cabot!

blacklistednews.com
Harvard Professor Creates Blueprint for Ending Cash in US; Calls for Immediate Phasing Out of $20 Bills

Originally posted by hisaluthola

Kenneth Rogoff, the Thomas D. Cabot Professor of Public Policy at Harvard University and the former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is out with an essay this morning in the Wall Street Journal titled,The Sinister Side of Cash.

Rogoff writes:

When I tell people that I have been doing research on why the government should drastically scale back the circulation of cash—paper currency—the most common initial reaction is bewilderment. Why should anyone care about such a mundane topic? But paper currency lies at the heart of some of today’s most intractable public-finance and monetary problems. Getting rid of most of it—that is, moving to a society where cash is used less frequently and mainly for small transactions—could be a big help…

There is little debate among law-enforcement agencies that paper currency, especially large notes such as the U.S. $100 bill, facilitates crime: racketeering, extortion, money laundering, drug and human trafficking, the corruption of public officials, not to mention terrorism….

Cash is also deeply implicated in tax evasion, which costs the federal government some $500 billion a year in revenue…

Cash also lies at the core of the illegal immigration problem in the U.S. If American employers couldn’t so easily pay illegal workers off the books in cash, the lure of jobs would abate, and the flow of illegal immigrants would shrink drastically.

In other words, cash is anti-state, It is about freedom. Rogoff by addressing the above state concerns lays out the true desires of the anti-cash promoters: More state control. It is a further move in the direction of totalitarianism.

How does Rogoff want to execute this anti-cash movement?

He writes:

To be clear, I am proposing a “less-cash” society, not a cashless one, at least for the foreseeable future. The first stage of the transition would involve very gradually phasing out large denomination bills that constitute the bulk of the currency supply. Of the more than $4,200 in cash that is circulating outside financial institutions for every man, woman and child in the U.S., almost 80% of it is in $100 bills. In turn, $50 and $20 bills would also be phased out, though $10s, $5s and $1s would be kept indefinitely. Today these smaller bills constitute just 3% of the value of the currency supply…

The point of getting rid of big bills is to make it harder to carry and store large amounts. A million dollars in $100 bills weighs approximately 22 pounds and can fit comfortably into a large shopping bag. With $10 bills, it isn’t so easy

He also explains how instruments like bitcoin will be thwarted in his statist non-cash world:

Won’t the private sector continually find new ways to make anonymous transfers that sidestep government restrictions? Certainly. But as long as the government keeps playing Whac-A-Mole and prevents these alternative vehicles from being easily used at retail stores or banks, they won’t be able fill the role that cash plays today.


Rogoff  also knows that  cash is a check against the Federal Reserve going serioulsy negative on interest rates:

In principle, cutting interest rates below zero ought to stimulate consumption and investment in the same way as normal monetary policy, by encouraging borrowing. Unfortunately, the existence of cash gums up the works. If you are a saver, you will simply withdraw your funds, turning them into cash, rather than watch them shrink too rapidly. Enormous sums might be withdrawn to avoid these loses, which could make it difficult for banks to make loans—thus defeating the whole purpose of the policy.

Take cash away, however, or make the cost of hoarding high enough, and central banks would be free to drive rates as deep into negative territory as they needed in a severe recession. People could still hoard small bills, but the costs would likely be prohibitive for any realistic negative interest rate. If necessary, central banks could also slap temporary fees on any large withdrawals and deposits of paper currency.

When does he want to launch his program to eliminate $20 bills and up?

“ I believe the time has come,” he writes.

The elimination of everything but very low denomination bills is one of the most significant statist power grabs in United States history.  It provides the state with unheard of methods of tracking and control.

It is an evil plan that must be objected to loudly and forcefully. This is a battle that must be joined. The anti-cash advocates must be defeated.

Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgement that something is more important than fear; The brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all.
—  Meg Cabot, The Princess Diaries

anonymous asked:

At what point did you start believing that Swan Queen was going to be endgame? Was there something that flipped the switch to make you say "This is happening"?

