Cult Members are Under Total Mind Control
Almost every family in North America has a member who is under total mind control of the Watchtower Society. Some examples of the extreme discipline these people are under:
The Watchtower intrudes into the married bed. They have rules about sexual foreplay and state that a husband and wife’s passion “should not go unbridled.”
Watchtower rules shelter sex abusers of children in the Kingdom Halls.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are prohibited from
Playing chess
Possessing wind chimes
Attending any event sponsored by a church, including a picnic.
Giving to the Red Cross or Salvation Army.
These are just some of the topics covered in my book, Rescuing Slaves of the Watchtower, Hannibal Books, 2011, . ISBN 978-1-61315-006-1. Available in Christian bookstores, Amazon.com, www.joebhewitt.net; www.rescuewatchtowerslaves.com, in print or e-book from Barnes and Noble, Sony or Amazon.
My first book, I Was Raised a Jehovah’s Witness, (Accent Books, Denver, Colo. 1979; Kregel Publishing, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1997). Sold 45,000 copies in English and more in Chinese translation published in Taiwan.
I served as pastor of churches in the Dallas area for 39 years. I retired in 2001 and devote most of my time to writing and serving as a court-appointed mediator handling cases for Dallas and contiguous counties.
The whole load of hay information on www.joebhewitt.net.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Routine Circumcision of Baby Boys
Some people want to routinely cut off part of helpless baby boys’ penises just in case they should grow up to be sexually promiscuous and/or fail to keep themselves clean. Not as bad as some Africans’ custom of “circumcising” (more like mutilating) young girls by cutting off their clitoris lest they grow up and want to enjoy sex. Not as bad, but close.
Those who advocate routine circumcision of all baby boys are obviously circumcised males and females who don’t know any better. They are the least qualified to claim a right to assume power over baby boys’ future sex life.
Circumcision is a religious sacrifice. It indicates total submission to God. The circumcised man has forfeited some sexual enjoyment for life. A family’s religion is the only justification of routine circumcision of every baby boy.
Routine circumcision has nothing to do with religion but rather with vogue, utility and big-brother-knows-best. I knew young soldiers who underwent circumcision only because they wanted to be like the other guys: the majority who were circumcised.
The idea behind routine circumcision is that circumcised men are less likely to contract the HIV virus.
It’s not like we were facing an AIDS epidemic by leaving all those foreskins intact. The increased vulnerability for the uncircumcised is minuscule at best and non-existent if he practices monogamy and/or cleanliness.
Explaining the difference in sexual satisfaction to a circumcised man is like trying to explain a rainbow to a person born color blind. He doesn’t know what he missed because he never had it.
The foreskin not only is a protective sheath, but sensitive nerves in the foreskin provide much of the pleasure of sexual intercourse. Because the tip of the foreskin is so sensitive, the aroused man can find the correct place of entry “with no hands.” The foreskin keeps the male’s natural lubricant where it needs to be. The lubricant works its way within the foreskin and prepares the head for entry. As entry is achieved the sheath slides down the shaft. Those sensitive nerves in the foreskin now form a ring around the shaft enhancing sexual pleasure.
To remove the protective sheath from the sensitive penis head is like turning a woman’s vagina inside out and exposing it to the drying air and irritants. It would lessen sensitivity and necessitate artificial lubricants; the same results of male circumcision.
Rather than routinely circumcising baby boys, I suggest a less drastic approach to the HIV problem. Teach them the old adage, “Be good. If you can’t be good, be careful.” Or you might paraphrase it, “If you can’t keep that thing in your pants, at least keep it clean.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Joe B. Hewitt is a retired pastor who did marriage
and family counseling during his 39 years of ministry.
Those who advocate routine circumcision of all baby boys are obviously circumcised males and females who don’t know any better. They are the least qualified to claim a right to assume power over baby boys’ future sex life.
Circumcision is a religious sacrifice. It indicates total submission to God. The circumcised man has forfeited some sexual enjoyment for life. A family’s religion is the only justification of routine circumcision of every baby boy.
Routine circumcision has nothing to do with religion but rather with vogue, utility and big-brother-knows-best. I knew young soldiers who underwent circumcision only because they wanted to be like the other guys: the majority who were circumcised.
The idea behind routine circumcision is that circumcised men are less likely to contract the HIV virus.
