A Warning To The Tea Party Nation
by Chuck Baldwin
February 12, 2010
As far as grassroots activism goes, the surge in Tea Parties across America is one of the more encouraging developments to recently take place. It reminds me of the “Conservative Revolution” of 1994, when the GOP reclaimed both the US Senate and House of Representatives. At that time, it had been over 40 years since the Republican Party controlled both the US House and Senate. And, between the two, the House victories were the most significant.
Spurred mostly by the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, a host of young, energetic freshman Republicans marched into Washington, D.C., determined to return a burgeoning and out-of-control federal leviathan to the constitutional precepts of limited government. I’m talking about then-freshman House members such as Helen Chenoweth, Steve Largent, Bob Barr, Joe Scarborough, Sonny Bono, John Shadegg, J.C. Watts, etc. These young conservatives went to Washington, D.C., determined to reduce the growth and size of the federal government.
The vehicle used to transport these young conservatives from grassroots activism to US House and Senate seats was the highly touted “Contract with America” (CWA), which was orchestrated by House Speaker-to-be, Newt Gingrich. The CWA included a promise to the American people that if they would give the GOP a majority in Congress, they would eliminate up to 5 federal departments–such as the Departments of Energy and Education–and many federal agencies.
Obviously, not only did the GOP-controlled Congress not eliminate a single federal department or agency–or even shrink the size of the federal government at all–it expanded the size and scope of the federal government at every level. And there is one reason for it: Big Government neocons posing as champions of conservatism co-opted and destroyed the Conservative Revolution of 1994.
If one wants to put names to these treasonous wretches (and I do), I’m talking about charlatans such as Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott. Anyone who thinks that Newt Gingrich is a real conservative or that he will do anything to reduce the size and scope of the federal government needs to speak with any of those Republican members of the freshman class of 1994. (Sadly, too, some of the members of that great freshman class went on to become Big Government toadies themselves. Such is the power of that Putrid Province by the Potomac.)
The Tea Parties of 2010 remind me very much of the Conservative Revolution of 1994. And if the Tea Party Nation is not very careful, they will succumb to the same fate. The signs of a silent takeover of the movement are already appearing.
First of all, the Tea Parties were actually born during the Presidential campaign of Congressman Ron Paul of Texas in 2007 and 2008. For all intents and purposes, the Tea Parties and the Ron Paul Revolution were one and the same. These were (mostly) young people, who were sick and tired of the same old establishment Republican Party. They were tired of establishment Republicans selling out the principles of limited government; they were tired of the US Constitution being ignored and trampled by both Republicans and Democrats; they were tired of an incessant interventionist US foreign policy that keeps sending US forces overseas to advance a burgeoning New World Order (NWO); they were tired of perpetual war; they were tired of the bank bailouts; they were tired of the Federal Reserve; etc.
I know this because I met–and spoke before–the Tea Party Nation in State after State as I campaigned for Dr. Paul during the Republican primaries back in 2008. And I met them again all over America, as I was running as an Independent candidate for President–with Ron Paul’s endorsement, no less. I was with them in scores of meetings (big and small) from Washington, D.C., to Spokane, Washington, and all points in between.
But now many of the Tea Parties are distancing themselves from Dr. Paul and embracing establishment players such as Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. Even Newt Gingrich is being courted. Watch out, Tea Party Nation: you’re in danger of losing your soul! Newt Gingrich is not one of you. He is not your friend. He is an imposter. He will destroy you just like he almost single-handedly destroyed the Conservative Revolution of 1994.
Plus, be careful about Sarah Palin and other establishment Republicans. Palin is currently playing both sides. She is promoting Big Government neocons such as John McCain on the one hand, and sincere conservative-libertarians such as Rand Paul on the other hand. But if one wants a real barometer of Palin’s true colors, look no further than her endorsement of Rick Perry in Texas.
