Clinton’s Socialism Is More Capitalistic Than You Know

Unchecked socialism and under-regulated capitalism have this in common, both redistribute the wealth of the many into the hands of the few; they just use different means to achieve the same goal.

“I know there’s a lot of smoke, and there’s no fire,”  Hillary Clinton said regarding the ongoing saga of her ever changing emails and the bridge she erected between the State Department and her private charity.

Nobody says “where there is smoke there is no fire.”  People say “there is no smoke and therefore there is no fire.”  If there weren’t any fire, than Hillary would have said there is no smoke.

Had Donald Trump served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013 and had he met with 85 people in his official capacity as Secretary of State accepting a total of $150 million from those people to finance his private and personal charity would the democrats give him a pass as they are giving Hillary a pass?  Better yet, would the “Tea Party,” Trumps primary supporters, give him a pass?  I think not.

Why are the democrats, including about 43% of them who actually support Bernie Sanders giving Hillary a pass on this?

Why can’t the democrats rise up and demand that Hillary drop out of the presidential race and let Bernie Sanders slide into the presidential nominee driver seat?  The reason is that not all socialists are the same.  The Clintons have made over $130 million dollars from capitalism; Hillary is worth $31 million alone.

Putting aside the latest conflict of interest lets look at the broader bill-president-5picture of the Clintons’ true political philosophy.  First of all we have to realize Hillary is not running for president, bill-president-7Bill is. Hillary intends to put Bill in charge of fixing the economy.

Hillary is actually acknowledging that the economy needs fixing meaning that she knows Obama did not fix it during his 8 years in office.  Hillary has promised millions of living wage jobs.
Obama has had 8 years to provide millions of living wage jobs yet he has not been able to produce any meaningful increase.  If Obama cannot do it in 8 years neither can Hillary.

“The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 has the same purchasing power as $22.41 would today.”  The $15.00 an hour minimum wage proposal is a slap in the face especially if there is not a corresponding solution provided for the dearth of affordable housing.

Smoke and Mirror Housing

Despite the appearance of economic prosperity during Bill Clinton’s presidency that fact is the purchasing power of the average American decreased during his 2 terms and the years that followed.

Bill used smoke and mirrors to create the appearance of economic prosperity by increasing home ownership not by increasing living wages but by forcing banks through the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), to issue loans to people who would never be able to repay.

Bill signed into law the Gramm–Leach–BlileyAct, (GLBA), which repealed the Glass–Steagall Act enabling his buddies on Wall-Street to get in on the profits.  He then tied the CRA with the Commodity Futures Modernization Act which provided the money for the loans by reclassifying futures as insurance.

The “Con,” an elaborate shell game, was now in play.

Using a fraudulent construction of the law through “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac” policies the Clinton Administration was able to force banks to issue an ever increasing number of subprime loans even if they preferred not to.  If banks did not meet certain quotas and grades they were denied the ability grow their business.  Most people would call this extortion.  Bill Clinton used unchecked socialism to manipulate unregulated capitalism in order to redistribute the money of the masses into the hands of the few.

Bill Clinton created a huge demand for housing by providing money to up to 28 million people who would otherwise not have the money, knowing full well that most of these people would eventually default on their loans because the loans were rigged from beginning to increase in payment amounts beyond their ability to pay.

This newly created demand for housing was created without increasing a corresponding amount of new inexpensive homes resulting in a low supply of housing stock.  High demand and low supply caused property value to skyrocket year after year increasing property owners’ and developers profits to levels never seen.

House flipping became the name of the game due the ever increasing property values.  Houses became tools to create wealth rather than homes to raise families and build communities.  No matter, the banks continued to rake in the money until the clock ran out when the mortgage amounts far exceeded the intrinsic value of property being purchased.

When the millions of defaulted loans threatened a global economic collapse the government bailed out the financial institutions that made the fraudulent loans and security sales.  In the end the banks walked away with 28 million down payments in addition to tens of millions of 12 to 36 monthly payments and the property too to boot.

The end game was exactly what they got.  The “too big to fail banks” got bailed out by tax payer money, socialism, in order to remain in business rather than allow free-market capitalism decide their outcome.  The big banks swallowed up the smaller banks decreasing market competition which hurts everyone.  Bill Clinton used socialism to make capitalists rich while increasing their monopoly in the market place.

If Bill Clinton truly wanted to increase home ownership in the U.S. then he would have repeated what has worked numerous times in the past; and that is to increase the supply of inexpensive private property to the point that people can afford it on the wages and salaries that they currently earn.  But he deliberately chose not to do what had worked in the past.

And then you have Hillary chastising Bernie Sanders for voting for the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, (CFMA), that Bill created and signed into law, yet she is going to put Bill in charge of fixing the economy.

