.8% of all whites shot and killed by police, whereas the 63 blacks killed when not a direct threat represent over 24.4% out of the 258 blacks killed by police in 2015.  Thus, a black man killed by police in 2015 was over 45% more likely to be not in the process of attacking someone than a white man killed by police.

Furthermore, blacks were a 16.3% higher proportion of the total number of Americans killed who were not direct threats compared to their proportion of the total number of Americans who were in the process of attacking; conversely, whites were a 28.9% lower proportion of all people killed when compared to their proportion of people killed while actually attacking.  Additionally, the portion of African-Americans killed while actually attacking was a good bit over 11.1% less than the portion of white people killed while actually attacking; to put it another way, a black person killed by police was 11.1% less likely to be killed when force would actually be likely justifiable in these situations than a white person killed by police, and formed higher portion of people killed when not attacking than they did when people were attacking.

In 2016 thus far, data does not include if an attack was in progress.

No matter how you look at it, then, lethal force is used far less appropriately proportionally when African-Americans interact with the police than when white people interact with police.

7.) Young blacks are killed far more proportionately and even more in absolute terms by the police than white Americans

There were even more black Americans aged 18-29 who were killed by police in 2015 in absolute terms than white Americans the same age: 124 blacks (about 37.6% of all 18-29-year-olds who were shot and killed) to 120 whites (about 36.4% of all 18-29 year olds who were shot and killed); the 124 black young adults represent less than 48.1% of all blacks killed by police, while the 120 white young adults represent almost 24.3% of all whites killed by police, only about half the proportion that age cohort represents in terms of all blacks killed by police in 2015.

So far in 2016, 167 18-29-year-olds have been killed by police: 60 white and 60 black, an equal 35.9% of the total each for this category.  For whites, the 60 represent nearly 24.8% of all whites killed, but the same number represents over 46.5% of all blacks killed so far this year, statistics very comparable to last year.

8.) Even though women are only a very tiny fraction of all those shot and killed by police, black women are still shot at a proportionally much higher rate than white women

The vast majority of those shot and killed by police in 2015 were men; only 42 people out of 990, or a little more than 4.2%, were women.  Yet of those 42 women, 26 killed were white (61.9% of all women) and 10 were black (23.8%), a comparable proportional disparity to the one between white and black men, though slightly less bad (of male victims, less than 49.4% were white, compared to less than 26.2% being black).  For what it’s worth, of the 3 women who were killed that were unarmed (not including 1 who held a toy gun), 2 were black and 1 was white, and of the 16 women killed who were not direct threats, an equal number of 6 black women and 6 white women were killed.  This means that out of the 10 black women who were killed, 20% were unarmed and 60% were not a direct threat, compared to the 26 killed white women of whom only over 3.8% were unarmed and not quite 23.1% were not direct threats; this means that a black woman who was killed by police 2015 was more than 5.26 times more likely to be unarmed than a white woman killed by police, and that black woman killed by police was almost 2.6 times more likely to not be a direct threat than a white woman killed by police.  Though the samples are very small, as is the case with black men, the use of lethal force against black women who were either unarmed or not serious threats was grossly disproportionate.

So far in 2016, 25 women have been killed by police: 11 white women (44% of all women killed) and 8 black women (32% of all women killed).  In terms of being unarmed and excluding two women killed with toy guns, of the 3 women killed with no weapons on them, 1 was black and 2 were white.  Even with such tiny numbers, the proportional disparity is obvious considering the difference in the white and black population sizes.

Smiley N. Pool



Even allowing for the fact that Africans Americans are the subjects of 28.7% of all arrests (vs. 69.4% for whites) and, specifically, are the subjects of 37.7% of all arrests related to violent crime in America (compared to 59.4% for white Americans), the disparities in how often black Americans are lethally shot by police and how lethal force is used disproportionately against blacks in situations where lethal force is not called for do not add up.

Additionally, the societal conditions that drive many blacks into crime are a whole other series of issues that must also be addressed in order to give full meaning and context to the above statistics.  Factors that must be considered include: that most whites by farand most black by far are murdered by members of their own race; that poor whites and poor blacks tend to be victimized by at least some types of violent crime at roughly the same rates; that poverty especially as a factor among other structural factors indetermining the likelihood of a person committing a crime is enormous and begs further statistical analysis, and may even be the determining factor; that the white publicharbors systemic bias against blacks; that blacks proportionately suffer from systemic, pervasive, and long-term poverty, unemployment, and poor educational prospects at far higher rates than whites; that there was a long historical tradition of using law enforcement—and the justice and prison system—as a weapon against—and way to exploit—the black community; that today’s criminal justice system is still deeply biasedagainst blacks on everything from systemic and endemic mass incarceration to sentencing disparities to arrest, prosecution, and conviction rates.

Ultimately, there is a sickness of racism and bias in America’s police forces and the criminal justice system as a whole, and it has been going on for far too long.  Even after the recent killings of police in Dallas and even today in Baton Rouge, American police in 2016 are still safer than they have been historically since the 1870s unless there is soon an explosion of anti-police violence in the next few months; even allowing for a modest increase in police deaths this year, the current average is still so historically low that it would take a lot for police safety to go back up to more historically dangerous levels.

Obviously, individual acts of terror targeting police deliberately are heinous and deplorable.  What is even more unacceptable is the constant level of police violence perpetrated by police against African-Americans (who, unlike police who choose their profession and choose to put themselves in harm’s way, cannot choose to be black or not), as the numbers here make abundantly clear.  America ignores these numbers, what they represent, and the rage they stir to catastrophic consequences.

Short answer: “No, not yet…”



*A discussion of this statistic of what makes up white Americans is necessary: in some ways, the racial disparities highlighted above are actually higher because “white”-Americans include a growing number of Hispanics who identify as white and primarily white, who are light-skinned, are of European ancestry, and say people seeing them in public would think they are white; these people are basically assimilated in the ways Irish, Poles, and Italians—considered non-white in the past—assimilated over time.  If a typical American would look at them and consider them white, so would the typical police officer.  And to make it even more confusing, Hispanic is an ethnicity and not a racial category.  So, somewhere in between the percent of white Americans that are non-Hispanic white (61.6%) and everyone who checked white and only white in the “race” category, where Hispanic is not an option for that category (2015 projection based on 2010 census: 77.1%), there is the true number/percent of Americans who are actually white, admittedly closer to the former rather than the latter since a majority of American Hispanics consider their Hispanic identity as part of their racial makeup, though a significant minority do not.

The government census has not been able to clearly identify exactly what these people identify with most strongly in their previous sets of questions, and will be updating the census in 2020 to get a better sense of this, when Hispanic will be included as a primary identity, next to white, black, Asian, and other primary categories.  Still, because of this confusion, for the purposes of this articles I am sticking with the non-Hispanic whites (the 61.6% figure) when I talk about whites out of caution, but will look forward to better data in 2020.  So, keep in mind, as bad as these disparities are, they are actually worse, possibly significantly worse, but this is hard to measure with current data.

** A shameful aspect of this that would actually make the chance of a black American being killed by police even worse is that around 900,000 to almost 1 million African-Americans are incarcerated, and are basically taken out of the population eligible to be shot by police; if we factored out 900,000-1 million African-Americans (over 2.1% to less than 2.4% out of the black population), then the odds of being killed as a black American, particularly a black male (the vast majority of black prisoners are male), would be higher.

Why The NRA is Awful and Needs to be Taken Down

The NRA is going to make him an offer he can’t refuse

The NRA reassures their sponsors, the gun manufacturers, that they are going to make him (any given politician) an offer he can’t refuse.

The NRA reassures their sponsors, the gun manufacturers, that they are going to make him (any given politician) an offer he can’t refuse (with thanks to Jason Newell for helping me with this piece).

As the Godfather said to the fictional Johnny Fontaine (aka Frank Sinatra), “Now, you just go outside and enjoy yourself, and, uh, forget about all this nonsense. I want you, I want you to leave it all to me.”