It’s not like we were facing an AIDS epidemic by leaving all those foreskins intact. The increased vulnerability for the uncircumcised is minuscule at best and non-existent if he practices monogamy and/or cleanliness.
Explaining the difference in sexual satisfaction to a circumcised man is like trying to explain a rainbow to a person born color blind. He doesn’t know what he missed because he never had it.
The foreskin not only is a protective sheath, but sensitive nerves in the foreskin provide much of the pleasure of sexual intercourse. Because the tip of the foreskin is so sensitive, the aroused man can find the correct place of entry “with no hands.” The foreskin keeps the male’s natural lubricant where it needs to be. The lubricant works its way within the foreskin and prepares the head for entry. As entry is achieved the sheath slides down the shaft. Those sensitive nerves in the foreskin now form a ring around the shaft enhancing sexual pleasure.
To remove the protective sheath from the sensitive penis head is like turning a woman’s vagina inside out and exposing it to the drying air and irritants. It would lessen sensitivity and necessitate artificial lubricants; the same results of male circumcision.
Rather than routinely circumcising baby boys, I suggest a less drastic approach to the HIV problem. Teach them the old adage, “Be good. If you can’t be good, be careful.” Or you might paraphrase it, “If you can’t keep that thing in your pants, at least keep it clean.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Joe B. Hewitt is a retired pastor who did marriage
and family counseling during his 39 years of ministry.
Dealing Death Legally
Each time I go to a super market or major discount store and see racks of cigarettes, snuff and chewing tobacco, I think of the more than 300,000 people in the United States and 500,000 people in Europe killed each year by tobacco products. And I wonder, "Do these retailers have a conscience? Do they care at all about human life?"
The middle aged lady behind the counter just works there. It's not her decision to sell the stuff. Same with the manager. You can ask questions all the way up to the corporate board rooms. "Business is business. We have to compete."
Obviously profits from sale of tobacco products are more important to them than human lives.
Tobacco bad news is not hidden in a corner. "Big Tobacco needs to recruit 500,000 new smokers each year to replace the ones who die prematurely due to smoking-related illnesses . . ." news reports quoted David Byrne, the European Union health commissioner after the EU outlawed tobacco ads on December 2, 2002.
In the United States the tobacco industry has been socked with billion-dollar court judgments for killing people. Yet the industry considers those losses part of the cost of doing business and keeps on going. Grocery chains, discount stores, and drug stores keep on retailing the deadly products, some of which finds their way to teenagers who become addicted and fill the ranks of the old smokers who are dying off.
Tobacco farmers keep on growing it. Big Tobacco keeps on making cigarettes, snuff, and chewing tobacco. Wholesalers keep on distributing. Retailers keep on selling. People keep on dying. Who cares?
I started smoking when I was 15, before I had enough sense to make such a life or death decision. I fortunately was able to quit when I was 30. I have outlived my old friends who could not quit. I have been present many times when people died, killed by tobacco. When I see a man die, gasping for breath in cancer-filled lungs, I think of those racks of cigarettes, the nice lady selling them, the store manager, the president of the company, and the board of directors. Corporations are not mechanical entities out of control. Humans make up the mechanism that grows, makes, distributes, and sells tobacco. Have they no conscience?
------------------------------------------------
The middle aged lady behind the counter just works there. It's not her decision to sell the stuff. Same with the manager. You can ask questions all the way up to the corporate board rooms. "Business is business. We have to compete."
Obviously profits from sale of tobacco products are more important to them than human lives.
Tobacco bad news is not hidden in a corner. "Big Tobacco needs to recruit 500,000 new smokers each year to replace the ones who die prematurely due to smoking-related illnesses . . ." news reports quoted David Byrne, the European Union health commissioner after the EU outlawed tobacco ads on December 2, 2002.
In the United States the tobacco industry has been socked with billion-dollar court judgments for killing people. Yet the industry considers those losses part of the cost of doing business and keeps on going. Grocery chains, discount stores, and drug stores keep on retailing the deadly products, some of which finds their way to teenagers who become addicted and fill the ranks of the old smokers who are dying off.
Tobacco farmers keep on growing it. Big Tobacco keeps on making cigarettes, snuff, and chewing tobacco. Wholesalers keep on distributing. Retailers keep on selling. People keep on dying. Who cares?
