While Chicago receives most of the attention around the country when it comes to shootings, gang-violence and overall homicides, Baltimore has a homicide rate that almost doubles Chicago’s.
In 2016 there were 762 murders in the city of Chicago compared to only 318 in Baltimore, but the two cities have vastly different population sizes.
If Baltimore had the same population as Chicago it would have a murder count of 1,390, close to double the murder count in Chicago.
A BBC report from from March, 1 details how dangerous the city of Baltimore has become.
President Trump has voiced his concerns for places like Baltimore saying, “At the center of my revitalization plan is the issue of trade. Massive, chronic trade deficits have emptied out our jobs. Just look at what has happened to Baltimore, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cleveland.”
Trump has also addressed rising homicide rates in these democratically controlled cities stating, “Democratic policies have given rise to crippling crime and violence.”
The Truth About Gun Control
Alex Jones breaks down the attempted takeover by the disempowered hoard of zombies calling for gun control.
These impotent civilians are being manipulated by those at the top to achieve the disarmament agenda they have been slowly integrating into the fibers of society.
Donald Trump has been saying that he expects the “rigged”political system will deny him the presidency, and one of his closest confidantes says that the ensuing chaos will amount to a “bloodbath.”
Roger Stone sat with Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos, and the two discussed how the general election will almost certainly be hijacked by acts of voter fraud. Several recent polls suggest that Hillary Clinton is even with, if not slightly ahead of Trump, and Stone said that the “fix” is definitely in, and it starts with the manufacturers for electronic voting machines.
“I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly,” Stone said. “If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.”
Yiannopoulos chimed in to say that the best case scenario was that Trump will continue to push buttons politically, and win by a margin large enough to render any tweaking null and void. Stone went on to say that Trump should keep drumming up his supporters against the “rigged” system, and promise that the government will be shut down if Clinton is pronounced the victor in November.
“If you can’t have an honest election, nothing else counts,” Stone said. “I think he’s gotta put them on notice that their inauguration will be a rhetorical, and when I mean civil disobedience, not violence, but it will be a bloodbath… We will not stand for it.”
Looking back on the American Revolution, John Adams (in 1813) wrote:
“But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations.”
Those frustrated by the seemingly relentless advance of authoritarianism – especially those who’ve given up and are ready to “go down fighting” – might consider Adams’ words.
I grant that defensive force may become necessary at some point. Some of us, as individuals, may find ourselves with our backs to the wall and no better option.
However, I also maintain that absent a change of heart and mind, violence will solve nothing, ultimately. People forced to submit and obey only submit and obey for as long as you are able to force them to do so. But convince them, through moral persuasion, that a given thing is wrong and any laws to the contrary will be rendered nullities at a stroke. They will lose all legitimacy and thereby become unenforceable.
Why is chattel slavery no longer practiced in most parts of the world? It is not because it is against the law. It is because a critical mass of people find it morally repellent.
This is the key to everything.
The wheel turns, perhaps slowly.
But it does turn.
And we must be patient, else risk losing everything.
Consider the “war” on (some) drugs, for example. Year-to-year, it’s hard to discern the shift, but if you’re old enough to remember the ’80s, you will agree that general attitudes have markedly changed and with them, the laws. How many states have decriminalized or are on the path to decriminalizing the use/possession/sale of marijuana? This would have been inconceivable circa 1985 because very few people – most especially those seeking public office (who had a prayer of being elected) would openly defend/argue in favor of decriminalization, much less legalization.
Today, a critical mass of people no longer regard the possession/sale/use of marijuana to be criminal. And, accordingly, it has become very hard for the state to justify the brutalities visited upon those who do use/possess/sell marijuana.
The wheel turns.
Not perfectly, in fits and starts. But it is moving in the right direction. Probably, most people who currently agree that pot ought to be decriminalized (if not outright legalized) are not yet ready to extrapolate the principle to other arbitrarily illegal “drugs.” But – and here is the beauty of it – consciously or not, they have accepted, implicitly at least, that merely to ingest a substance, produce a substance, sell a substance – while perhaps a vice – is not a crime.
This is huge.