So who is to blame for the absurdity of America’s infantile gun culture, these ever escalating numbers of school shootings? Be prepared to be asked some tough questions.

Obama gets it–this was his response to Oregon’s Umpqua Community College shootings that took place on October 2, 2015:

Referring to the NRA, Obama asks the million dollar question, are “your views… being properly represented by the organization that suggests it is speaking for you?”

We are now going to need to discuss why this question is pivotal to addressing US gun culture issues.

NRA is nothing but the National Rifle Association. It is mainly for the gun rights and the control of guns. The political party which is ruling the state can give the shooting order to the policemen to stop some serious issues going here in the state without their control. At that time the policemen can use the rifles and shoot the persons who are crossing the limits.

The NRA is serious about silencing dissenting votes

Don’t you find it odd that after one half-baked plan to use a shoe as a bomb, we shall forever be walking around airport terminals barefoot? Suddenly my miniature Swiss Army knife on my key ring, is constantly confiscated, or your shampoo ending up in a goody bag for TSA employees.

Yet nothing ever happens in response to ever rising incidents of mass school shooting. People believing that the TSA and their minimum wage employees will protect us from more obvious security weaknesses (which I will not mention) are about as delusional as those who believe that a life jacket will save you if  your large commercial plane plummets into the ocean. But as long as people feel good right?

Well it is time to stop feeling complacent about school shootings, and it is time to take responsibility for the increasing numbers of children that are put at risk as a result of people spouting infantile opinions. Stupid myth-based opinions are deadly. One does not have the right to mythical opinions, if such opinions can be proven wrong. This is not about you, it is about every one but you. You are culpable if you believe in any of the following Myths:

  1. First: America does not have the most infantile gun culture on the planet.
  2. Second amendment twaddle.
  3. More guns make you safer.
  4. Gun free zones need guns.
  5. The NRA is not an insidious organizational and that it must be tolerated.

Point one will will be clarified below.

Now let us quickly deal with the second point, as it is really dead simple:

a) The 2nd amendment is not unambiguous, plus there remains controversy over the precise grammar that impacts its intentions.

b) The Constitution by definition changes every time the Supreme court makes a ruling, and there have been such ruling.

And most importantly:

c) If any action taken by the Government is unconstitutional—that is why we have the Supreme Court in the first place.

So what the hell are they worried about? Like all things Stupidparty—it is simplistic sloganeering to rile up an uninformed fearful base.

If you even tolerate circular vacuous slogans like ‘Guns don’t shoot people’—you are morally bound to seek substance, and you are morally bound to engage in some introspection. Before we get to the nitty gritty (and to assist in get getting one started on the dark nordic noir road of introspection), let’s get a lighthearted reality check. shall we—from an outsider looking in—because it really is important  to be aware of how the rest of the world perceives this problem.

Let us evaluate what we are up against in terms of the numbers:

America, in spite of having only 270 million guns, seems to be the only country that has a material number of school shootings, and the only country where infantile political debate is tolerated when it comes to the safety of children (there are no doubt some exceptions in countries undergoing civil war or drug-cartel domination of the police).

Here is the pattern for school shootings by year since 2000

The number of mass shootings has skyrocketed in recent years.

Stupidparty Disciples will point to a few incidents abroad and suggest that Europe is thus just as bad. They fail to figure out that while the USA, with less than half the population of Europe, has had 167 school shootings since 1960 while Europe has had 19.

This means that schools in America are 1,700 percent more likely to be hit than schools in Europe.

Now look at these trends and then imagine what idiots might do:

Talking of Europe, let’s talk about Texas. What is the connection? Well its quite simple really, there is none—other than the fact that they are intellectual polar opposites. Texas has been desperate to prove that they are the stupidest state in the Country. This is a battle of the titans as Texas tries to  duke it out with the likes of Mississippi and Kansas. The mathematical results of this Olympian competition have been thoroughly analyzed. But Texas must be feeling a bit miffed, because now they have outdone themselves, as the The New York Times reveals:

In Texas, there’s so little concern for college students’ physical safety that concealed firearms will be permitted in classrooms at public universities like the state flagship here. This wasn’t the doing or desire of administrators and faculty at the University of Texas—most of whom, it seems, are horrified—but of conservative Texas lawmakers on a tireless mission to loosen gun restrictions whenever, however and wherever they can. To be or not to be armed in Shakespeare class? Your choice! Guns in dorms? Just the ticket for a good night’s sleep!

As an aside I would point out that any out of state parent should not even consider sending their kids to any public university in Texas, and should even explore transferring their kids as soon as possible. I say out of state, because I recognize that in state parents may not have financial options. But bare in mind that it will not be long before any one educated in Texas will likely find some suspicion from employers round the globe. once it becomes generally recognized that the curriculum is being tampered with by extraordinarily stupid people—Texas Stupidparty politicians.

America's children: raised in the NRA's doctrine of anti gun control

I issued the above public health warning on Oct 7th—on Oct 9th the following occurred:

One dead after a shooting near Texas Southern University

Two people were shot, according to the university. One person was killed and the second injured, authorities said. The condition of the injured person is not yet known. Their identities were not disclosed by authorities. The campus went into lock down as a result of the incident. “All staff are asked to remain in offices—students to remain in classrooms until further notice,” Eva Pickens, a university spokeswoman, said in a statement.

Now look at these trends (above) and then imagine what an idiot might say:

“Look, stuff happens.” Yes, that was Jeb’s response to Oregon’s Umpqua Community College shootings. A bit different from Obama then.

Now, Jeb can argue, with a degree of justification that this comment was taken out of context, and he defended himself by saying that he was talking more generally about the tendency to pass laws in response to tragic events. In a normal political environment with a normal candidate that would be a reasonable defense. But the problem is that there are so many false and deadly narratives out there, such as the notion that schools being in no-gun zones, makes them a target—that if a political leader does not shoot down such stupidity, he must get implicated by the consequences of his lack of intelligence or honest leadership. It is such a stupid theory that I never thought I would need to disprove it. But I did.

Now let us evaluate what we are up against in terms of intellect:

After the Umpqua Community College shootings, Obama was righteously furious and he finally said what really needs to be said:

“And I would particularly ask America’s gun owners who are using those guns properly, safely, to hunt for sport, for protecting their families, to think about whether your views are being properly represented by the organization that suggests it is speaking for you,”

Obama is still being over cautious in his inclusion of gun owners protecting their families (they are actually putting their families at greater risk)—but baby steps is all that we can possibly expect, in the art of the possible. Most importantly he is finally going there, zeroing in on the biggest culprit—the NRA.

We must launch a war on the NRA if we are ever to move this forward. Now many people who remain sympathetic to the NRA point out that the NRA has had quite a progressive history. They are correct. But all that history was made redundant the day the extremists staged a coup, took over the leadership, and created the facade of being a democratic organization. The Washington Post reported that the “NRA was transformed from a mainstream sportsman’s association into a hard-core anti-gun control lobby in the late 1970s after its most radical members rebelled and booted their long-time leadership. Ever since then, the group’s energetic right flank has pressed its leadership to take evermore uncompromising policy stances, particularly when the stakes were highest.”

NRA death race: the final frontier. Herein are the facts and this website will not tolerate falsity and lies. Our continuing mission: to explore absurd Stupidparty thinking, to seek out new intelligent life and build new civilizations in Red States, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Hillary Clinton nailed it: “What is wrong with us that we can’t stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby and the gun manufacturers they represent?”

Unfortunately, Bernie Sanders did not nail it  “we’ve got to do something… I don’t know that anybody knows what the magic solution is.” But being from and helping to create the least Stupidparty state in the Country (which I prove here), he can hardly be blamed for not having a trigger-happy finger on the pulse of the obscene gun culture in so many regions of the country.

But Mike Huckabee said, “We have not so much a gun problem, we have a problem with sin and evil.” OK Micky, let’s go and find the worst sinners in the world. Who are they and where do they live?

Loose American gun control laws are what give these red states such a high firearm-related death rate.