I started smoking when I was 15, before I had enough sense to make such a life or death decision. I fortunately was able to quit when I was 30. I have outlived my old friends who could not quit. I have been present many times when people died, killed by tobacco. When I see a man die, gasping for breath in cancer-filled lungs, I think of those racks of cigarettes, the nice lady selling them, the store manager, the president of the company, and the board of directors. Corporations are not mechanical entities out of control. Humans make up the mechanism that grows, makes, distributes, and sells tobacco. Have they no conscience?
------------------------------------------------
Friday, October 1, 2010
Babies Need Not Die in Hot Cars
Another two-year-old child died in a hot van. Another family drowned after their car went into a lake. These needless deaths can be prevented.
Frequently we read of a forgotten toddler imprisoned in a hot car with the windows closed, killed slowly but surely. These babies need not die. An easy way of prevention exists if we will just put it to use.
Creativity has been described as a new combination of things already known. Just a little creativity, combining existing electronic elements to make a “Baby Rescue” device can save hundreds of lives in the United States every year.
The usual scenario: A day care worker can’t count, or forgets to count, leaves a toddler asleep on a back seat, and leaves the van in the sun. The child wakes and starts crying. No one hears. The child may try to escape, but no one sees. Modern devices can detect high temperatures and the high pitched cry of a child. Another device can roll down windows. Another can sound an alarm.
These devices could be built and installed in cars and vans at little cost. The Baby Rescue device wouldn’t be 100 per cent effective, because some dying children won’t cry out. But the majority who do cry out would be saved.
People don’t drive into a lake or river deliberately, but such accidents happen. I recall a news article several years ago of a man driving with his wife and children in a rainstorm. He lost his way and drove down a boat ramp and into a swollen river. The family drowned. Evidence showed they tried to get out of the car but couldn’t.
My brother, Gordon Hewitt, parked his car in the driveway of a hurricane-proof house when Hurricane Ike hit Grand Cayman Island. The storm surge swept his BMW car off the driveway, down the street, and into deep water. When he found the car, all the windows had been rolled down. I assume BMW has a safety device that causes the windows to roll down when the car is submerged. Such a device could have saved the family that went into the river, and many others as well.
If BMW can do it, why can’t the other automobile manufacturers?
Women who leave babies in hot cars while they visit bars are not likely to buy a Baby Rescue device. Automobile manufacturers close their eyes and refuse to look at safety devices that will add cost to their products. Seat belts and air bags came into use with pain that hurt car companies like childbirth. So for the children’s sake, there should be laws. Devices to rescue babies from hot cars and families from submerged cars should be installed in each new car, and all existing day care center vans and buses.
Frequently we read of a forgotten toddler imprisoned in a hot car with the windows closed, killed slowly but surely. These babies need not die. An easy way of prevention exists if we will just put it to use.
Creativity has been described as a new combination of things already known. Just a little creativity, combining existing electronic elements to make a “Baby Rescue” device can save hundreds of lives in the United States every year.
The usual scenario: A day care worker can’t count, or forgets to count, leaves a toddler asleep on a back seat, and leaves the van in the sun. The child wakes and starts crying. No one hears. The child may try to escape, but no one sees. Modern devices can detect high temperatures and the high pitched cry of a child. Another device can roll down windows. Another can sound an alarm.
These devices could be built and installed in cars and vans at little cost. The Baby Rescue device wouldn’t be 100 per cent effective, because some dying children won’t cry out. But the majority who do cry out would be saved.
People don’t drive into a lake or river deliberately, but such accidents happen. I recall a news article several years ago of a man driving with his wife and children in a rainstorm. He lost his way and drove down a boat ramp and into a swollen river. The family drowned. Evidence showed they tried to get out of the car but couldn’t.
My brother, Gordon Hewitt, parked his car in the driveway of a hurricane-proof house when Hurricane Ike hit Grand Cayman Island. The storm surge swept his BMW car off the driveway, down the street, and into deep water. When he found the car, all the windows had been rolled down. I assume BMW has a safety device that causes the windows to roll down when the car is submerged. Such a device could have saved the family that went into the river, and many others as well.
If BMW can do it, why can’t the other automobile manufacturers?