Similarly, while imperfect, more and more people have at least implicitly accepted that what consenting adults do in the bedroom – and even whom they choose to spend their lives with – is their business alone. We may not agree, some of us, with their activities or arrangements, but how many would wish to see people imprisoned or otherwise have violence done them on account of such things? In the past, you’d find many who would. Today, there are fewer such. A great deal fewer such. The changing attitudes are reflected in the changing laws.
Consider the philosophical – the moral – significance of this. Of the principle that’s been – so to speak – smuggled into people’s minds. It is a resurfacing of the old American ideal: He ain’t bothering you. Leave him alone. The importance of this cannot be overemphasized.
Because it scales.
If one accepts in principle that it’s no crime – though perhaps a vice – for adults to smoke pot or to engage in various consensual sexual acts – then it is only a matter of time before that principle begins to be applied to other things. It is the critical first step toward conscious acceptance of the non-aggression principle (NAP), the moral idea that using violence against peaceful people is always wrong. While you may disagree with your neighbor, dislike him personally, believe that he ought to do this rather than that … so long as he ain’t bothering you, leave him alone.
Once people grok this, everything will fallback into place. Demagogues (whether Team Red or Team Blue or some other team) will find increasingly less receptive audiences as people begin to recoil from aggressive violence, no matter how it is couched or justified.
It may take time for these baby steps to become galloping great leaps forward. But progress is being made. Whether they realize it or not, many people have already embraced non-aggression when it comes to a variety of things that – within recent memory – most people (a working majority, anyhow) fully agreed constituted criminal acts worthy of violent response. Having questioned the moral propriety of some of these things, they have necessarily taken the decision to question all such things.
It is no coincidence that “law enforcement” is sliding into general disrepute – even outright loathing. And the same goes for “authority” generally. People are questioning. And beginning, many of them, to see. Our task is to encourage this. And to be patient. To resist the temptation to lose hope – and lash out.
by Christina Sarich || Infowars.com | February 16, 2015
Food in the end, in our tradition, is something holy. It’s not about nutrients and calories. It’s about sharing. It’s about honesty. It’s about identity. ~ Louise Fresco
You may already know that junk food is bad for your health, but you may not realize how bad it can be. A new study from the School of Medical Sciences at Australia’s University of New South Wales points to profound brain changes that junk food causes, making a junk food habit “more deadly than war, famine, and genocide”.
Say what? Yep, the food war is real, and though the UNSW study was conducted on rats, the brain changes observed matter to us humans. As mammals we share similar brain functioning in the orbitofrontal cortex, the part of our gray matter responsible for sensing and evaluating the pleasurable aspects of food.
Makers of junk food know it is highly addictive, but the UNSW study proves unequivocally that junk food alters behavior by causing near-permanent changes in the brain’s reward circuiting, an alteration that can trigger obesity.
The study abstract concluded:
“We observed that rats fed a cafeteria diet for 2 weeks showed impaired sensory-specific satiety following consumption of a high calorie solution. The deficit in expression of sensory-specific satiety was also present 1 week following the withdrawal of cafeteria foods. Thus, exposure to obesogenic diets may impact upon neurocircuitry involved in motivated control of behavior.”
While mammals developed a natural trigger over our evolutionary history which prevents us from over-eating, a phenomenon termed “sensory-specific satiety,” the consumption of junk food overrides this natural ‘kill’ switch that allows us to regulate the calories we consume.
Junk food consumption also causes mitochondrial dysfunction and tissue inflammation, which leads to a host of other diseases. Perhaps most troubling, though, is that these fake foods also mess with our internal motivation and reward system – which causes us to seek more nutrition-less junk. It’s like programming a time bomb and just waiting for it to blow.
Here Is What Happened In The Study
In the UNSW study, rats were fed a standard junk food diet, complete with cookies, cakes, biscuits, and other junk foods for two weeks. Another group of rats were fed a ‘standard lab chow’ diet. They were then observed under Pavlovian conditions, when a sound cue informed the rats it was time for their next serving. You can guess what happened.
The ‘junk-food rats’ ate until they were glutinously full, obese, and ill, and the ‘healthy –diet rats’ stopped eating naturally – when they were full, and not over-stuffed.