Fancy that, the world’s worst sinners support Mike Huckabee and he panders to and inflames their sins. Mike (Micky) the Anti Christ-ian.

Now back to the pied pipers, the mafioso of gun nonsense, of Gundamentalism. During the 2012 election cycle, 21 Democrats compared to 223 Stupidparty congressmen—received donations from the NRA. 89% of NRA contributions go to the Stupidparty.

But this only the tip of the iceberg, because if you dare speak out against NRA extremism, they will take you down. Let’s look at one example, a politician from Tennessee, Debra Maggart, a lifetime NRA member with an A+ NRA rating. She was OK with guns in bars! But she finally drew the line and did not want to back a bill allowing guns in cars, even on properties where the owners did not want guns. The NRA got mad, and the NRA got even:

“We tried to work out a compromise,” Maggart told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour  “after that they came after me because I was the caucus leader and I was the only person in leadership who had a primary.” She said the NRA poured money into her small district, attacking her from every angle. She says they created a “Defeat Maggart” website, and used billboards, robocalls, radio ads, YouTube videos and 12 full-page newspaper ads to drive her from office. “They convinced the people where I am from that I was for all these things and that I was actually going to put your family in danger because of this bill.”

They changed her rating on gun legislation from an A+ to a D.

So you see, the NRA does not need to make donations. Just like the Mafia, they can simply offer a deal you can not refuse. If you are brave enough, you are likely to wake up and find a recently decapitated horse’s head lying next to you.

As for their rating, clearly there is no science behind it, it is simply a sledgehammer designed for all the really small nails trying to keep their jobs. As their power to intimidate increases, they can actually reduce their donations. Plus their puppet masters, the gun manufacturers, can save a ton of money on contributions. But any message emanating from the NRA, any donation, should come with a health warning similar to what is now wound on a packet of cigarettes—Warning! Inhaling NRA’s poisonous propaganda is a leading cause of death.

The NRA does not need to make donations whey  can engender fear, inflame bigotry and further an agenda totally removed from reality.

Wayne LaPierre, NRA executive vice president and integral part of SP:

“The NRA is going to bring all of its knowledge, dedication and resources to develop a model National School Shield Emergency Response Program for every school that wants it. From armed security to building design and access control to information technology to student and teacher training, this multi-faceted program will be developed by the very best experts in their fields.”

The NRA and its Mafia stance on gun control

Wayne’s World:

“After Hurricane Sandy, we saw the hellish world that the gun prohibitionists see as their utopia. Looters ran wild in south Brooklyn. There was no food, water or electricity. And if you wanted to walk several miles to get supplies, you better get back before dark, or you might not get home at all.”


“Meanwhile, President Obama is leading this country to financial ruin, borrowing over a trillion dollars a year for phony ‘stimulus’ spending and other payoffs for his political cronies. Nobody knows if or when the fiscal collapse will come, but if the country is broke, there likely won’t be enough money to pay for police protection. And the American people know it.”


“Or ominously, the border also remains open to agents of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Numerous intelligence sources have confirmed that foreign terrorists have identified the southern U.S. border as their path of entry into the country.”

In a recent briefing, Obama eloquently called out the NRA and its unreasonable position on gun ownership. Obama highlighted the fact that there have been 10 times more killings of Americans from mass shootings than terrorist attacks. Furthermore, he touched on the reality of states with stricter gun control measures having less gun violence. Obama also said the following:“Ominously, the border also remains open to agents of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Numerous intelligence sources have confirmed that foreign terrorists have identified the southern U.S. border as their path of entry into the country.”

“When Americans are killed in mine disasters, we work to make mines safer. When Americans are killed in floods and hurricanes, we make communities safer. When roads are unsafe, we fix them to reduce auto fatalities. We have seatbelt laws because we know it saves lives. So the notion that gun violence is somehow different, that our freedom and our Constitution prohibits any modest regulation of how we use a deadly weapon, when there are law-abiding gun owners all across the country who could hunt and protect their families and do everything they do under such regulations doesn’t make sense.”

What Obama politely commented, realizing that facts will simply turn Stupidparty bigotry into actionable hate is that most domestic terrorism come from the domestic Stupidparty mindset. Take the issue of universal background checks, a proposal that 90% of Americans and 74% of NRA members support. If background checks passed at the federal level, then it could solve the issue of criminals crossing state lines to purchase weapons. Policies like these, however, are staunchly opposed by NRA leadership. Anything threatening the the ever-increasing sales of guns will be aggressively attacked by the NRA.

So why is the USA so insane compared the rest of the world?

The only Country that it can some how be compared to might be Switzerland. Looking at this might help shed some light, as many Swiss also own guns—yet they can be trusted with guns. Why? The Swiss have about 46 guns per 100 hundred people compared to America at almost 89 per 100 people. It may be a result of guns being viewed in a different manner. The Swiss view gun ownership as a patriotic duty that stems from an historical fear of invasion, being a neutral country where only 5% of its military personnel are professional and by Government dictates regarding an ability to use guns to defend the nation. Some of Switzerland’s gun regulations include: 1) a ban on concealed weapons, 2) a ban on automatic firearms, and 3) gun buyers must receive a government permit in order to purchase weapons (obtaining this permit involves passing both criminal and mental background checks).

In contrast, many American gun owners find it necessary to brandish their weapons in public places like Walmart. You see, gun nuts treat their weapons as if they reside in the 1850’s Wild West—but this a false perception. It wasn’t unusual for frontier towns to prohibit carrying weapons in public and require visitors to check in their weapons with the proper authorities upon arrival.

Good Guys with Guns:

Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.

Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without.

In states with Stand Your Ground and other laws making it easier to shoot in self-defense, those policies have been linked to a 7 to 10% increase in homicides.

Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.

For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home

43% of homes with guns and kids have at least one unlocked firearm.

In one experiment, one third of 8-to-12-year-old boys who found a handgun pulled the trigger.

Guns for fun, for sport, for hunting, and in really remote areas to protect against wild animals—that is all fine. There might even be a very few areas where guns for personal safety might make sense. But as a general rule owning a gun will not make you safer. Thus owning a gun for this purpose is the act of a coward. But it is worse than that, because by owning a gun, not only are you putting yourself in greater danger—you are also imperiling your family, friends and community.

You are delusional if you believe gun ownership will lead to a better outcome, in the vast majority of cases. So you are not only being a coward, you are being a selfish coward, par for the course for the Stupidparty mindset. I might add than in comparison I  conduct my life in a heroic fashion. I have been known to go shopping bearing not even a pencil for self preservation. I also allow my self to wander round airport terminals totally devoid of my beloved miniature Swiss army knife.

As a general rule, owning a gun will not make you safer.

The NRA has the financial muscle, the power over politicians. They have the ability to rally its supporters to pressure their congressmen—the power not only to suffocate debate but to keep advancing their insane agenda. They can send a message by targeting certain representative, throwing money at their opponents.

In Sept. 2013, in Colorado, they just completed such a coup.

This is enough to engender fear and buy subservience. “Stand Your Ground” laws are simply a device to allow armed people to shoot unarmed people at will. The gun manufactures and the freedom criers want everyone to be armed, to return us to the Wild West.

Sure, people will get shot—but John Wayne or Clint Eastwood will ride in and save the day. “String ’em” high, all those bad guys, those immigrants, those gays, those damn Yankees. Safest for the womenfolk to stay inside—looking out through a veil.

So why do people fall for all this provable nonsense?

In an unfettered capitalist universe, money trumps everything. Money trumps facts. Money trumps common sense; money trumps humanity itself.

So I am making you an offer that you can not refuse.

Do you want to live in world governed by knowledge, facts and inclusiveness—if so aggressively refute the NRA world, Wayne’s world. On this issue there is no compromise between Myth and Math. If you refuse this offer, you will wake up every morning awash with blood, children’s blood.