It should be noted that the CFMA floated through the morass of Congress modified for a year until it was finally attached to the 11,000 page omnibus bill that funded the government.   It is conceivable, probable, that several senators did not know the full scope of the deregulation that was being enacted.

Just Another Arkansas Business

Hillary Clinton sat on the board of Wal-Mart for years because she happened to be the governor’s wife.  Alice Walton just gave Hillary’s Democratic National Committee Victory Fund $353,000 right after she gave $25,000 to the Ready for Hillary political action committee.

Wal-Mart is a U.S. company that will take the extreme measure of shutting down a store as means of preventing its employees from unionizing Wal-Mart is a company that refuses to pay its employees a living wage requiring its employees to seek billions of dollars in government subsidies for food, healthcare and housing.

Why is Hillary taking money from a company that doesn’t want to allow its employees to become empowered from unionizing?  Why is Hillary taking money from a company that refuses to pay a living wage?  Hillary is taking money from Wal-Mart because Hillary is helping Wal-Mart increase its profits by passing off a portion of its labor costs to tax payers, socialism.

Hillary is taking money from Wal-Mart in order to force the people of America to seek aid from the government rather than enabling the people to provide for themselves through collective bargaining.  By forcing the citizens of America to seek help in the form of food, housing and healthcare from the government, the government can force its top down ideological views upon its citizens.

The more the government controls the less the freedom the people have.  Hillary Clinton does not want to set people free economically; she wants them dependent upon the government so that she can control them.

Hillary is using the play book of the World Bank and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).  Check out John Perkins book, The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.

The Nightmare Of Obamacare

Why is Obamacare failing, it’s failing because people don’t make enough money to afford it even with the aid of the government subsidy.  Why isn’t there enough money to subsidize those who cannot afford Obamacare, again they don’t make enough money to provide the government with the required tax revenue to finance the subsidies.

This is always the end result of overbearing economic socialism that seeks to enrich those at the top.

If the majority of Americans were making a living wage, that is bearing the majority of the fruit of their labor, there would be enough tax revenue to make Obamacare work, yet if the majority of Americans were earning a living wage then Obamacare would be unnecessary for then the majority of Americans would be able to afford health care on their own without any government subsidy.  The people would not need the government’s assistance.

“Obamacare” and a “living wage” are mutually exclusive.  If Hillary Clinton were truly for a living wage then she wouldn’t be for Obamacare.  If Hillary Clinton truly wanted everyone to have cheap health care she would seek to regulate capitalism in such a manner to produce greater competition between insurance companies while simultaneously empowering employees through collective bargaining to obtain living wages and greater health benefits.

The Payoff

People don’t give you money for nothing in return.  When people give you money they expect something in return.  Bill and Hillary Clinton received $153 million in speaking fees from 2001 to 2016.  This included at least $7.7 million for 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS.  Hillary collected at least $1.8 million for eight speeches to big banks, the free market profiting capitalistic banks that rely on socialism to pay off their debt when they fail in the market place.

“Bill Clinton Cashed In When Hillary Became Secretary of State  A typical speech would net Bill $150,000 upon retiring from the White House.  Then when Hillary became Secretary of State his paydays for speeches increased upwards of $500,000 and beyond which included the likes of a Russian investment bank and $750,000 to address a telecom conference in China.

Nobody pays $750,000 to hear someone talk for an hour unless there was something else to be exchanged.  Perhaps some of it is pay back for services rendered when Bill was in office.

And some of it is a little pay forward for what both Bill and Hillary will do when reelected.  Hillary Clinton appointed former Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to head of her transition team.  Salazar works for one of Washington’s most powerful lobbying firms, WilmerHale.  Salazar is a fervent supporter of fracking, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, (TPP), and the Keystone XL pipeline; all pro Republican policies.

NAFTA: The North American (Fraudulent) Trade Agreement

“Yesterday, Sen. Clinton also said I’m wrong to point out that she once supported NAFTA,” Obama said. “But the fact is, she was saying great things about NAFTA until she started running for president.

A couple years after it passed, she said NAFTA was a ‘free and fair trade agreement’ and that it was ‘proving its worth.’ And in 2004, she said, ‘I think, on balance, NAFTA has been good for New York state and America.’ “The Clinton campaign says Obama is wrong, that Clinton was critical of NAFTA “long before she started running for president.”  Politifact

Clinton wrote positively of her husband’s efforts on NAFTA in her memoir “Living History,” published in 2003: “Creating a free trade zone in North America — the largest free trade zone in the world — would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization. Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal.”  Politifact

At a debate hosted by CNN in November 2007, Hillary Clinton said, “NAFTA was a mistake to the extent that it did not deliver on what we had hoped it would, and that’s why I call for a trade timeout.”  Hillary supported NAFTA, then she said she said it was broken. Now Hillary wants to create a much bigger version of NAFTA called the TPP which Bernie Sanders ardently opposes.