Perry is the quintessential establishment Republican. Perry has been in office for some 9 years, and what has he done to thwart the NWO in Texas? Nothing! Perry is even a Bilderberg Group attendee. What has he done for State sovereignty in Texas? Nothing! In fact, he supports the North American Union and the NAFTA superhighway. What has he done to resist Obama’s universal health care proposals? Nothing! What has he done to protect the citizens of Texas against an emerging Police State? Nothing! What has he done to fight illegal immigration? Nothing!
As a result of both Rick Perry’s establishment business-as-usual politics in Texas and the proliferating grassroots Tea Party movement, counterattacking establishment politics, a Tea Partier herself has entered the race for Texas governor. Her name is Debra Medina. As the Tea Party Nation in Texas already knows, Medina is one of you.
Medina is committed to preserving Texas’ independence and sovereignty. She is opposed to the Patriot Act. She will secure the Texas border. She will give Texas Vermont-style open carry freedoms for gun owners. She wants to get rid of unconstitutional property taxes in Texas. She will stop the NAFTA superhighway. Medina is the real deal.
So, what did Sarah Palin do? She went to Texas and endorsed Rick Perry! I’m sorry, ladies and gentlemen, playing political games in order to rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars on the speaking and book-signing circuits is not what the Tea Parties are all about.
Tea Parties are supposed to be about putting principle over politics, supporting and defending the US Constitution, supporting limited government and personal liberty, getting rid of the Federal Reserve, abolishing the IRS, ending preemptive and pervasive wars, and putting truth and integrity back into government.
Don’t get me wrong; there are things about Sarah Palin that I like. I especially appreciate her pro-life and pro-Second Amendment stands. I also appreciate her signing the Alaska State sovereignty resolution while she was governor. By all indications, she did a good job as Alaska’s chief executive. At the national level, however, she favors the Patriot Act–and even wants to expand it. She supported the banker bailouts. And when it comes to foreign policy issues, Palin is just another neocon. Plus, as with most Republicans at the national level, I think she is clueless about the NWO. And please remember, it was Mr. New World Order himself, Henry Kissinger, who vetted Palin on behalf of McCain.
The Tea Party Nation should expect better!
The Nation also needs to be careful about Glenn Beck. He says many of the right things. He is likeable and charismatic; but he’s also dead wrong on a number of issues–issues that are critical to the Tea Party Nation. He’s dead wrong when he attempts to disparage and impugn Congressman Ron Paul, saying Dr. Paul is a “crazy, kooky guy.” He’s dead wrong in supporting the banker bailouts. He’s dead wrong when he supports raising taxes (which he has done on several occasions). He was dead wrong when he supported the Patriot Act. He is dead wrong when he viciously attacks the 9/11 victims’ families who demand further information about what happened to their loved ones on that fateful day. And he is dead wrong when he mocks people such as Alan Keyes and Joe Farah for demanding that Barack Obama release his birth certificate–if he indeed has one.
And now I hear that there are some self-professed members of the Tea Party Nation who are actually running for Congressman Paul’s US House seat in Texas. If this is not a sign that establishment Republicans are hijacking the Tea Party movement, I don’t know what is. Remember, the Tea Party movement began as a support base for the Ron Paul Revolution back in 2007.
I strongly encourage the Tea Party faithful to read Jane Hamsher’s recent column on this subject:
http://tinyurl.com/tea-party-soul
I say again, be careful, Tea Party Nation. You are being infiltrated. You are being compromised. You are being neutered. Stick to your principles. Stick with the Constitution. Keep opposing unconstitutional, preemptive wars. Keep calling for the abolition of the Federal Reserve. Keep fighting for less taxes, reduced federal spending, and states’ rights. Keep opposing the Patriot Act and the New World Order. Don’t abandon Ron Paul. Be wary of people such as Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. You don’t need “big name” celebrities to give you credibility. As Samson’s strength depended on keeping his hair uncut, your strength lies in keeping your principles intact. And unless you want to wind up like the Republican freshmen in 1994, avoid Newt Gingrich like the plague!