Government Can be Great -but not when Stupidparty Governs

Without Government – Just how would the economy have been salvaged from economic Armageddon, a catastrophe created by unfettered capitalism, the asset strippers mooching off everything and every one else? Let’s simply look at the auto “bailout” (which was hardly a bailout – but stupid loves inflammatory misleading language) that so infuriated the Stupidparty. Would we even now have an auto Industry? Would America now have a new Auto Company that is on the cusp of turning the world wide Auto Industry on it’s head, with the USA hosting the technological brains? But first let us fact check some statements Bill Clinton made at the 2012 Democratic convention regarding the Auto Industry.

Clinton stated: (The Bailout) It saved more than a million jobs, and not just at GM, Chrysler, and their dealerships, but in auto parts manufacturing all over the country.


The Center for Automotive Research estimates the auto bailout saved 1.5 million jobs.

Clinton stated: So what’s happened? There are now 250,000 more people working in the auto industry than on the day the companies were restructured.


The companies were formally restructured in July 2009, with GM, for example, being reorganized on July 10. Since then, auto industry employment is up by 233,800 workers, according to BLS.

Clinton stated: Now, the agreement the administration made with the management, labor, and environmental groups to double car mileage, that was a good deal, too. It will cut your gas prices in half, your gas bill . . . according to several analyses, over the next 20 years, it will bring us another 500,000 good, new jobs into the American economy.


The new mileage standards will double fuel efficiency which, in principle, should halve fuel costs. A study by the Blue Green Alliance, a joint Labor–Environmental group, estimates the standards will create 570,000 new jobs. That’s hardly an independent source, but it shows Clinton’s not pulling the number out of thin air.

As The Washington reports, every so often, we ought to celebrate our victories. The auto bailout is a case in point. Six years ago, it was wildly controversial, with the fate of General Motors and Chrysler hanging in the balance. Now, it’s clear that the bailout was a solid success.

The revitalized auto industry has been a pocket of strength in a lackluster economic recovery. Motor vehicles and parts have provided 25 percent of the recovery’s gain in manufacturing, despite representing only 6 percent of manufacturing’s value added. Since mid-2009, the number of manufacturing jobs increased by 256,000, up 41 percent from the low of 623,300. Dealerships and parts stores added another 225,000. (All gains are as of mid-2014.)

The Auto Bailout is all but a small fraction of what the Government achieved

Taxpayers have made $350,000,000,000 (Yes 350 Billion) from the bailout – and this number is increasing all the time. How come?

1) TARP 15.6b.  The Troubled Asset Relief Program is a program of the United States government to purchase assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector

2) Fannie and Freddie  37.5b*

*Once they have made the latest payments in December, the two companies will have returned $225.5 billion to taxpayers, in exchange for about $188 billion in taxpayer aid they received after being placed under the government’s wing at the height of the financial crisis

3) Interest income out of thin air caused by quantitative easing. This interest is pure profit to the Fed — and the Fed, by law, turns over its surplus profit to Treasury. Hence the following graphic:Picture

Stupidparty Disciples (voters) actually love big governments.

They love having a bloated military.

They are happy with Social Security.

They are happy with Medicaid.

I have also established that Stupidparty states benefit disproportionately from federal spending.

Stupidparty disciples do not understand that only 30% of the Budget is discretionary – i.e. only the following programs can be cut


Who is really against the Military’s 57% of 30% (we will get back to this), Public Education’s 6% of 30%, and the Veterans’ 6% of 30%? Now we are left with about 30% of 30% = i.e., about 10%.

But what do we get from the government for this?

  1. Clean air, clean water, safe food.
  2. Housing to keep people off the streets.
  3. Public transportation, easing congestion, mobilizing workers, & job seekers.
  4. Business regulations that prevent insurance companies from reckless investments and profiteering—so that your claims can be paid. Or bank regulations to prevent people from walking away with all your assets, or job-retraining programs, etc.
  5. Investments in scientific research.

Putting investments in science aside for the moment, that leaves the favorite Stupidparty targets:

Foreign aid 3%.

Okay, let’s cut that. Let China bribe themselves into the hearts and minds, furthering their trade and security interests. Or let’s start by cutting security of overseas representatives; you can always blame someone else for Benghazi.

The post office.

It should be noted that the finances of the post office are misrepresented and generally misunderstood: 1) reforms are hampered by Congress, 2) losses are in fact being reduced, and before even thinking about closing down the service, 3) retirees should be shifted to Medicare and 4) other healthcare economies made.

The post office now has to prefund its retiree health costs, maybe up to 75 years. Darrell Issa is investigating, but we have already established Issa’s credentials. His opinion is not worth the dust sitting under the paper it is written on. According to Josh Barro in a Bloomberg article, 75% of private firms do not prefund their retiree healthcare obligations. Until 2006 the post office did not prefund its retiree healthcare benefits. In 2006 Congress forced the post office to prefund (some lawmen suggested up to 75 years, including liabilities for people not even born yet) these benefits to the tune of $8 billion a year—when their actual annual costs are less than $3 billion. Consequently, they are taking an accounting hit of $5 billion a year—a remarkably similar amount to what the post office is actually unable to pay; thus, the calls for closing it down.

But regardless, those debts have to be paid and the taxpayer is on the hook. Therefore, when analyzing the viability of the post office today and going forward, one should assign that additional $5 billion to paying off past debts; it should be put to one side.

The post office recently reported (November 2013) that they had reduced losses by about 67%, down to around that magic $5 billion number, and had actually increased revenue.

The post office is an easy target, whose demise can only help its competitors increase their monopoly and margins. Closing down post offices—who gets hurt? Think about rural communities that lack easy access to alternatives. The post office provides local jobs; it is a fabric of the community, a staple of a diminishing High Street. The postman, a person we might see on a day-to-day basis, can act as a friendly local watchdog over a barely visited neighbor.

Who lives in rural communities? Yes, these communities are disproportionately represented within the Stupidparty power base, another clear example of Stupidparty Disciples acting against their best interests. Virtually all rural districts are Red.

Keynesian Economics

How could capitalism ever need government assistance in creating economic growth? First, one should bear in mind that up through the Second World War, the capitalist system had had pretty mixed results. In the sixty-year period 1880 to 1940, the economy grew by 100%, or about 1.15% a year. In the next sixty-year period, the economy grew by about 400%, or almost 2.5% a year.


Bear in mind the 1880–1940 period included the so-called Gilded Era: a time when the few, the Robber Barons, pillaged society—gaining staggering wealth—while evidently the rest of society progressed very slowly. A period that Stupidparty now harkens back to. There are perhaps two huge factors for this improvement of the capitalistic economic report card, both of which Stupidparty and Disciples cannot fathom.


In the 1930s, Keynes spearheaded a revolution in economic thinking, overturning the older ideas of neoclassical economics that held that free markets would, in the short to medium term, automatically provide full employment, as long as workers were flexible in their wage demands. Keynes instead argued that aggregate demand determined the overall level of economic activity, and that inadequate aggregate demand could lead to prolonged periods of high unemployment. According to Keynesian economics, state intervention was necessary to moderate “boom and bust” cycles of economic activity. (Wiki)

In short, this means that when the free market leads us into a swamp, it is at these junctures that governments can pull us out of that swamp. They can invest in those big ideas (such as a space program, medical research, or national defense), which are too expensive, too indirect, or too risky for the private sector. The private sector needs to be confident of a high likelihood of a profitable return within a fairly short window. Venture capital is similarly averse. Also, it is clear (to everyone but Stupidparty) that profit should not be the motivating factor behind war, crime prevention, incarceration, deadly disease, education, basic safety, etc. This may appear to be a damning statement, but any confusion, which clearly exists, is subliminally exacerbated by the Benefactors—playing into the lack of clarity as to what caused the debt and how serious the issue is, and the methodology and timing for debt reduction.

 Who Does Bad Government?


Who Does Bad Government?Picture

Who Does Bad Government?


Who Does Bad Government?


Who Does Bad Government?



What Unknown Stuff Does Government Do?

I am sure the very notion of the government creating anything, is beyond the scope of Stupidparty Disciples.

Hardly anyone, of any party, appears to understand one of the key aspects of what lies behind economic growth. When one asks a person, “Who is responsible for the technological advances that have fueled improved productivity leading to economic growth?” everyone will come up with Bill Gates or Stephen Jobs or Google, and so on.