How do you know when someone is lying, they keep changing her story.  If Hillary is opposed to NAFTA and claims that it failed why in the world would she be promoting the TPP given that it is the same policies as NAFTA only with different nations covering a much greater economic area?

NAFTA has hurt American citizens as well as citizens from participating nations.  During her convention speech Hillary espoused the TPP to the nation in such a manner as if it is something that people want; as if it is something that would be good for American citizens and the citizens of the participating nations.  Why is she lying to the American people and the world?

“Democrats and Republicans have come together for trade agreements which have resulted in America losing over 60,000 factories in the United States over the last 13 years.”  Bernie Sanders  Why does Hillary want to enact the Trans Pacific Partnership, the TPP?

“Now We Know Why Huge TPP Trade Deal Is Kept Secret From the Public”  One way President Obama and the Chamber of Commerce sell the TPP is by saying it will change everything and will rewrite the rules for doing business for the 21st century.  This leak shows us that they are right about the TPP changing everything and rewriting the rules.

But the leak shows that the people and organizations opposing the TPP were right too, because the changes give corporations vast new powers to overrule democratic governments.”  Huffington Post  The TPP eliminates the Constitutional Rights of U.S. Citizens subjecting them to an international court not bound by elected officials.  The TPP eliminates Democracy and a Republican form of government.

(Five Scary Things About the Trans-Pacific Partnership)

(The TPP could make the environment even worse.)

NAFTA Fallout

The Clintons destroyed the livelihoods of millions of Latin hillary-2Americans.  In his book and movie, “Harvest of Empire,” Juan Gonzalez of Democracy Now illustrates point by point how the corporate elite working through governmental institutions have exploited the poor in Latin America as well as the U.S. using the policies associated with NAFTA.

NAFTA has resulted in greater income inequality; a $181 billion U.S. trade deficit with Mexico and Canada; the related loss of 1 million net U.S. jobs; the displacement of more than one million Mexican campesino farmers and a doubling of desperate immigration from Mexico.  For the full report of NAFTA’s devastation read Public Citizens’ Report on this failed economic policy.

(NAFTA at 20: Lori Wallach on US Job Losses, Record Income Inequality, Mass Displacement in Mexico)

The Clintons intend to do to the Pacific Rim nations what they have done to the Americas.

Voting for Hillary Clinton is voting for your worst economic self interest.

Voting for Hillary Clinton is voting for your worst social interests.

The “free-trade” moniker is a euphemism used to deceive people about what the truth is behind “free trade” agreements just like when the government used the moniker, “collateral damage” to describe the deaths of innocent citizens in a war zone.  According to stats obtained by Public Citizen, “Trade deficits grew 418 % with FTA countries, but declined 6% with Non-FTA countries.”

The Evidence

In 1994 27 million Americans were on food stamps. Today, more than 46 million Americans are on food stamps.  There are massive soup lines in America we just don’t see them the way we did during the great depression.  In 2014, 46.7 million people (14.8 percent), including 15.5 million children were living in poverty to which 15.3 million children were not being adequately nourished for a healthy life.

The ability for the average American to own a home and enjoy the so called “American Dream” is at an all time low.  If Obama could not stop this tragedy neither can Hillary.

Keeping Them In The Dark

Then to make sure the public is kept in the dark Bill Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996.  The act, signed into law on February 8, 1996, was “essentially bought and paid for by corporate media lobbies,” as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) described it, and radically “opened the floodgates on mergers.”  truthout

“Never have so many been held incommunicado by so few,” said Eduardo Galeano, the Latin American journalist, in response to the act.”  truthout

Broadcasting and telecommunications services in the U.S. are now controlled by six corporate conglomerates: Disney, CBS, News Corp., Viacom, Time Warner, and Comcast.  Gannett Company owns over 1,000 newspapers and 600 magazines nationwide, including USA Today. iHeartMedia owns 850 radio stations in the U.S. alone.

According to Bernie Sanders, this violates the core principles of American government as: “we cannot live in a vibrant democracy unless people get divergent sources of information.” To combat this problem, Bernie has consistently called out media conglomerates on their dishonest practices.”

Once again Bill Clinton decreased competition in the market place which increases costs for the product and in this case that would be advertising space.  Holding a monopoly these media companies can increase the cost advertising unchallenged by competitors.

These increased costs to the companies that buy the ad space pass on this cost to their customers who purchase their products.  The rules of the marketplace have been manipulated to force a majority of people to hand over more of their money to a minority of companies unnecessarily.