WFAA Dallas Channel 8 is set to air a one-hour statewide debate between Texas GOP gubernatorial candidates on January 29, at 7 p.m.
Since Debra Medina has risen so rapidly in the polls, the debate will include all three Republican candidates: Hutchison, Medina and Perry. It will originate from WFAA studios in Dallas, and air live on Belo Corp. television stations in Houston (KHOU), San Antonio (KENS), Austin (KVUE) and on Texas Cable News (TXCN). The debate will also be streamed live and archived on the Web sites operated by Belo broadcast and cable companies, and on the Web site operated by A. H. Belo Corporation’s newspaper, The Dallas Morning News.
WFAA veteran news anchor John McCaa will serve as moderator. Panelists for the debate include senior political writer Wayne Slater of The Dallas Morning News, news anchors Len Cannon of KHOU, Sarah Lucero of KENS and Terri Gruca of KVUE.
Currently, there is no debate scheduled with the Democratic candidates.
Reposted from National Center For Policy Analysis
MORE GUNS, LESS CRIME IN ‘09
Americans went on binges buying guns and ammunition in late 2008 and early 2009, worried that a radical leftist president and Democrat-dominated Congress would violate their Second-Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The effects? Less murder, robbery, rape and property crime, according to report released last week by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI).
The gun-buying started shortly before, and then took off after, President Barack Obama’s election, says the American Thinker:
- The Toronto Star reported a 15 percent increase of 108,000 more FBI background checks in October 2008 than during the same month in 2007.
- In November 2008, the number of FBI background checks on applicants buying guns spiked 42 percent from the previous year.
- The FBI performed 12.7 million background checks in 2008, compared to 11.2 million in 2007, a 13 percent increase.
More evidence of rampant gun-buying in the states, according to the American Thinker:
- Through June 2009, the Texas Department of Public Safety received a monthly average of 12,700 applications for concealed handgun licenses, up 46 percent from the average in 2007.
- In liberal Massachusetts, gun permits surged 15 percent over the last two years (after falling several years before that).
Source: Joe Gimenez, “More Guns, Less Crime in ‘09,” American Thinker, December 30, 2009.
For text:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/more_guns_less_crime_in_09.html
For FBI report:
http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104668&article=6492241
For more on Crime:
by VisionVictory » Sun Dec 13, 2009 2:37 am
Every single fiat currency that has ever existed prior to the ones we have with us today, has eventually been destroyed by its government. Let me say that again. Over 3,800 fiat currencies have failed with the exception of the ones we have with us today. So, what’s different about the ones we have with us today? Nothing.
The only difference between a fiat currency that has value today and one that no longer exists, is time. Currently, the world is supported by a 38 year old fiat Dollar system. Prior to the entitlement boom, the U.S. Dollar was as good as gold..literally. Prior to 1933 Americans had a currency that was redeemable in gold and silver. Sound money kept control of our government through limited supply and demand. Unfortunately, Democrat President Woodrow Wilson created the creature from Jekyl Island known as the Federal Reserve in 1913.
With the free market no longer influencing interest rates and credit worthiness, the U.S. economy entered its first Federal Reserve boom bust cycle with the roaring 20’s followed by the Great Depression, then by war, more war, recessions (new word for depressions), and of course the Great Society. With the transition from Republic to Empire complete, Republican President Nixon did what any good emperor would do, devalue the currency and keep the party going.
You see all leaders with sound money face the same two choices:
1. They can live within their means; tell their constituents the truth about war, government services, and the free lunches that aren’t really free. If society wants war, services, and free lunch for all they will need to be taxed. I’ll let you guess how many Kings, Emperors, and Presidents have chosen option number 1.
2. Screw sound money. We’ll borrow instead of tax. Print instead of making payments. No one will even notice since we (the government) can tame inflation. You see at first no one notices. No one even cares. The tax revenue and deficits are still not that far a part. Of course as government gets bigger and more free lunches are passed out, the debt rises so much that just the interest becomes, oh say 202 billion for 2009
With the unlimited man made fiat dollar the sky is the limit, I mean it took Republican President Ronald Reagan one term to grow the national debt larger than all the previous Presidents combined. Did Ronald Reagan create all the unaffordable entitlements? No, and neither did Obama or Bush for that matter. But guess what they all do have in common, they all chose option number 2.