Steve Jobs was obviously a remarkable innovator—especially in designing very appealing consumer products. Look at the technologies in the iPhone. These smart phones tap into a number of things: a) the Internet, b) the GPS, c) touch screen technology, d) the HTML common language, and e) many other ideas coming out of Silicon Valley. Before taking a closer at why Steve Jobs could be so successful, I just need to insert some brief historical context.

The U.S. government—yes, that same consistently denigrated entity—has additional if somewhat indirect tools at its disposal to stimulate private-sector growth. There are massive side benefits (ripple effects) to simply keeping the nation safe. When the Second World War began in earnest, on September 1, 1939, with the German invasion of Poland, the U.S. Army ranked seventeenth in size and combat power. This ranking placed the U.S. just behind Romania.

It was not the private sector or capitalism that stepped in. With extraordinary speed the government turned that situation around. Having secured military preeminence, it then also realized that to ensure the U.S. remained strong and secure, it had to keep investing in ideas. To win, the government had to take risks. It had to run risks in ways the private sector is not capable of. A rule of thumb is that the greater the risk, the greater the potential reward. The government had to invest in what with hindsight may have been some pretty crazy ideas. Most failed, but that was not the point. The point was not about making profits for investors but about ensuring that the United States could not be beaten by Russia or China—or today by radicalized Islamists. Since the stakes are higher, there must be a greater tolerance for risk. Armed Forces personnel and CIA operatives routinely put their lives at stake.

So within this context, let’s now go back to Steve Jobs. Before Apple even went public, it received a $500,000 loan from an obscure government agency. Let’s take another look at that ever-so-smart iPhone:

  1. The Internet.

The Internet was created by a slew of government agencies and a wide range of academic research organizations, freely collaborating and sharing the fruits. The Internet was perhaps born in 1962:

“In October 1962, [J. C. R.] Licklider was hired by Jack Ruina as Director of the newly established IPTO within DARPA, with a mandate to interconnect the United States Department of Defense’s main computers at Cheyenne Mountain, the Pentagon, and SAC HQ. There he formed an informal group within DARPA to further computer research.”

The U.S. Congress during the Cold War—fearing for the very existence of the United States as a consequence of nuclear proliferation—authorized the funding of GPS:

“GPS was created and realized by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and was originally run with 24 satellites. It became fully operational in 1995. Bradford Parkinson, Roger L. Easton, and Ivan A. Getting are credited with inventing it.”

  2. Touch screen technology.

Academic scientists in publicly funded universities and labs developed the touch screen and the HTML language.

  3. The HTML common language.

See a) and d) above.

 4.Voice-activated “virtual assistants.”

This technology was created by government funds for the armed forces:

“Speech recognition technology made major strides in the 1970s, thanks to interest and funding from the U.S. Department of Defense. The DOD’s DARPA Speech Understanding Research (SUR) program, from 1971 to 1976, was one of the largest of its kind in the history of speech recognition.”

 5. Many other ideas coming out of Silicon Valley.

The government provided much of the early funding for Silicon Valley:

“The entity that built the Valley and gave birth to its culture of collaboration and experimentation was none other than Uncle Sam. In other words, the creation of the hub of American entrepreneurship and innovation was a federal project.”

So Steve Jobs came into a world of government-created inventions, of government-supported business. So why do the founders and the shareholders of Apple get all the profits—and do everything they can to mitigate their taxes?

Likewise, the research that produced Google’s search algorithm, the fount of its wealth, was financed by a grant from the National Science Foundation.

As for pharmaceutical companies, they are even bigger beneficiaries of state research than Internet and electronics firms. America’s National Institutes of Health, with an annual budget of more than $30 billion, finances studies that lead to many of the most revolutionary new drugs.

Economists have long recognized that the state has a role in promoting innovation. It can correct market failures by investing directly in public goods, such as research, or by using the tax system to nudge businesses towards doing so.

 The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths (Mariana Mazzucato) argues:

The entrepreneurial state does far more than just make up for the private sector’s shortcomings: through the big bets it makes on new technologies, such as aircraft or the Internet, it creates and shapes the markets of the future. At its best the state is nothing less than the ultimate Schumpeterian innovator—generating the gales of creative destruction that provide strong tailwinds for private firms like Apple.

Stuff That Came from the Space Program  | NASA.

Better, smaller digital cameras; flexible, insulating aerogels; environmentally friendly lubricants; medical-exam LED lights.

Or what about scratch-resistant glasses, comfy sneaker insoles, enriched baby foods, ear thermometers, smoke detectors, protective paint, better cardiac pacemakers?

The Large Hadron Collider | CERN.


One realizes that Stupidparty Disciples are happy to think that Jesus rode around on dinosaurs—but the rest of us have a thirst for knowledge, a thirst for answers, for solutions. It is not just us: Ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Romans, et al., created better education, literacy, medicines, irrigation, etc.

These cultures also created or promoted Philosophy, History, Theater, the Olympics, and of course Democracy. They were asking, “Where do we come from? What is our place in the universe?” It turns out that even though many questions have been answered, many tough questions remain. Not even the Asset Strippers can afford the time and money to help humanity understand its existential place—and once again, the government steps into the abyss. And as they explore, they discover. A side benefit of all this additional knowledge will be new potential products that consumers will demand, presenting opportunities for the private sector.

So next time Stupidparty moans about non scandals such as Solyndra (a government investment that did not lead to profit), you might just want to ask why they do not appreciate the many ways the taxpayers have profited from government investments or actions, including not having been invaded by Germany or Japan in 1940—a time when the USA was  extremely vulnerable—or Russia since 1940. Or on the other hand, ask them about Tesla—a car company built on the back of government assistance—because the government can be a lot smarter than Stupidparty Disciples, in that it clearly has a better understanding of the importance of the technologies behind Tesla (zero gas) or Solyndra, for that matter (solar panels). As we speak Tesla now has a sports car sedan  that can do 0-60 in 2.8 seconds – an SUV like vehicle that will be able to do 0-60 in 3.2 seconds. The cars look beautiful, and the Model S was voted best car of the year for two yeas in a row by Consumer Reports and Time and Best Car of the Year by Motor Trend.


The days of the Lamborghini, Ferrari, Porsche and the rest – they are over. As these high end drivers make the switch to Tesla -they are realizing that they are fast losing interest in their older, noisier, dirtier, hard to maintain out of date toys that required them to mingle at gas stations with the rest of us. Tesla grows more affordable and practicable by the day – with less expensive models not so far from being launched.

Next Big idea?

 It could be anything. It might be extremely cheap energy from nuclear fusion, a decades-old project, with a recent breakthrough that many governments are working on (see link below).

It is also clear that the U.S. infrastructure is somewhat suspect when it comes to international comparisons. One way to leapfrog over everyone else

The economy is a bag of multiple factors, which relies on many things. the countries economy is like an individual’s finance management, when there is something wrong in one corner, the whole thing drops in value. So, go to this site, to manage your finances better and never fail in earning better in life.

might be the proposed Hyperloop. If venture capital finds the logistics too complicated, perhaps this is a potential job for the government. I do not know how feasible it is. I am certainly no engineer. But if anyone says that this is daft, you only need to evaluate one thing: how does that person (the cynic)’s résumé compare to the résumé of the person proposing the idea, a man by the name of Elon Musk? Ignorance of such matters is ever more inexcusable because of that government invention—the Internet.

The Hyperloop. San Francisco to LA in 30 minutes.



The best way of cutting the size of the government – i.e. discretionary spending would be to ask: Does the USA need an army larger than the rest of the World’s combined? Do we really have to start another illegal war? Or attack Iran, bomb some indefinable group in Assad’s Syria . . .do we want his stay or want him out -all quite complex stuff ?

Perhaps we could cut discretionary spending if we lowered the crime rate by changing gun culture, or reduced the absurd incarceration rates, closed tax loopholes; reduced subsidies to factory farms, subsidies to Oil Companies; had cheaper access to birth control (which leads to reduced poverty); and, yes, went after those 4% of moochers in a bipartisan fashion.