Hey Anon…

I don’t think I ever had some sort of epiphany. I think I discovered Once Upon a Time on AfterEllen checking out the shows that were being reviewed. Last time I found a show that way it was because everyone was watching Law & Order: Special Victims Unit for Alex Cabot and Olivia Benson. I remember thinking that I did see chemistry with them, but initially it didn’t look intentional to me - Mariska Hargitay just has great chemistry with women - and then I felt you could tell when the show found out about the shipping and they played into it a little. I also watched Rizzoli and Isles where I could see the story potential of getting them together, I could see the actresses playing into it, but it never felt like something they were ever going to do.

So going into Once Upon a Time, I expected to see something very similar. Two women with chemistry that would make a great couple if tv had been inclined to tell our stories. A little wink here and there, nothing more. What made me choose that show was that I liked the potential for storytelling behind a mother being reunited with the son she’d given up for adoption, the fairy tale twist seemed original and - silly, I know - I missed Vancouver, so I wanted to watch something shot there.

Imagine my surprise when I found it wasn’t like Rizzoli and Isles or Alex and Olivia at all. I wasn’t emotionally invested at that point, I just observed that none of it looked subtle and that it was built into the story. The entire first season was very obvious, they had a meet-cute in the Pilot. They gave them a son together. Unlike with the shows mentioned above, their potential for a future romantic relationship seemed set up as an integral part of the story and it was there from the beginning. Set up by the show, not in response to fans. On top of their interactions Emma was strongly queer coded from the start.

I actually started watching and didn’t get into it at first, then a year after something pulled me back and I binge watched seasons 1 to 3 and the first half of season 4 in… three or four days. I was just watching with an open mind, not really focused on Emma and Regina as a couple in the sense that it was a given to me. I just felt like it was going to happen and I looked at the show as a whole and the story at hand. Regina’s story in season 2 was what got me emotionally invested, I think. I wasn’t bothered by the other relationships, because watching it all in one go makes Swan Mills family even more obvious, the men just felt like life lessons for these women, not romantic partners for life. Emma and Regina’s relationship is one of the only things that is consistent on a show that gets increasingly less structured and realistic. It stands out more if you watch it in one go. 

So when I went online because I felt the need to talk about this show - there seemed to be hidden meaning everywhere, but I couldn’t pinpoint it - I was surprised to find people being into Regina & Robin and Emma & Hook at all. Binge watching probably enhanced the effect. Robin Hood just showed up and suddenly he’s Regina’s partner without any build up or much effort. The tattoo was obviously a bad reason to get into a relationship with someone, but it was the nudge she needed to let someone in again. It made perfect sense to me, it was part of the journey. Then there was Hook, which looked like gay panic from Emma. A mother harping on about True Love, a fairy tale land where nobody is gay. Then they made sure to unequivocally show during their first date - a relationship milestone - that he hadn’t changed. Also, binge watching made it very clear there was no such thing as a redemption arc for that character, more like a random flip flopping between good actions and bad actions, but no consistency, no arc, no clear evolution like for Regina. So I have been waiting for the other shoe to drop, because Hook not being good for Emma is something the show itself makes sure to remind us of all the time.

I think I just never doubted Swan Queen, what changed is that I became emotionally invested as I was watching, while in the beginning it was just an observation that the show would most likely go there at some point. Coming online, seeing ship wars, homophobic attacks and reading PR made me a little confused, but if I just focus on what I get from the show - incidentally that’s the only thing most people see - I still see what I saw in the beginning.

Originally posted by obsessionisthenewblack

I guess I’ve just always subconsciously felt like that was the story, but coming online made me realize what a big deal that still is to some people. I just refuse to pretend I don’t see what I see. Or apologize for it. 