One of the biggest frauds in the world today is that the United States dollar is a safe haven. The U.S. dollar became a safe haven when it still had ties to gold and silver. Shortly after WWII the gold dollar was crowned with world reserve status. This meant nations and central banks agreed to do transactions in U.S. dollars. Because of this, demand for U.S. dollars Nations and Central Banks have saved and looked to the dollar as a store of value.
The fiat dollar didn’t come until 1971. President Nixon feeling the pressure of war and exploding entitlements closed the gold window. The dollar was now a free floating fiat currency. And by the way, with world reserve status, it was still in high demand. With the dollar now backed by a printing press and still in high demand, U.S. consumers were given the ultimate global credit card.
For the last 3 decades the world has produced, saved, and built their nations, while the U.S has been busy maxing out their global credit card by borrowing, spending, and living the good life. No need to save when the world needs dollars to buy oil, we have lenders lined up at our interest only door steps. Who needs capital to expand an economy when you have China, Japan, and the whole world begging for freshly printed U.S. currency?
How long will this party last?
In my opinion the party is already over, we’re just too drunk on debt to notice. Americans have been in an illusion of wealth for so long, they actually believe that 2005 was a normal year. Most believe a recovery is likely and will bring back good times. Meanwhile the world is buying less and less U.S. currency, a trend that has accelerated to the downside for the last 9 years.
The U.S. currency has seen dramatic declines priced against gold, oil, Euros, and food. U.S. stocks as well priced in oil, gold, food, Euros, Aussie dollars, Canadian dollars, Swiss francs, and almost any other item of value has seen a decline. I know, stocks are up, but my point is that they are only up in Dollars. It’s a trick and all part of the illusion; in fact, you can call it the final act. As I write this, congress is about to raise the debt ceiling again, but this time its going to be raised to a record 1.9 trillion.
Previous to 2009 the record for an annual deficit was less than half a trillion. 2009 blew the roof off with a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit, payments of course have been kept down with an artificially low rate of 2% and of course paying our lenders back in a devalued currency has also helped the trickery. The breaking point in my opinion is here, now, today, and it is only a matter of time. Remember how I said the trend for buying dollars is down? Well guess what, the demand for borrowing is up, up by more than you can imagine.
It took 205 years for the national debt to hit 1 trillion dollars, less than 10 to hit its second trillion, and in 2009 less than 9 months to add 1 trillion to the deficit. According to the Congressional Budget office for fiscal year 2010, we should hit a trillion just 7 months in. So let’s look at the macro data, more war, more interest, more entitlements, entitlement spending, and less revenue from baby boomers and foreign lenders. Hmm, I wonder if they will continue the weak dollar policy.
People who still hold their wealth in U.S. dollars blow me away. I can’t tell you the day or time, but I can tell you that ALL nations who have chosen option number 2, ALL empires, ALL fiat currencies eventually come to an end. When that day comes, its not going to be pretty. The drug of stimulus, artificial interest rates, and printing prosperity will turn into a hyperinflationary nightmare. Those on the fence will be washed away by a foreign tsunami flooding the nation with dollars. They will be buying our gold, silver, valuable real estate, commodities, and other assets. Foreigners will turn in their dollar causing prices for everyday Americans to become unreachable.
Like ALL other fiat currencies, the dream will end in a terror. Nation after Nation has repeated history, the history that you can not print your way to prosperity. You can not devalue your currency to pay debts and you can not sustain an endless military occupation of the world. In closing, the dollar crisis is here, and there is no turning back.