But suggest any of this to Stupidparty Disciples—they would then revert to one of their favorite slogans: U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A


Dear Green Party

Plus it is nothing but a tool for fools, who would rather help Trump than actually think. But the bigger question is can they ever be relevant? I do hope they can. A breakthrough in it’s thinking could well make them relevant, but only in the event of the demise of the Stupidparty (an event that we happen to be strikingly close to). I have already spelled out what is a crystal clear case against voting for Jill Stein here. Of course there are some holdouts and I am confident that most of those holdouts will do the right thing before election day. But until that that day every word spoken against Hillary Clinton (usually totally invented claptrap, assertions that I have disproven on this website—see end of the article) is just an orgasmic delight to the Ann Coulter’s, Hannity’s and Giuliani’s of this world—all determined to facilitate a fascist securing the levers of power, allowing this once in a lifetime opportunity to destroy the Stupidparty to slip, perhaps for ever, through our hands.

I will now allow my friend Karl to try a different tack in reaching the ears of the Jill Stein diehards:

Dear Green Party,

When Jill said her hero was Martin Luther King,

Martin Luther King Jr. was born on 15th January 1929 in Atlanta, United States. He was a Baptist minister and an activist. He was the most visible spokesperson of civil rights movement. He was assassinated on 4th April 1968 at Memphis. He won the noble prize in 1964 to fight for racial inequality in a nonviolent way. Click her latest blog to know about him.

she could have connected one of his prime concepts that King wanted to implement for the black community. Dr. King called it the guaranteed income. You can find the concept in the study of his words, which have fallen to the waste side of history for obvious reasons. Jill should have known that and used that concept. Why did Dr. King believe in a guaranteed income, because he understood that the money environment dictates human behavior, even though he did not word it as such. But the premise is this: Put money into the environment and crime would dramatically disappear, because humans are not fighting over money.

If the Green Party is to be a serious force that wants to change the world, it would be best to cite the latest science on human behavior. The science states that human behavior is dictated by the environment. We all live in a system of money and scarcity, so we hurt each other to get ahead. This would have expanded the oppression concept your VP stated, and would have opened a whole new world of discussion that is more accurate than what the party presented. Bottom Line: The Green Party fell into standard thinking that will not change the world.

Here is the brutal truth. Your party will not grow unless it adopts the latest advancements of thought that can actually fix Earth. If the party does not stretch its ideas, then you are contributing to Earth’s demise. Let me put it this way. Bernie Sanders had great ideas, but they were obsolete in flash of a moment due to the conditions of Earth. The Green Party must move ahead of the curve and present information that the political structure is not willing to present. It is a basic business philosophy, offer something that no one has or have thought of. This will open ears and you will get noticed, especially if you tie into the other movements like Zeitgeist, or at least the Positive Money movement of returning money back to the control of government so they may spend money on the correct infrastructure that saves Earth.

How credible can the Green Party be, if not willing to transform the Federal Reserve? There are conservatives who understand this principle. Your CNN debut missed every opportunity on how to save civilization. I urge you to thoroughly investigate the education of Peter Joseph and the Zeitgeist Movement.

Let me be very clear: the only way to save Earth is by dismantling the concept of money. If money is not dismantled, civilization will self-destruct. A resource-based economy is the only lifestyle that can save the human race. Please get with the program of survival.

Your ideas do not fully embrace survival. They are destructive offshoots of a system that will destroy us all.

Here is a quick video about human behavior that may help the Party to really investigate the correct solutions that can redesign Earth, and save Earth.

Stop Blaming Humans II

It really is an educational problem for the entire human race. I know I would like to help the Green Party. And I assume from an logical deduction, though I do not know Peter, he would too. His energy of free education sets a precedent that he would not deny you. The Green Party really needs advance thought. What is the point of trying to modify a system that will kill us?

Always Wishing You the Best – Karl Gary.

The Compassionate World

As promised, to any “Steinbacks” still standing, I presume that you have noticed that we are all making some very serious charges against your character. If anyone of you are spouting right wing conspiracy type theories against Hillary Clinton, well you are morally bound to ensure that you are not committing slander in the name of bigotry and ignorance. Your are duty-bound to discover the actual facts and try and rebut them if you can. The ball is now back in your court:

To Hillary haters and lost environmentalists, many of us are not really interested in opinions we are interested in facts. Some of us work hours to figure out what is actually happening so that when we say something, we have a hell of a lot of facts to back up our statements. Out statements are more than just opinions, the stakes are just too high to go around spouting fatuous opinions. What you need are facts:

No Hillary is not dishonest:

No both parties are not the same

No the foundation is not corrupt

Here is more perspective about he foundation

Actually the USA has made great strides on the environment, under Obama so do not screw it up–I mean, you are “Greenies” aren’t you?

No Hillary did not do anything wrong regarding Benghazi

If you enable Trump you are also a traitor

The Obama Administration is miraculously NOT corrupt

Hating Hillary puts you on a par with these two idiots

No Bernie or Busters–you do not have totally clean hands to get over yourselves

To all “Steinback” hold outs

Finally if you actually care about the planet–well so do I!

And I have figured out some stuff that I can pretty much guarantee that you are not fully up to speed on. Here is the part one of a five-part series looking at the problem by explaining how the problem was born (out of the worst American in living History) and how it will be solved (by the best American in living History)

Clinton Foundation: Time for Truth About Its Work!

This story just became even more vital in the light of the now debunked AP story, which was nothing but misleading innuendo designed as click-bait. The AP Journalist who wrote it should be disbarred (why is that not “a thing” as Journalism is meant to be a profession) for making gullible people swallow even more claptrap. Now the good news about all the nonsense written about the Clinton foundation is that now people can get better acquainted with what this charity actually does.Like so many things Stupidparty, trying to shut it down, simply means people will die—as Stupidparty is deadly.But now it is time to get the actual facts about the Clinton Foundation. It is extremely odd that no one discusses what the fund actually does. That is how sick the American political process has become. That is how much of a stranglehold pseudo-right-wing journalism has on the very fabric of  America’s political aptitude.It's time the Clinton Foundation were clearly acknowledged for its world impact

Brian Frydenborg – Author‎, International Affairs/Development/Public Policy Professional, Freelance Writer/Journalist/Consultant/Historian

Even if you hate the Clintons, there’s no denying the spectacular amount of charitable work the Clinton Foundation has done and the millions of lives it has improved, even saved. Despite a disinformation campaign, there is no doubt about the sheer scale and variety of beneficial projects in which the Foundation is engaged, from the inner cities of the United States to the slums of India, from helping women and girls overcome discrimination to providing access to HIV/AIDS medications for patients who would otherwise not have them. Here, in one place, is a brief accounting of all the major work, both direct and indirect, that the Foundation performs all across the globe; here is the real deal on the Clinton Foundation’s work.  The diversity and scale of the work make the Foundation a truly one-of-a-kind organization, one that many millions around the world are thankful for and would never characterize as something political or fraudulent.

By Brian E. Frydenborg (LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter @bfry1981)

Efforts to tarnish the Clinton Foundation fall flat.

All photos taken from the Clinton Foundation website

AMMAN — If you listen to many conservatives, the Clinton Foundation is little more than a personal, criminal stash for cash for the Clintons (one big “scam,” to quote Trump). But like so many other things that conservatives claim, upon closer inspection, efforts to tarnish or call into question the Clinton Foundation fall flat, quite like their efforts to dismiss the good work of the United Nations, even for all the UN’s faults. In reality, the Clinton Foundation is a massive organization, atypical of most charities but one that does a staggering amount of good all around the world.

Love or hate the Clintons’ politics, it is an objective and indisputable fact that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Chelsea Clinton have been involved in programs that have bettered and save the lives of millions of people. Even without Bill’s political career, his work with the Clinton Foundation would be enough to make him one of the great philanthropists of our time, and Hillary Clinton has been getting increasingly involved, as has Chelsea.