Do lawyers enjoy lawyer shows? Do doctors enjoy doctor shows? Do cops enjoy cop shows? Do wizards enjoy wizard shows? Like I gotta know bc what if they don’t? And like what if they do but like are yelling out all the inaccuracies of the show during every episode?

Recs list - central mentor-student relationships between women

One thing I love to read about is mentor-student relationships, especially where both participants are women or girls. Often these kinds of relationships are in the background of narratives where other stuff is going on, but here are a few of my favourites that have a prominent place in their own stories:

Wise Child, Monica Furlong – This is one of those books that I keep coming back to. It’s a rich, vibrant fantasy set in a misty Celtic past, telling the story of a clever and prickly girl called Wise Child who is sent to live with the mysterious Juniper, a healer and sorceress who teaches her and helps her to discover her own strength and power. There’s also a prequel that’s just as magical, following Juniper’s very different experiences with her own mentor, Euny.

The Princess Diaries, Meg Cabot – This series follows the adventures of New York teen Mia Thermopolis as she discovers that she is the princess of a small European nation, and learns how to handle her new responsibilities and power. Mia’s grandmother the dowager princess – unlike the version played by Julie Andrews in the (AWESOME!) movie adaptation – is a terrifying and manipulative woman who nevertheless gives Mia invaluable help as she learns about everything from how to refuse a proposal to how to speak in public, navigate life in the public eye and trust her own instincts.

Quarter Days, Iona Sharma – In interwar London, in the midst of an investigation into a rail disaster and an upheaval in the magical world, Salt magic practitioner Grace semi-reluctantly takes on an apprentice – a perceptive and talented girl named Kira. As Kira settles into the world of magic and learns the basics of her craft under Grace’s care, Grace learns her own lessons and makes her own discoveries. This lovely and evocative novella is available to read for free HERE.

Maresi, Maria Turtschaninoff – Maresi grows up in a community of women, and Sister O is just one of her many teachers and role models, but in spite of Sister O’s seriousness and strict discipline, the two of them have a deep connection built on an understanding of the importance of the quest for knowledge, and the need to share it. If you’d like to know more, I recced Maresi in detail HERE.

The Raven Cycle, Maggie Stiefvater – Like Maresi, Blue Sargent grows up surrounded by other women – the ones at 300 Fox Way are clairvoyants and practitioners of magic, most not related by blood but living together as a family. Despite being the only non-psychic in the house, Blue learns a lot from the older women around her – especially her mother Maura, and Maura’s best friends Calla and Persephone.

Anne of Green Gables, LM Montgomery – The entire Anne series is rich with mentor-student relationships between women, with Anne herself often in the mentor role in the later books, but for me one of the most special is Anne’s hero-worship of Muriel Stacy, her teacher in her later years at Avonlea School. Miss Stacy is a vibrant, intelligent woman who encourages Anne to challenge herself and form her own opinions of the world, and her influence continues to resonate through Anne’s later life.

If you know of any I’ve missed out, please, please reblog and add them, I’m always looking for more books like this!

ariabellagato  asked:

I hope this isn't a bother, but I saw your "authors to avoid" post and I can't come up with much info on anyone aside from Silver Ravenwolf. Could you maybe explain why you don't recommend each of the authors?

This post is kind of long cause I go in detail about all the authors listed :) I’ve been meaning to do this for awhile, so this gives me good motivation to get it done :D

Silver Ravenwolf:

  • Strong anti christian rhetoric
  • Very misinformed about the Satanic religion (looking at this critically, many are)
  • She’s spread misinformation about the USA ethics law involving employment (i.e. she assumes employers can ask what potential employees religion is, which is a straight up NO, this CAN NOT happen legally)
  • Bashes people who don’t believe they’re witches (not the charmed/harry potter/etc version, but those who believe in magik)
  • Lack of credible sources
  • Bizarre and possibly dangerous lies about the scientific community (like for some reason your friend/loved one dropping dead cause you cast a spell wrong ???)
  • Encourages lying
  • Pushes the elitist idea of “real witch” vs “not a real witch”
  • Pushes Biblical misinterpretations of the “witch” (many Biblical academic and professional scholars say the term “witch” really resulted just from mass mistranslation over time)