Join State Representative Angie Chen Button for a District Celebration to Honor the Great Constituents of District 112
With Appearances by Local Officials from the Cities of Garland and Richardson and a Special Presentation by Michael Quinn Sullivan of Texans for Fiscal Responsibility
Food, Refreshments, and Door Prizes Provided
Thursday, November 5, 2009
5:30-7:00 PM
DFW Technology Activity Center
999 East Arapaho Road, Suite 300
Richardson, TX 75081
RSVP at 972-234-8980 or angie.button@house.state.tx.us
| Written by Selwyn Duke |
| Friday, 23 October 2009 09:23 |
|
After giving a speech in Toronto, Canada, several years ago, I spoke to some of the high school students in attendance. While talking about the role of the state with one of them, he said: “Government is there to make people happy.” He was a nice, intelligent young man, and he made the statement in a non-confrontational, matter-of-fact manner. While such an attitude reminds one of what a certain road is paved with, unfortunately, his perspective is shared by millions of Americans. Of course, some of these people are well-meaning, but they nevertheless are lacking in a very traditional American quality: distrust of government. How American is it? Columnist Dr. Walter Williams treats this in his piece, “American Idea,” writing: At the heart of the American idea is the deep distrust and suspicion the founders of our nation had for government, distrust and suspicion not shared as much by today’s Americans. Some of the founders’ distrust is seen in our Constitution’s language such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage, violate and deny. If the founders did not believe Congress would abuse our God-given rights, they would not have provided those protections. After all, one would not expect to find a Bill of Rights in Heaven; it would be an affront to God. Other founder [sic] distrust for government is found in the Constitution’s separation of powers, checks and balances and the several anti-majoritarian provisions such as the Electoral College and the requirement that three-quarters of state legislatures ratify changes in the Constitution. Why have Americans lost this healthy suspicion? For one thing, since we Western moderns have never lived under a King George — let alone a Stalinesque tyranny — we often assume our nation could never descend into such a state. It also is no coincidence that as faith in God shrinks, government grows. After all, man tends to look to his “higher power,” to use that fashionable term, for aid and comfort. But if you don’t believe in the next world, your higher power will be in this one — and this fold’s most powerful entity is the biggest government. This is perhaps why people look to little g to provide sweetness and light for you and me. Yet one obvious difference between God and gov. is that the latter doesn’t share the former’s perfection. Given this, is government really like God, with bigger being better? Let’s start with a question: Would you like to empower the top executives at PepsiCo, Ford, Microsoft or Bear Stearns to control your life? Would you like them to determine your tax burden, regulate your businesses and devise school curricula for your children? This prospect disturbs many and is downright frightening to those suffering from “corporaphobia,” and I wouldn’t like the idea myself. But why then would you place such power in the hands of the federal government? Do people suddenly become angelic upon acquiring a government position? Does such status grant them a special dispensation from the frailties plaguing man? Oh, but isn’t the federal government balanced because it comprises 535 duly elected representatives, the Supreme Court and the President? True, it isn’t a dictatorship, so power is somewhat dispersed. But then how about filling those slots with the same number of top executives from across the corporate world and then giving them carte blanche? If you’d say that corporate types are a group of elitists lacking in diversity, this may be true. But what are politicians? Do they represent an accurate cross-section of America? Before answering, remember that we don’t pluck these people out of a phonebook. While they may come in many shapes, sizes, colors and both sexes, they also are a select group. They have the drive and means to run for office and possess greater than average political skills. They are wealthier and have more formal education than the average American, and, most strikingly, the majority of them are lawyers. (Note: I’d seriously consider a law — legitimized by constitutional amendment if necessary — prohibiting lawyers from running for public office. We already have one branch of government, the judicial, that is a lawyers’ playground. Why should the other two be populated with members of the same legalistic milieu? Talk about a destructive lack of diversity.) Let’s place this in further perspective. Many lament the rise of Wal-Mart and death of the small mom-and-pop shop. Not only does the phenomenon change the face of small-town America, it has other effects as well. For example, we all know that a small, intimate business with ties to its community offers better, more