Women who leave babies in hot cars while they visit bars are not likely to buy a Baby Rescue device. Automobile manufacturers close their eyes and refuse to look at safety devices that will add cost to their products. Seat belts and air bags came into use with pain that hurt car companies like childbirth. So for the children’s sake, there should be laws. Devices to rescue babies from hot cars and families from submerged cars should be installed in each new car, and all existing day care center vans and buses.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Pretending Ancestors were Pure is Pure Fiction
By Joe Hewitt
Vocal Jewish groups don't like it said that “Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus.”
Would the Japanese now like to say they were not responsible for bombing Pearl Harbor and wholesale slaughter of men, women and children in China? Some Germans might like the world to believe the Germans were not responsible for the Holocaust when Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and Jehovah's Witnesses were rounded up and exterminated. Some white Americans try to make excuses for the 200 years our ancestors enslaved blacks. Of course the Japanese living today can't be blamed for something done by the fanatical leadership that had control of their country during a past generation. Nor can the Germans living today be blamed for actions of long dead Nazis who had control of Germany. White Americans living today should not be blamed for something done by a minority of their ancestors. The same is true about Jews living today; they can't be blamed for something done by fanatical Jewish leaders more than 2,000 years ago.
But let's not pretend it didn’t happen.
Volumes of volumes should count for something. The facts haven't been kept secret. The most published book in history, the Bible, says Jewish leaders insisted that Jesus be crucified. The highest court of Israel, the Sanhedrin, voted for Jesus to die, following the recommendation of the highest official in Judaism, the high priest. Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor, wanted to release Jesus and wash his hands of the whole affair, but a Jewish mob shouted "Crucify him! Crucify him!"
The Jewish leadership insisted on the Romans doing the dirty work, and the Romans did it at the Sanhedrin, the high priest, and the mob's fanatical insistence. Later on the Jewish leaders got over their shyness about murder and stoned Stephen, a disciple of Jesus Christ, to death because he was preaching about Jesus.
Rabbi Eugene Korn of the Anti-Defamation League, was quoted as saying Mel Gibson's movie on the Passion of Christ relies on "sinister medieval stereotypes, portraying Jews as bloodthirsty, sadistic and money-hungry enemies of God who lack compassion and humanity."
There are sadistic, money-hungry enemies of God who lack compassion and humanity in every ethnic group and culture. Are we to believe that of all the races of people on earth the Jews alone are immune from such flaws?
We can't forever condemn an entire nation for some of their ancestors' past actions, neither the Japanese, Germans, White Americans, Jews, or Romans. However, if something is true, it's true and no amount of whining will change the facts.
To say the Jews were not responsible for Jesus' death is a gross revision of history, and requires the same kind of reasoning employed by shallow thinkers who deny the Holocaust. We have to admit it: Jews crucified Christ; Germans enacted the Holocaust; the Japanese murdered children in China; white people enslaved Negroes.
Some anti-Semites pretend that Jesus was not a Jew. The crucifixion of Jesus is about God’s sacrifice that enables Jew and Gentile to be reconciled to Him. During the persecution of Jesus’ disciples, some of the bad guys were Jews. Most of the Christian victims were Jews.
I and millions of others on this planet believe Mel Gibson's film is true to Scripture. We also believe the Bible that says Israel is God's chosen people. The greatest Gentile defenders of Israel are Evangelical Christians.
The death, burial and resurrection of Christ are not about denigrating a race of people. Rather, it's about goodness and mercy; it's about an innocent one dying willingly for the guilty. In true Christianity there is no difference in races, sexes, or economic class.
-----------------------------------------------------
(Matthew 26:3-4, 59, 65, 66; 27:1-2, 21-25; Acts 6:11-13; 7:57-58)
Vocal Jewish groups don't like it said that “Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus.”
Would the Japanese now like to say they were not responsible for bombing Pearl Harbor and wholesale slaughter of men, women and children in China? Some Germans might like the world to believe the Germans were not responsible for the Holocaust when Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and Jehovah's Witnesses were rounded up and exterminated. Some white Americans try to make excuses for the 200 years our ancestors enslaved blacks. Of course the Japanese living today can't be blamed for something done by the fanatical leadership that had control of their country during a past generation. Nor can the Germans living today be blamed for actions of long dead Nazis who had control of Germany. White Americans living today should not be blamed for something done by a minority of their ancestors. The same is true about Jews living today; they can't be blamed for something done by fanatical Jewish leaders more than 2,000 years ago.