What’s most interesting though is what happened to the ‘junk food rats’ once they were returned to a normal diet. They still had the tendency to overeat. Their brains were literally trained to eat too much, and held that habit even after environmental factors were changed.
Dr. Amy Reichelt, lead author of the UNSW study says:
“As the global obesity epidemic intensifies, advertisements may have a greater effect on people who are overweight and make snacks like chocolate bars harder to resist.”
Professor Margaret Morris, another UNSW team member added:
“It’s like you’ve just had ice cream for lunch, yet you still go and eat more when you hear the ice cream van come by.”
It is no wonder we are facing a global obesity epidemic. The United States is the epicenter of this troubling phenomenon, with 2 our of 3 Americans being clinically overweight or obese.
If we check the numbers against the Historical Atlas of the 20th Century, 203 million people died in the last century from war and oppression – including military and collateral civilian casualties from conflicts, genocide, politicide (i.e., the extermination of people who share a political belief), mass murders, and famines. This equates to an average of 2. million deaths a year – but the junk food habit kills more.
Even at the humble and likely modest estimation of the World Health Organization, at least 2.8 millionpeople die annually from diseases linked to obesity including heart disease, diabetes, and brain stroke.
The junk food habit is killing 40% more people than wars, famine, dictators, murderers, and politicians put-together. Still think there’s no reason to fight for food freedom so that Americans and people everywhere can enjoy healthful, non-processed, nutrient-dense, organic food? The toxic food manufactured by corporations like McDonald’s, Kentucky Fired Chicken, Pepsi-Co, and Kraft is simply killing us -slowly.
Rodale points to 31 completely pointless foods you can find in your grocery store, but we all know that there are thousands of toxic, genetically modified, high-fructose-corn syrup-containing, MSG-laden foods. The problem is that some of these foods are not so easily recognized.
Concerningly, most Americans have been tricked through brain-piercing marketing ploys into thinking these junk foods are healthful. For example, companies use terms like “healthy” or “natural” as a means to convince us it’s a good buy – this is one of many food tricks.
You know the modern food system is broken too, when even vegetables are now cause for concern – the GMO, pesticide-laden kind, that is.
So what can one do to counter-balance this literal food war? Start by eating unprocessed foods in organic form. It is really that simple. That, and growing your own food is essential. Eating better is the best weapon against the corporate coup which has us eating toxic junk straight into the hospital.
This is just the beginning of the oil crisis. Over the past couple of weeks, the price of U.S. oil has rallied back above 50 dollars a barrel. In fact, as I write this, it is sitting at $52.93. But this rally will not last. In fact, analysts at the big banks are warning that we could soon see U.S. oil hit the $20 mark. The reason for this is that the production of oil globally is still way above the current level of demand. Things have gotten so bad thatmillions of barrels of oil are being stored at sea as companies wait for the price of oil to go back up. But the price is not going to go back up any time soon. Even though rigs are being shut down in the United States at the fastest pace since the last financial crisis, oil production continues to go up. In fact, last week more oil was produced in the U.S. than at any time since the 1970s. This is really bad news for the economy, because the price of oil is already at a catastrophically low level for the global financial system. If the price of oil stays at this level for the rest of the year, we are going to see a whole bunch of energy companies fail, billions of dollars of debt issued by energy companies could go bad, and trillions of dollars of derivativesrelated to the energy industry could implode. In other words, this is a recipe for a financial meltdown, and the longer the price of oil stays at this level (or lower), the more damage it is going to do.
The way things stand, there is simply just way too much oil sitting out there. And anyone that has taken Economics 101 knows that when supply far exceeds demand, prices go down…
Oil prices have gotten crushed for the last six months. The extent to which that was caused by an excess of supply or by a slowdown in demand has big implications for where prices will head next. People wishing for a big rebound may not want to read farther.
Goldman Sachs released an intriguing analysis on Wednesday that shows what many already suspected: The big culprit in the oil crash has been an abundance of oil flooding the market. A massive supply shock in the second half of last year accounted for most of the decline. In December and January, slowing demand contributed to the continued sell-off.