What the Clinton Foundation Is and How It Works

The Clinton Foundation is actually a public charity that mainly does direct charity work, which can be confusing since many foundations primarily funnel money to other charities. While conservative media and political figures (like serial liar Carly Fiorina) have claimed that only a small portion (Fiorina said 6%, hot-air-dispenser Rush Limbaugh said 15%) of the money going into the Foundation goes to charity, this statistic is in reference to the money that the Foundation gives to other charitable groups; the vast majority of its money still goes to charity, its own charitable works, with 87.2% of all funds going directly to either their or others’ program activities/beneficiaries. Unsurprisingly, conservatives myopically failed to do even this basic level of research before making their wildly off-base claims, which is par for the course in these hyper-partisan times.

What is now the Clinton Foundation began in 1997 as an organization that began helping then-President Clinton set up his presidential library, but since then it has grown to be a global foundation that encompasses eleven initiatives, has raised over $2 billion for charity and development work, and now raises about a quarter of a billion annually.

Let’s look at these eleven parts, and a twelfth that was recently ended:

Clinton Foundation:

2014 expenses: $249,545,030 (12.3% overhead, including management, administrative, and fundraising expenses; 87.2% directly to program activity/beneficiaries; and 0.5% to make up for shortfalls in donation pledges)

Clinton Foundation revenue - 87.2% goes to program activity/beneficiaries. 0.5% covers shortfalls in donation pledges.

Clinton’s Presidential Center (library) (1997-present)

2014 expenses: $13,501,618 (5.4% of Foundation total)

Clinton’s Presidential Center (library (1997-present))

Presidential libraries

A nationwide network of fifteen libraries comes under the administration of presidential libraries. It preserves the paper, records, and other historical objects of all the presidents of United States. The Presidential Library is a part of NARA. In addition to this t also organizes exhibitions of presidents belongings. Hop over to this website to know more.

serve as something of a combination of a museum and an archive for the particular presidency they showcase. The Clinton Foundation was formed in 1997 to help raise money for Bill Clinton’s presidential library, which it did to the tune of $165 million over some years plus over $11 million in the form of grant of land from Little Rock, Arkansas, on which the library was built (in comparison, Reagan’s library cost $60 million at the time it was built, and George W. Bush’s presidential library cost about $250 million). Clinton’s library, which includes the University of Arkansas’ Clinton School of Public Service and provides year-round educational programs and camps for students of all ages, has benefited the city of Little Rock greatly, as well.

 Clinton Economic Opportunity Initiative (2002-2013)

The Clinton Economic Opportunity Initiative began in 2002 by helping small businesses in Harlem and grew to focus on promoting entrepreneurs and small businesses in cities across America. Through partnerships with successful entrepreneurs who acted as mentors and major business institutions like Booz Allen Hamilton and UBS, the Initiative specialized in providing consulting and mentoring to small businesses and small business owners. The 2012 annual report for the Clinton Foundation noted that the Clinton Economic Initiative had provided 75,000 hours of pro bono consulting and mentoring hours, over $15 million in pro bono consulting, that 92% of businesses that received assistance from its Entrepreneur Mentoring Program said that that assistance had helped them deal with the recession, that all these businesses assisted had an average of a 16% increase in workforce, and over 600 volunteers provided long-term pro bono services for small businesses in nine different U.S. cities. Another example of the type of work the Initiative engaged in, as highlighted in the 2009 annual report, was helping to provide banking services to struggling populations in America that were underserved by the banking industry. The program was shuttered in 2013 because the Foundation found that the efforts were too labor intensive and dependent on many too outside factors to be replicated on the larger scale the Foundation had hoped for it.

Clinton Health Access Initiative* (2002-present, *now affiliated but separate entity)

2014 expenses: $143,041,357 (57.3% of Foundation total)

The Clinton Health Access Initiative began in 2002 as a big push to provide HIV/AIDS patients with low-cost access to lifesaving drugs

The Clinton Health Access Initiative began in 2002 as a big push to provide HIV/AIDS patients with low-cost access to lifesaving drugs, and since then has expanded to include treatment for malaria and vaccine access, among other programs; nearly 10 million people have received access to lifesaving treatment at low cost through the Initiative since 2002, to name its most significant achievement. It now operates directly in more than 33 countries benefiting over 70 countries overall. Its 2014 annual report noted that it was also heavily involved in assisting Liberia with its recent Ebola epidemic.

Clinton Alliance for a Healthier Generation (2005-present, *now affiliated but separate entity)

2014 expenses: $16,436,262 ($2 million from Clinton Foundation, 0.8% of Foundation’s total expenses; rest is (presumably) raised by Alliance on its own, outside of the efforts of the Foundation)

The Alliance for a Healthier generation was founded by the Clinton Foundation and the American Heart Association in 2005 to fight America’s childhood obesity epidemic

The Alliance for a Healthier generation was founded by the Clinton Foundation and the American Heart Association in 2005 to fight America’s childhood obesity epidemic by providing alternatives to soft-drink sodas in schools and other facilities used by children, all through making deals with the soda industry. It is the nation’s largest effort to fight childhood obesity, and in large part because of the Alliance’s efforts, the calories of drink products sent to school locations fell 90% from 2004-2010. Through 2015, the program has spread to help affect 18 million students in over 31,000 schools in all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico, as well as over 6,300 locations used by children outside of school grounds. There is also an effort to help students improve health in other ways, engaging over 56,000 doctors and health professionals.  The Alliance also engages companies like McDonald’s to improve the level of healthier offerings within their product lines, in McDonald’s case covering 85% of its worldwide sales.

Clinton Global Initiative (2005-present)

2014 expenses: $23,544,381 (9.4% of Foundation total)

The Clinton Global Initiative began as way for President Clinton to bring together world leaders and thinkers as only he can together in one place and to get them to make substantive commitments towards tackling major global problems.

The Clinton Global Initiative began as way for President Clinton to bring together world leaders and thinkers as only he can together in one place and to get them to make substantive commitments towards tackling major global problems.  Through 2015, it has engaged over “180 heads of state, 20 Nobel Prize laureates, and hundreds of leading CEOs, heads of foundations and NGOs, major philanthropists, and members of the media, which has resulted in $90 billion in commitments representing over 3,100 Commitments to Action, which have improved the lives of over 430 million people in more than 180 countries,” spanning issues as diverse as job creation, training, education, human rights, gender equality, health, medicine, conservation, ecology, endangered species, and international development, among others.

180 Heads of State improving the lives of 430M people.

 Clinton Climate Initiative (2006-present)

2014 expenses: $8,293,416 (3.3% of Foundation total)

The Clinton Climate Initiative has been working for years to address fundamental drivers behind dangerous manmade climate change

The Clinton Climate Initiative has been working for years to address fundamental drivers behind dangerous man made climate change using easily replicable and cost-effective methods that the Initiative is spreading throughout the U.S. and the world. The Initiative’s Forestry Program is helping governments together with other partners to better manage their forests and forested lands and to help plan and enact forest restoration, with major programs in Kenya, Ethiopia, and Indonesia. The Islands Diesel Replacement program helps small island countries transform their energy sectors into ones that involve far more clean energy and far more sustainable practices, and also assists with waste and water management, which all, in turn, spur new jobs and markets for the green energy sector. An energy-consumption-reduction program and a Home Energy Affordability Loan (HEAL) program that both began in Arkansas have both spread to six other states—California, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Vermont, and Wisconsin—and allowed both employers and employees to greatly improve energy efficiency and reduce costs, with the HEAL program alone helping over 5,600 people and both programs together reducing U.S. carbon emissions by over 33,500 tons every year.