But let's not pretend it didn’t happen.
Volumes of volumes should count for something. The facts haven't been kept secret. The most published book in history, the Bible, says Jewish leaders insisted that Jesus be crucified. The highest court of Israel, the Sanhedrin, voted for Jesus to die, following the recommendation of the highest official in Judaism, the high priest. Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor, wanted to release Jesus and wash his hands of the whole affair, but a Jewish mob shouted "Crucify him! Crucify him!"
The Jewish leadership insisted on the Romans doing the dirty work, and the Romans did it at the Sanhedrin, the high priest, and the mob's fanatical insistence. Later on the Jewish leaders got over their shyness about murder and stoned Stephen, a disciple of Jesus Christ, to death because he was preaching about Jesus.
Rabbi Eugene Korn of the Anti-Defamation League, was quoted as saying Mel Gibson's movie on the Passion of Christ relies on "sinister medieval stereotypes, portraying Jews as bloodthirsty, sadistic and money-hungry enemies of God who lack compassion and humanity."
There are sadistic, money-hungry enemies of God who lack compassion and humanity in every ethnic group and culture. Are we to believe that of all the races of people on earth the Jews alone are immune from such flaws?
We can't forever condemn an entire nation for some of their ancestors' past actions, neither the Japanese, Germans, White Americans, Jews, or Romans. However, if something is true, it's true and no amount of whining will change the facts.
To say the Jews were not responsible for Jesus' death is a gross revision of history, and requires the same kind of reasoning employed by shallow thinkers who deny the Holocaust. We have to admit it: Jews crucified Christ; Germans enacted the Holocaust; the Japanese murdered children in China; white people enslaved Negroes.
Some anti-Semites pretend that Jesus was not a Jew. The crucifixion of Jesus is about God’s sacrifice that enables Jew and Gentile to be reconciled to Him. During the persecution of Jesus’ disciples, some of the bad guys were Jews. Most of the Christian victims were Jews.
I and millions of others on this planet believe Mel Gibson's film is true to Scripture. We also believe the Bible that says Israel is God's chosen people. The greatest Gentile defenders of Israel are Evangelical Christians.
The death, burial and resurrection of Christ are not about denigrating a race of people. Rather, it's about goodness and mercy; it's about an innocent one dying willingly for the guilty. In true Christianity there is no difference in races, sexes, or economic class.
-----------------------------------------------------
(Matthew 26:3-4, 59, 65, 66; 27:1-2, 21-25; Acts 6:11-13; 7:57-58)
Cloning Humans
By Joe Hewitt
Originally published in The Dallas Morning News
Sunday, May 19, 2001.
Where is it written, AThou shalt not clone humans@? By what standard is cloning human beings immoral or unethical?
People continue to say there are moral and ethical questions without delineating them. If a majority of people in a democracy vote to outlaw something, they don=t need a moral explanation; they can just do it. Americans well might. But I believe if they do it will be because of a panicked reaction to the unknown rather than for solid, moral or ethical reasons.
Perhaps the real, deep down, fear is that sex will eventually be downplayed. But that, of course, is ridiculous. A society that produces babies without the need of sexual relations exists only in science fiction. If human cloning is perfected and accepted it will be expensive and rare. In vitro fertilization was greeted with the same suspicion, but Atest tube babies@ and their families are doing just fine. Neither in vitro nor cloning would make an artificial human. Both require a mother=s womb.
Granted, there are dangers in human cloning. The whole idea may turn out to be a bust, producing only malformed infants. If so, a ban would be necessary. But, until we find out, outlawing scientific research would be using the same medieval reasoning that nurtured the Dark Ages. So far, only government-funded research is prevented by law.
There is nothing in the Bible to prohibit human cloning. God created. Then He equipped mankind to procreate. With the ability God gave us, we produce children. The soul is God=s department, not ours. Cloning humans is no more immoral or unethical than giving birth to an identical twin, which is a natural clone. None would claim an identical twin to be an artificial entity with no soul.
People get the wrong idea about human cloning. They think the clone emerges full grown from some mystic machine. With successful human cloning, an infertile husband=s wife could bear a son literally just like Dad. The baby would be like Dad=s identical twin but younger.