At this point so much oil has already been stored up that companies are running out of places to put in all. Just consider the words of Goldman Sachs executive Gary Cohn…
“I think the oil market is trying to figure out an equilibrium price. The danger here, as we try and find an equilibrium price, at some point we may end up in a situation where storage capacity gets very, very limited. We may have too much physical oil for the available storage in certain locations. And it may be a locational issue.”
“And you may just see lots of oil in certain locations around the world where oil will have to price to such a cheap discount vis-a-vis the forward price that you make second tier, and third tier and fourth tier storage available.”
[…] “You could see the price fall relatively quickly to make that storage work in the market.”
The market for oil has fundamentally changed, and that means that the price of oil is not going to go back to where it used to be. In fact, Goldman Sachs economist Sven Jari Stehn says that we are probably heading for permanently lower prices…
The big take-away: “[T]he decline in oil has been driven by an oversupplied global oil market,” wrote Goldman economist Sven Jari Stehn. As a result, “the new equilibrium price of oil will likely be much lower than over the past decade.”
The recent surge in oil prices is just a “head-fake,” and oil as cheap as $20 a barrel may soon be on the way, Citigroup said in a report on Monday as it lowered its forecast for crude.
Despite global declines in spending that have driven up oil prices in recent weeks, oil production in the U.S. is still rising, wrote Edward Morse, Citigroup’s global head of commodity research. Brazil and Russia are pumping oil at record levels, and Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran have been fighting to maintain their market share by cutting prices to Asia. The market is oversupplied, and storage tanks are topping out.
A pullback in production isn’t likely until the third quarter, Morse said. In the meantime, West Texas Intermediate Crude, which currently trades at around $52 a barrel, could fall to the $20 range “for a while,” according to the report.
Keep in mind that the price of oil is already low enough to be a total nightmare for the global financial system if it stays here for the rest of 2015.
If we go down to $20 and stay there, a global financial meltdown is virtually guaranteed.
Meanwhile, the “fracking boom” in the United States that generated so many jobs, so much investment and so much economic activity is now turning into a “fracking bust”…
The fracking-for-oil boom started in 2005, collapsed by 60% during the Financial Crisis when money ran out, but got going in earnest after the Fed had begun spreading its newly created money around the land. From the trough in May 2009 to its peak in October 2014, rigs drilling for oil soared from 180 to 1,609: multiplied by a factor of 9 in five years! And oil production soared, to reach 9.2 million barrels a day in January.
And this boom was funded with lots and lots of really cheap money from Wall Street. I like how Wolf Richter described this in a recent article…
That’s what real booms look like. They’re fed by limitless low-cost money – exuberant investors that buy the riskiest IPOs, junk bonds, leveraged loans, and CLOs usually indirectly without knowing it via their bond funds, stock funds, leveraged-loan funds, by being part of a public pension system that invests in private equity firms that invest in the boom…. You get the idea.
As all of this bad paper unwinds, a lot of people are going to lose an extraordinary amount of money.
Don’t get caught with your pants down. You will want your money to be well away from the energy industry long before this thing collapses.
And of course in so many ways what we are facing right now if very reminiscent of 2008. So many of the same patterns that have played out just prior to previous financial crashesare happening once again. Right now, oil rigs are shutting down at a pace that is almost unprecedented. The only time in recent memory that we have seen anything like this was just before the financial crisis in the fall of 2008. Here is more from Wolf Richter…
In the latest reporting week, drillers idled another 84 rigs, the second biggest weekly cut ever, after idling 83 and 94 rigs in the two prior weeks. Only 1056 rigs are still drilling for oil, down 443 for the seven reporting weeks so far this year and down 553 – or 34%! – from the peak in October.
Never before has the rig count plunged this fast this far:
What if the fracking bust, on a percentage basis, does what it did during the Financial Crisis when the oil rig count collapsed by 60% from peak to trough? It would take the rig count down to 642!
Rig counts have long been used to help predict future oil and gas production. In the past week drillers idled 98 rigs, marking the 10th consecutive decline. The total U.S. rig count is down 30 percent since October, an unprecedented retreat. The theory goes that when oil rigs decline, fewer wells are drilled, less new oil is discovered, and oil production slows.