*There’s a bunch of other issues with Silver, but this points out the big ones*

Ann Moura:

  • Ann has a tendency to bash Christianity
  • Ann has horribly missed the mark with historical things, despite being a high school history teacher (and having a masters degree in it). Many people complain that her ORIGINS OF MODERN WITCHCRAFT is more fantasy than actual history.
  • Some of her “beginners books” are not easy to read.
  • She claims to be a natural witch (3rd generation), this concept has had criticism by contemporary witches
  • Poor editing styles and book organization
  • Questionable dieties in relationship to specific spells (such as a goddess of chastity for pregnancy and birth)
  • Doesn’t cite sources

Fionna Horne

  • Took up the name “witch” to support a rockband, not actually one who practices magik
  • Her interviews make her seem very passive about “being a witch” (if she even is one)
  • Says Wicca and witches are the same thing (THEY ARE NOT)
  • Claims to be Wiccan…and athiest at the same time…….. (wiccans believe in the God and Goddess, athiest don’t believe in deities)
  • Contradicts herself about her personal history

Full info here, click!

Lauri Cabot

  • Has claimed the “traditional” Halloween costume is ACTUALLY a religious dress (which is bullshit)
  • “official witches of Salem”….which actually was more about the psychological phenomena known as mass hysteria, NOT actually to do with witches practicing magik
  • Has had run-ins with the law (threatening person with a gun, custody battle over her son in Salem)
  • People feel she’s commercialized Paganism and witchcraft

Starhawk

  • Began to shift some Wicca ideas in such a way that members of the community (aka other wiccans) did NOT like
  • Brings personal issues to non-pagan related things
  • Has done questionable actions in recent years that makes people question if she’s actually Neopagan
  • Strong radical feminist influences (aka 1960s feminism) on how she views Paganism (to simplify: boys are the reason for destruction and violence)
  • Has made questionable history errors in their books

Gwinevere Rain 

  • The biggest possible issue I found so far on her is her age (she’s late 20s)

She says she’s wicca, so my Wicca followers might have more on her. She is on Twitter and Facebook. I’m not Wicca, so I’m not as knowledgeable on this sub-section of Paganism. 

Konstantinos 

  • Said to the the “dark” version of Silver by many critics
  • Poor official website design, feels very amateur (he’s written 6 books and has appeared apparently on a lot of official well known TV shows and channels, so he CAN afford to hire a professional web artist)

Dorothy Morrison 

  • Uses witches and wiccans interchangeably (they’re NOT)
  • Has used Hoodoo terms to describe Wiccan practices and vise versa
  • Questionable spell ingredients
  • Her books lack sources, which leave more knowledgeable fans question how “authentic” her work really is
  • Accused of not giving new information to the neopagan community (aka just repeating what other books are saying in her own words) 
  • Gives hoodoo rituals claiming they’re “voodoo”, when they’re actually hoodoo
  • Has told readers to deface tarot cards, burn them, and flush them in the toilet (WTF????)

D.J. Conway 

  • Gets history facts wrong
  • Accused of not giving new information to the community (though claims the info in their books is a “new” and “different” way to look at things)
  • Claimed a book was about celtic magik when it wasn’t
  • has made several sexist remarks

Gavin and Yvonne Frost 

  • Their book (Witch’s Bible) encourages incestuous and sexual assault on children
  • Claimed they were the founders of Wicca (NOT)
  • Homophobic and were against the idea of gays/lesbians being in the Wiccan community (claims to have taken this back though?)

*For those curious about the actual ritual*

To begin, the child is given a sponsor, which is usually the most recent initiate into the group of an opposite gender, however a special sponsor may be chosen if there is too large a difference in age or physique.