Some people were ready to forbid organ transplants because of potential unethical practices. Human cloning can proceed with the same ethical safeguards. We are no more Aplaying God@ by utilizing every opportunity to save or enrich human life than we are when we conceive and bear children, or when we use advanced gene therapy.
Our Creator is the maker of moral laws. If God chooses to prevent human cloning, it just won=t happen.
Millions of potentially adoptable American babies are being lost to abortion. Couples yearning for children are spending small fortunes to travel to Russia and other Eastern European countries to adopt. There is a great need in the hearts of these loving couples that can be filled with perfected human cloning. People who desperately want children genetically their own will demand it.
Originally published in The Dallas Morning News
Sunday, May 19, 2001.
Where is it written, AThou shalt not clone humans@? By what standard is cloning human beings immoral or unethical?
People continue to say there are moral and ethical questions without delineating them. If a majority of people in a democracy vote to outlaw something, they don=t need a moral explanation; they can just do it. Americans well might. But I believe if they do it will be because of a panicked reaction to the unknown rather than for solid, moral or ethical reasons.
Perhaps the real, deep down, fear is that sex will eventually be downplayed. But that, of course, is ridiculous. A society that produces babies without the need of sexual relations exists only in science fiction. If human cloning is perfected and accepted it will be expensive and rare. In vitro fertilization was greeted with the same suspicion, but Atest tube babies@ and their families are doing just fine. Neither in vitro nor cloning would make an artificial human. Both require a mother=s womb.
Granted, there are dangers in human cloning. The whole idea may turn out to be a bust, producing only malformed infants. If so, a ban would be necessary. But, until we find out, outlawing scientific research would be using the same medieval reasoning that nurtured the Dark Ages. So far, only government-funded research is prevented by law.
There is nothing in the Bible to prohibit human cloning. God created. Then He equipped mankind to procreate. With the ability God gave us, we produce children. The soul is God=s department, not ours. Cloning humans is no more immoral or unethical than giving birth to an identical twin, which is a natural clone. None would claim an identical twin to be an artificial entity with no soul.
People get the wrong idea about human cloning. They think the clone emerges full grown from some mystic machine. With successful human cloning, an infertile husband=s wife could bear a son literally just like Dad. The baby would be like Dad=s identical twin but younger.
Some people were ready to forbid organ transplants because of potential unethical practices. Human cloning can proceed with the same ethical safeguards. We are no more Aplaying God@ by utilizing every opportunity to save or enrich human life than we are when we conceive and bear children, or when we use advanced gene therapy.
Our Creator is the maker of moral laws. If God chooses to prevent human cloning, it just won=t happen.
Millions of potentially adoptable American babies are being lost to abortion. Couples yearning for children are spending small fortunes to travel to Russia and other Eastern European countries to adopt. There is a great need in the hearts of these loving couples that can be filled with perfected human cloning. People who desperately want children genetically their own will demand it.
The Dying Dollar
By Joe Hewitt
While the federal government is swinging a flyswatter at the fox in the henhouse a big hungry bear is coming in the open kitchen door.
Sub-prime mortgages, credit card debt, bankruptcies, and collapsing financial institutions are bad enough, the fox in the henhouse, but not our main problem. Our main problem is a looming currency crisis.
The dollar is dying.
Gold is now close to $1,000 an ounce. Not that gold is worth a lot more, but that money is worth a lot less. The dollar is losing steadily to the Euro. The Euro was introduced in 2000 on par with the dollar. The Euro reached $1.57. People in Europe and around the world who have been saving dollars will figure it out: Euros are a better investment.
I remember when Saddam Hussein’s stash of money was discovered in a Baghdad bank: large cartons full of U.S. $100 bills. There are other hoards of dollars around the world. I remember visiting Russia in 1996 and exchanging dollars for Rubles. Even in remote Siberia so many dollars were flowing through the system that the Russian currency exchanges had automatic machines to count dollars. Traveling in the Middle East I heard again and again the cry of street peddlers, “One American dollar,” or “Five American dollars.” Throughout Latin America, I have asked the question, “Do you accept dollars?” The answer is usually, “Yes.” U.S. dollars flow through the arteries, veins, and capillaries of commerce around the world.