The Best Democracy Money Can Buy

Now you know why Hillary Clinton can take in $19 million in 72 hours and $143 million for the month of August in campaign donations from the wealthiest people in America; like Republican Meg Whitman who have endorsed Clinton for President.  And now you know why Donald Trump is the Republican presidential candidate.  Trump is the only person in America whom Hillary can beat in an election.

The Clinton Foundation

The Clinton Foundation has taken in over $ 2 billion.  People don’t give you $2 billion for nothing, they expect something in return.

(The Clinton Bush Haiti Fund is Lying to You)

Hillary Clinton is telling America what they want to hear in order to get elected and then she will implement laws, treaties and policies that are in your own worst interests.  Bill and Hillary Clinton talk the talk but they don’t walk the walk.  They make hundreds of millions of dollars by exploiting the poor through their foundation and pandering to big business and heads of state in exchange for political favors.

According to a May 31, 2015 story from the ultra-liberal publication “” there was a steady stream of cash to the Clinton Foundation from 20 foreign governments who relied on Hillary to approve of weapons exports to their nations.

While Clinton was secretary of state, her department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to Clinton Foundation donors which was twice the amount allocated during the same time period of George W. Bush’s second term.

Another $151 billion in separate pentagon deals, (a 143% increase over the Bush’s administration), went to 16 countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary slammed Algeria on human rights violations one year and then the next year increased military exports to Algeria by 70% after Algeria donated $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation.  Those exports included “toxicological, chemical and biological agents.”

Hillary the War Hawk?

There are mixed reviews on the Clinton Foundation by charity watchdog groups yet one group, “Charity Navigator” had to remove the foundation from its charity list due to the foundation’s atypical business model which could not be accurately rated according to Charity Navigator’s methodology.

The Clinton Foundation does not have a typical charity business model.

Bill’s Piggy Backing Profit College

Hillary Clinton has blasted for profit universities promising to crack down on their predatory tactics.  Bill Clinton received $17.6 million from for profit university, Laureate International to be its honorary Chancellor for five years beginning shortly after Hillary became Secretary of State.Doug Becker, the founder of Laureate Universities, has made large donations to both Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s political campaigns.

Becker has donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation.  Laureate, “the fastest growing college network in the world,” has partnered with the Clinton Global Initiative on various educational causes throughout the world.

Becker is the chairman of the board of the International Youth Foundation, (IYF), which is a non-profit organization run out of hte State Department, yes Hillary’s Department.  The IFY is involved in international education that provides job and life skills to disenfranchised youth throughout the world.

The IYF is funded by the State Department through the U.S. Agency for International Development.  In the three overlapping years beginning in 2010 State Department funding of the IYF shot up dramatically to an average of $19 million a year.

The year after Hillary left the the State Dept. grants to IYF fell to about $6 million a year.  “The only scam in education that I am aware of is the scam of Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton,”  said Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to Donald Trump. “Secretary Clinton was funneling State Department grants to this university.”

No Uranium For You

Vladimir Putin personally thanked Bill Clinton for giving a speech to a Russian investment bank, Renaissance Capital; Clinton received 500k for the speech.  Renaissance Capital was promoting stocks in a uranium mining company, Uranium One, that was acquired by the Russian Atomic Energy Agency, Rosatom.  One catch, Rosatom needed the U.S. State Department’s approval to purchase Uranium One’s mining rights.

The Clinton Foundation received $2.35 million from Uranium One’s chairman and family foundation leading up to Hillary Clinton signing off on the deal; a the deal that handed over 20% of the United States’ Uranium to Russia.

According to Clinton Cash, the total donations from Uranium One shareholders to the Clinton Foundation exceeded $145 million.

How You Make $6 Billion Disappear

$6 Billion vanished from the U.S. State Department primarily under Hillary Clinton’s watch.

The Inspector General concluded in it’s alert that such failures create “conditions conducive to fraud, as corrupt individuals may attempt to conceal evidence of illicit behavior by omitting key documents from the contract file. It impairs the ability of the department to take effective and timely action to protect its interests and, in turn, those of taxpayers. Finally, it limits the ability of the government to punish and deter criminal behavior.”

So in the final analysis, Clinton’s Socialism Is More Capitalistic Than You Know

2 Replies to “Clinton’s Socialism Is More Capitalistic Than You Know”

  1. Update:
    Harvard Business School’s study on competitiveness led by Michael Porter, found that the political system was actually a key cause in hindering the economic development of the US.

    The study concluded that tax reform is the single most powerful step to improve America’s economic trajectory. And the impacts would be felt almost immediately.

Comments are closed.