Clinton Development Initiative (2006-present)

2014 expenses: $4,482,714 (3.3% of Foundation total)

The Clinton Development Initiative has been helping small farmers in Tanzania, Malawi, and Rwanda

The Clinton Development Initiative has been helping small farmers in Tanzania, Malawi, and Rwanda by leveraging knowledge, resources, and partnerships to help over 105,000 small farmers improve their efficiency and access to markets. In addition, its Trees of Hope program in Malawi has helped over 2,300 farmers plant more than 2.6 million trees to help offset their carbon footprint and create a new opportunity in tree farming, where it is also helping local farmers and their families by establishing local health clinics. In Rwanda, the Initiative recently helped to create two local businesses based on producing soy in one case and coffee in the other that are combined expected to create hundreds of jobs and help 150,000 farmers with their livelihoods.  With a New Seeds to Sale Project in Myanmar, the Initiative also helps to reach some 15,000 farmers there over the first 3 years of implementation.

 Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (2007-present)

2014 expenses: $7,358,967 (3% of Foundation total)

The Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership seeks to implement the best of nonprofit/for-profit approaches to help emerging-market-nations around the world deal with major gaps in supply chains/distribution chains...

The Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership seeks to implement the best of non-profit and for-profit approaches to help emerging-market-nations around the world deal with major gaps in either supply chains or distribution chains in ways that improve both the social and financial situations of poorer, underserved populations by bringing them into one of three-market driven approaches: supply chain enterprises, distribution enterprises, or training center enterprises in the hopes of providing economic opportunities through which people can find social mobility and lift themselves out of poverty.  Distribution enterprises can make a huge difference in rural areas where many small villages and towns and farmers often find it very difficult to obtain basic supplies.

The Partnership in one instance found almost 3,000 women in one of the most remote parts of Peru and trained and equipped them with the help of major corporations to be able to sell many basic, in-demand products to their own communities; these women are expected to double their income within a year of beginning the program. Supply chain enterprises help small farmers in developing countries obtain ways to get their products to the right markets and improve their business as a result as well as help developing markets fill their shelves with appropriate and better quality products. A Partnership enterprise in one region of India was able to help small farmers get cashew products to new customers, and another Partnership program set up many small farmers with PepsiCo’s local juice operations; along with efforts to help local farmers become more efficient and produce better crops, the Partnership hopes to see these farmers’ incomes double within 5 years and to spread these models to encompass some 15,000 local farmers in the region in the near future. Another project is helping over 12,000 peanut farmers in Haiti get their crop to markets.  Finally, training center enterprises help to provide youth in developing countries the skills needed to get decent jobs in places where there is often a skills mismatch.  One such enterprise in Cartagena, Colombia, is training some 20,000 young people to be able to find jobs in the hospitality industry. The Partnership will be expanding to new regions and countries soon, and thus far has helped to train and empower more than 450,000 people in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia.

Clinton Health Matters Initiative (2012-present)

2014 expenses: $3,696,323 (1.5% of Foundation total)

The Clinton Health Matters Initiative works in the United States to reduce the occurrence of preventable health problems, conditions and diseases

The Clinton Health Matters Initiative works in the United States through a wide variety of public and private, local and national entities to reduce the occurrence of preventable health problems, conditions and diseases, while also working to bridge inequality in health and healthcare access and to improve access for all Americans. Its national-level programs focus on “employee health, military and veteran health, health disparities, access to nutrition, access to sport and physical activity, and prescription drug abuse,” while a variety of local and regional programs (mainly focusing on working through many hundreds of partners to help some 8 million people in specific regions in the U.S.: California’s Coachella Valley, Central Arkansas, Northeast Florida, the Greater Houston Area, and, most recently, Adams County, Mississippi) combine with the national programs to be projected to be able to benefit some 85 million Americans. The initiative has also created over $200 million in partnerships with various organizations to help improve Americans’ health, is helping to innovate new technology to improve healthcare across the country and access to information about health and healthcare, is improving substance abuse and mental health programs on over 60 college campuses, is pioneering fitness programs, is working with 40 different organizations to improve employee wellness, and is bringing together experts from many different organizations to plan new ways to tackle health problems in America.

The following programs fall under the “other” category as listed in the Foundations’ financial statements/annual reports, as is (presumably) the $2 million grant that goes to the Clinton Alliance for a Healthier Generation; the “other” category comprised $13,789,165, or 5.5% of the Foundation’s 2014 expenses; minus the Alliance grant, these below programs would be part of $11,789,165, or 4.7% of the Foundation’s 2014 expenses.

Clinton Foundation in Haiti (2009-present)

The Clinton Foundation in Haiti began in 2009 as a way to specifically help the beleaguered Caribbean nation.

The Clinton Foundation in Haiti began in 2009 as a way to specifically help the beleaguered Caribbean nation, but when a major earthquake devastated the nation in 2010, the program focused for some time on disaster relief, recovery, and rebuilding but is now back to its original intent: helping to empower the people of Haiti through education and economic opportunity by engaging a wide range of actors. Since its inception, the program has raised some $36 million for Haiti (including $16.4 million in for immediate relief after the earthquake tragedy), and has also been instrumental in bringing about $120 million in direct investment to Haiti, including in Haiti’s agricultural, artisan, and environmental sectors, helping some 117,000 Haitians and creating some 11,200 jobs.

 No Ceilings: The Full Participation Project (2013-present)

The No Ceilings: Full Participation Project, led by Hillary and Chelsea Clinton, aims to bring women and girls around the world to points of full participation and equal opportunity in their societies using data-driven methods.

The No Ceilings: Full Participation Project, led by Hillary and Chelsea Clinton, aims to bring women and girls around the world to points of full participation and equal opportunity in their societies using data-driven methods. To this end, the Project partnered with The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to produce a detailed global report on the status of women and girls worldwide, identifying specific areas of concern that can be targeted by various organizations around the world.  As part of this process, the Project began a global conversation about the status of women involving over 12,000 people, and conducted a survey about the status of women of over 10,000 people in over 150 countries. The Project also teamed with The Brookings Institution to secure pledges from over 30 partners to provide $600 million to help girls get access to and do well in secondary school, which has since been increased to $800 million through 50 partners with plans to reach 15 million girls. Another initiative plans to facilitate access to mobile technology for women in Afghanistan, Myanmar, the Philippines, Indonesia, and the Arab Gulf States in order to help empower disempowered women in those locations.

Too Small to Fail (2013-present)

The Too Small to Fail project, also led by Hillary Clinton, seeks to help different parts of society to come together to provide health/growth environments for children

The Too Small to Fail project, also led by Hillary Clinton, seeks to help different parts of society to come together to provide solid heath and growth environments for children from when they are born to age 5, focusing in particular on interactions involving talking, reading, and singing. Such interactions foster vital early brain and language development among our youngest children, ensuring that they enter school not in a mental state behind that of their follow classmates and in a better position to succeed in life.  This helps to fight the “word gap” in which lower-income kids by age 4 hear an average of 30 million fewer words than their better-situated counterparts, causing their brains and language skills to develop more slowly. With partners like Sesame Street, the American Academy of Pediatrics, Univision, Text4baby, and Scholastic, Too Small to Fail was a major force in efforts to donate some 500,000 books, reach 700,000 parents regularly with parenting information and tips through text messaging, use television programming to get important information and tips out to parents, get over 20,000 families to take pledges, and distribute 62,000 literacy tool kits to pediatric professionals.


In addition:

In America, the Clinton Foundation has also helped to organize thousands of volunteers for “Days of Action” that have resulted in over 18,000 hours of volunteer service since 2012, at first in response to Hurricane Sandy and later to include other projects. There is also the Job One initiative, designed to help young Americans find meaningful employment in the wake of the Great Recession; so far, the initiative has secured promises from 13 companies to focus on mentoring and hiring young people, has generated commitments worth $37 million, and expects to be able to help some 150,000 young Americans in the near future.


All in all, The Clinton Foundation is a unique thing in the world, one of the world’s largest charities on its own, but then transcending even that status when the extensive action it has led indirectly through its special partnerships and relationships is taken into account, amplifying its already staggering scale of impact on people all over the world. It’s time the media and even the Clintons’ critics clearly acknowledged this basic truth. And for Trump to criticize the Clinton Foundation, when nothing he has done has even come close to a fraction of this level of charity, is shameful.