But production isn’t slowing yet. In fact, last week the U.S. pumped more crude than at any time since the 1970s. “The headline U.S. oil rig count offers little insight into the outlook for U.S. oil production growth,” Goldman Sachs analyst Damien Courvalin wrote in a Feb. 10 report.
Look, it should be obvious to anyone with even a basic knowledge of economics that the stage is being set for a massive financial meltdown.
This is just the kind of thing that can plunge us into a deflationary depression. And when you combine this with the ongoing problems in Europe and in Asia, it is easy to see that a “perfect storm” is brewing on the horizon.
Sadly, a lot of people out there will choose not to believe until the day the crisis arrives.
By then, it will be too late to do anything about it.
by Anthony Gucciardi | Infowars.com | January 26, 2015
As war wages over the genetic modification of the food supply, mega biotech companies have already begun launching campaigns to release millions of GMO insects in the Florida Keys region that have been cross-bred with the herpes simplex virus and E. coli bacteria.
With petitions against the release already amassing 130,000 signatures, British researchers are currently seeking government approval to initiate the unprecedented release. It was back in December of 2014 that we first revealed to you that these mosquitoes were already being shipped inside the United States, showing the confidence of the biotech lobbyists and researchers that they are in fact going to be granted the stamp of approval by the Food and Drug Administration to release the GMO insects.
As the Associated Press reports today on the issue, we are entering into a whole new territory of genetically modified creations:
“Enter Oxitec, a British biotech firm that patented a method of breeding Aedes aegypti with fragments of genes from the herpes simplex virus and E. coli bacteria as well as coral and cabbage. This synthetic DNA is commonly used in laboratory science and is thought to pose no significant risks to other animals, but it kills mosquito larvae.
Oxitec’s lab workers manually remove modified females, aiming to release only males, which don’t bite for blood like females do. The modified males then mate with wild females whose offspring die, reducing the population.
Oxitec has built a breeding lab in Marathon and hopes to release its mosquitoes in a Key West neighborhood this spring.”
With the seemingly-imminent roll out of GMO pigs alongside the release of genetically modified insects within the United States, it is now obvious that the new war over the supply exists not only over staple crops and seeds — but the oncoming wave of genetically augmented animal and insect life.
Would you be concerned with being stung by a genetically modified mosquito?
Have you ever thought about owning a vacation home, even if you rent in the states?
Now may be the time and here is a company who can show you how it could pay for itself.
The town of Jaco Beach Costa Rica is the closest readily accessible beach to the capital city of San Jose and still has the reputation of being the “fun and sun” spot on the Pacific coast. Playa Jacó is considered the liveliest and most developed beach town on the Pacific coast. Real Estate at its best!
It is a complete city with supermarkets, stores, public and private schools, clinics and other services. The area includes great surfing and beautiful beaches, national parks, tropical rain forests with an abundance of flora and fauna. There are many hotels, restaurants and night spots. Here are marinas with world famous sports fishing, golf courses, and all kinds of adventures from horseback riding and nature tours to zip lines.
The number one attraction is the surf and surfers love the consistent beach break here and in neighboring Playa Hermosa. The active village is full of life at all hours of the day and night.
Costa Rican Realtors Jaco Beach Real Estate makes it easy for you to purchase vacation or investment properties in Jaco Beach, Hermosa Beach and Los Suenos Resort and Marina because Costa Rican Realtors Jaco Beach Real Estate makes it easy for you to find vacation or investment properties in Jaco Beach. Hermosa Beach and Los Suenos Resort and Marina. We offer complete MLS listings, financial tools and sound Real Estate advice to make the most out of your Real Estate sale or purchase.
Browse through our listings and find the properties that fit your desire and your budget and tell us so we can arrange your showings. Then click on our “Book Your Trip” link to plan the Date, location and entertainment during your stay. We will see that you have a great time in Costa Rica and get a great deal on the property of your choice.
Come check out the folks at Costa Rican Realtors to get the advice and attention your investments deserve.