So when people in these other countries figure out that the dollar is losing its value as fast as a new car, what will they do? They’ll ship them back to the United States where they have the most value and spend them. American real estate sales to foreign companies, already numerous, will multiply. Within a three-month period the amount of currency circulating in the United States could double. Like the run on Bear Stearns stock caused its value to plummet out of control, the rush to send dollars back to the U.S. will gain momentum until it’s a flood. When the money supply in the U.S. doubles, guess what will happen to prices. Four-dollar-a-gallon gasoline hurts. Eight-dollar-a-gallon gasoline will hurt worse. How about a seven-dollar loaf of bread, and a nine-dollar gallon of milk?
Like Richard Nixon’s futile attempts to stop double digit inflation in the Seventies, the federal government will probably institute price controls with the same results, accelerated inflation.
When the tons of dollars flood into the United States we could do as other countries have done when their currency becomes worthless: just chop off some zeroes and print more money. Call it “New Dollars.”
No matter how well you dress it, a dead dollar is just a piece of paper. We got started with printing press money because we were desperate during the Great Depression. President Franklin D. Roosevelt instituted a giant devaluation when we went off the gold standard. Gold went from $20 an ounce to $35 an ounce. Two generations later, President Lyndon B. Johnson did away with the silver standard, and soon gold was $350 an ounce.
Now we’re on the paper standard.
The big hungry bear is coming through the open kitchen door, and the fox is still in the henhouse. What do we do? Maybe government can do something. I hope so. I’m afraid nature will take its course and our country will suffer a major economic collapse that will spread like a tsunami around the world.
-------------------------------------------------------
While the federal government is swinging a flyswatter at the fox in the henhouse a big hungry bear is coming in the open kitchen door.
Sub-prime mortgages, credit card debt, bankruptcies, and collapsing financial institutions are bad enough, the fox in the henhouse, but not our main problem. Our main problem is a looming currency crisis.
The dollar is dying.
Gold is now close to $1,000 an ounce. Not that gold is worth a lot more, but that money is worth a lot less. The dollar is losing steadily to the Euro. The Euro was introduced in 2000 on par with the dollar. The Euro reached $1.57. People in Europe and around the world who have been saving dollars will figure it out: Euros are a better investment.
I remember when Saddam Hussein’s stash of money was discovered in a Baghdad bank: large cartons full of U.S. $100 bills. There are other hoards of dollars around the world. I remember visiting Russia in 1996 and exchanging dollars for Rubles. Even in remote Siberia so many dollars were flowing through the system that the Russian currency exchanges had automatic machines to count dollars. Traveling in the Middle East I heard again and again the cry of street peddlers, “One American dollar,” or “Five American dollars.” Throughout Latin America, I have asked the question, “Do you accept dollars?” The answer is usually, “Yes.” U.S. dollars flow through the arteries, veins, and capillaries of commerce around the world.
So when people in these other countries figure out that the dollar is losing its value as fast as a new car, what will they do? They’ll ship them back to the United States where they have the most value and spend them. American real estate sales to foreign companies, already numerous, will multiply. Within a three-month period the amount of currency circulating in the United States could double. Like the run on Bear Stearns stock caused its value to plummet out of control, the rush to send dollars back to the U.S. will gain momentum until it’s a flood. When the money supply in the U.S. doubles, guess what will happen to prices. Four-dollar-a-gallon gasoline hurts. Eight-dollar-a-gallon gasoline will hurt worse. How about a seven-dollar loaf of bread, and a nine-dollar gallon of milk?
Like Richard Nixon’s futile attempts to stop double digit inflation in the Seventies, the federal government will probably institute price controls with the same results, accelerated inflation.
When the tons of dollars flood into the United States we could do as other countries have done when their currency becomes worthless: just chop off some zeroes and print more money. Call it “New Dollars.”
No matter how well you dress it, a dead dollar is just a piece of paper. We got started with printing press money because we were desperate during the Great Depression. President Franklin D. Roosevelt instituted a giant devaluation when we went off the gold standard. Gold went from $20 an ounce to $35 an ounce. Two generations later, President Lyndon B. Johnson did away with the silver standard, and soon gold was $350 an ounce.
Now we’re on the paper standard.
The big hungry bear is coming through the open kitchen door, and the fox is still in the henhouse. What do we do? Maybe government can do something. I hope so. I’m afraid nature will take its course and our country will suffer a major economic collapse that will spread like a tsunami around the world.
-------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)