Prior to the ritual, at the youngest age possible, boys will have their penis circumcised and girls meanwhile will have their hymen broken, either surgically or at home by their mothers.

The girls are given two wooden phalluses (dildos) of different sizes and instructions on how to use them in order to prepare their vaginas for sexual intercourse over a period of one month. It’s also stated that they should be helped by their father or sponsor if they have any pain or difficulty using them.

The boys meanwhile receive instructions from their sponsors on how to have sex and what will be expected of them during initiation.

Then the children undergo a three day fast eating only bread, honey, and water. During that time they are shown a demonstration of two people having sex.

The ritual begins robed with some talk after which the initiate, a child with zero tolerance that has been starved for three days, is given a full glass of mead to drink. The child then disrobes, there is some more talking, and then they dance naked with their sponsor. After that the child and their sponsor leave the circle area and have sex with each other.

Some actual quotations from this chapter:

“It is hoped by Wicca that the first full sexual experience will take place in the plesant surroundings of the coven and that the spiritual as well as the physical aspects of the experience will lead the child to a complete life.”

“The horror stories through which the Establishment attempts to downgrade this aspect of Wicca and the threatened terrible consequences of obeying natural instincts cause Wicca to more time and trouble in preparation for the sexual experience than of old.”

“At the last sabbat or eshbat before the initiation, the female novice is given the sacred phallus and the instruction sheet in Table 5 so that she can learn to insert and remove the phallus quickly and comfortably.   She is also taught how she should lie and what she should do during the initiation ceremony.”

“We would like you to be initiated at the next coven meeting, which will take place on …. This means that, excluding your menstruation time, you have three weeks to prepare your muscles for introitus.  Your father or your sponsor will help you if you have any difficulties or pain.”

In 1999 (over twenty years after the book was first published) the Frosts added an introduction to this chapter, that among other things said that people shouldn’t be initiated in this way until they were 18. The actual disclaimer read “This chapter describes some of the more controversial practices of the old path taught in the earliest days of the Church and School of Wicca. No formal initiation into a group that practices the great rite should be done before the candidate attains the age of eighteen.” Despite the fact that there is now a disclaimer, this ritual for children entering puberty was espoused by the Frosts in their book for over twenty years, and the disclaimer itself states that it was a practice taught in the early days of the Church of Wicca. The initiation ritual itself remains unchanged.

Hailey D.D Kleine 

  • She’s only written one book involving Paganism (geared towards children), but this speaks for itself  about the author “a self-proclaimed Aphrodite/Artemis/Cassandra/Lady of the Lake/Athena/Hecate/Persephone/Spider Woman/Hestia/St. Lucy/Lilith/Pandora” if you’re wondering why this speaks for itself, this screams fluff bunny (a NOT nice term in the pagan community)

Sandra Kynes

  • Has been accused of cultural appropriation with their Sea Magic book
  • Line seems to be blurry for the author describing the differences between Wiccan and sea witches
  • Has been accused of being too technical in books meant more for “pleasure” style reading, or a book meant for beginner’s (aka reads like a chinese instruction book meant to put together your IKEA furniture)

I miss the old SVU when trial was a much bigger aspect and we got to see Cabot being absolutely savage in the courtroom. Barba is nowhere near as savage as Cabot; she was electric in the courtroom, and she seemed to care a lot more than Barba as well (though we never really get to see him as extensively, so who knows). I miss court being a big aspect of the show in general, honestly. It was the most interesting aspect in my opinion, not to mention typically the most rewarding or frustrating.

4

04.28.16 (New York, NY @ SiriusXM) - For her appearance at New York City’s SiriusXM’s HQ, Halsey went edgy glam. She wore this absolutely beautiful Cabot dress from Reformation (it is s/o in the blue color, but Reformation does have the color available in two other similar dresses, the Cayenne dress and the Amante dress), possibly this Nasty Gal leather jacket, and these Public Desire boots.