There’s been a lot of talk in Republican circles about Congress’s authority to stop President Obama’s unilateral executive action on immigration. Now, a GOP lawmaker has actually filed a bill to do it.
The lawmaker is Alabama Rep. Martha Roby, who on Tuesday, the first day of the new session of Congress, introduced a bill called the “Prevention of Executive Amnesty Act of 2015.”
It’s a short, simple measure — just three pages. It is intended to apply to the coming appropriation for the Department of Homeland Security, which Congress funded only until the end of February in anticipation of a move to stop the Obama immigration edict.
Roby’s bill is essentially a “none of the funds” clause, that is, it forbids the executive branch from spending money for a particular purpose. Instead of defunding the Department of Homeland Security as a whole, or any office within the department, the bill specifies that none of the funds available to DHS may be used to enforce two recent directives. The first is a November 20, 2014 memo from DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson outlining new policies for the “apprehension, detention, and removal of undocumented immigrants.” The second is a pair of presidential memos issued November 21, 2014, “Creating Welcoming Communities and Fully Integrating Immigrants and Refugees” and “Modernizing and Streamlining the U.S. Immigrant Visa System for the 21st Century.”
“The case for carbon taxes has long been compelling,” Summers wrote. “With the recent steep fall in oil prices and associated declines in other energy prices, it has become overwhelming. There is room for debate about the size of the tax and about how the proceeds should be deployed. But there should be no doubt that, given the current zero tax rate on carbon, increased taxation would be desirable.”
Summers’ call for a carbon tax came just a day after prominent Republicans discussed the possibility of an increase in the federal gas tax to shore up the Federal Highway Trust Fund, which will run out of money this May.
The tax has been at 18.4 cents per gallon, without being adjusted for inflation, for more than 20 years. Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) has advocated raising that tax to match inflation by 12 cents over two years as a means of creating a dedicated source of funding – a sort of user fee – for the federal highway system. Appearing with Corker on Fox News Sunday, Sen. John Thune (R-SD), who will chair the Commerce Committee in the new Senate, said he couldn’t rule out the possibility of raising the tax.
“I don’t think we take anything off the table at this point,” Thune said. “I think it’s important to recognize we have a problem and issue that we need a solution for and we need to look at all the possible ways [to] address the problem.”
Corker’s proposed gas tax is less far-reaching than Summers’ proposal, which presumably would hit all emitters of carbon, from cars to factories. Yet the fact that both sides are even considering a move is notable.
<p>Fight to fund infrastructure: Corker</p> <p>Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) supports a bill to raise the federal gas tax as a way to solve the country&#039;s long-term infrastructure problems. </p>
Summers’ argument for a broader tax is largely economic. “That which is not paid for is overused,” he writes. This applies to energy in the U.S. because the use of fossil fuels creates what economists call “externalized costs.” When a driver burns a gallon of gas in his car, he is paying for all the costs of extracting and refining oil and delivering gasoline to a filling station. However, he is not contributing anything toward the remediation of the effects of air pollution caused, in part, by his own vehicle’s exhaust.
The same argument applies to power plants that release damaging emissions or foul waterways. The full price of their operations is not reflected in their costs. A carbon tax would attempt to capture the currently externalized costs of burning fossil fuels – basically compensating broader society for the costs it now bears to the advantage of people and companies that use large amounts of carbon-emitting energy.
To be sure, any increase in taxes at the producer level would ultimately find its way to the consumer. Economic pressures, however, cut both ways. Producers compete on price, and if one method of production or delivery becomes expensive, it should spur innovation to find cheaper alternatives. Consumers reward producers who offer lower cost by giving them more business, and cleaner energy becomes a competitive advantage.
Yet as Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, pointed out on his blog Monday, a modest increase in the gas tax might be all that advocates of taxing carbon can reasonably hope for.
“[I]t’s probably more realistic – or less unrealistic – given the makeup of the new Congress and where they are on taxes to think smaller and more targeted,” wrote Bernstein, who has argued for raising the gas tax.
“A gas tax is, of course, also a tax on carbon, but a few cents a gallon (say a nickel/gallon a year phased in over three years) won’t be felt by drivers either now or even down the road when gas prices go back up.”