personalized service than a large corporation; for one thing, not only is the former’s owner often the fellow you meet on the street, but you also can see him when patronizing his establishment. In contrast, the top dogs at a large company are anonymous figures whose rarified air you not only will never breathe but would even have trouble locating. And what would we not apply this to? Would you rather place your children in a corporate daycare center whose executives make their decisions 1000 miles away or in a local one run by people in your town? What about law enforcement? Blackwater or the local sheriff? What about your schools? Big corporation or local? How about when you need your car repaired, medical care, a nurse for an aging parent, a plumber or a carpenter? Big corporation or local? OK, why should this answer change simply because the giant entity is public rather than private? Nevertheless, many people would give us a Wal-Mart government (at, inevitably, a Saks Fifth Avenue price). But if you can’t trust your local officials — who are often the people you meet on the street and whom you can talk to at town hall — how can you trust federal officials? How does it make sense to out-source local responsibilities to nameless, faceless, anonymous bureaucrats 1000 miles away, people to whom you’re just a number? This brings us to the principle of “subsidiarity,” which correctly states that the smallest unit of society capable of performing a given function should be the one to do so. This is why small government shouldn’t be a Republican, conservative or even just a constitutionalist idea; it is simply a correct idea. It is why it’s not even just a governmental idea; it applies to everything. If the “family government” can handle a task, a community organization’s “government” cannot do a better job; if the former cannot tackle something but the latter can, there’s no reason to involve local government. And the feds are the last link in this chain. Once this is understood, it becomes apparent that a small-government philosophy isn’t synonymous with hatred for government. It’s synonymous with recognition of and respect for the various “governments” and their roles. Lastly, remember, there has never been a government of godlike charity and benevolence, but there have been many of devilish barbarity and violence. Big government is the small idea that great power somehow breeds great virtue. Small government is the big idea that man’s vice must be kept in a small cage. |
Our love affair with big government becomes more intense as our nation ages. But are we looking for love in all the wrong places?From BusinessWeek.com, by Peter Coy
The financial crisis taught us that markets can drop further and faster than anyone expects. Housing prices, for example, fell for three straight years starting in 2006, even though the conventional wisdom right up until the bust began was that prices would not fall even a little bit.
Let’s apply some of our hard-won knowledge to the dollar, which is also supposed to be resistant to a bust. After weakening gradually since 2002, the greenback rose during the financial crisis last year. It has fallen roughly 15% since March as investors moved to higher-yielding currencies. The conventional wisdom is that at these levels the dollar is cheap and, if anything, due for a rebound. “Currencies don’t go much more than 20% from their long-term averages in real [inflation-adjusted] terms. We’re there already,” says Michael Dooley, an economist who is co-founder and research chief of Cabezon Capital Management, a San Francisco investment firm.
But it’s worth at least thinking about the possibility of a dollar bust. The reason the housing bust had such devastating consequences was a failure of imagination: Lenders, regulators, credit raters, and others simply couldn’t believe that house prices would ever fall the way they did, so they were blindsided.
BANK BLOWUPS POSSIBLE
Let’s imagine the dollar quickly dropped by a further 25% against each major world currency, roughly parallel to housing’s unprecedented 30% decline. That would mean it would take $2 to buy a single euro. On the good side, U.S. manufacturers would find it easier to compete globally, and foreign tourism would boom in the U.S. On the bad side, inflation in the U.S. would zoom because of the rising cost of imported products. Americans would have even more trouble getting a loan as foreign buyers pull out of the debt market.
Abroad, the cheap dollar would make it harder for other nations to export to the U.S., hurting their growth. China could face social unrest. Trade wars could break out. And there could be blowups at overexposed banks whose risk managers were sure no such dollar bust could happen. As investor Warren Buffett once said: “You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.”
Federal regulators are monitoring banks for a wide variety of risks, including the threat of a dollar bust: “We’re not looking quarter to quarter, we’re looking hour to hour and minute to minute at what those risks are,” says one regulator who requested anonymity.
Click here for full article.
For the November 3rd Election, Precinct 1704 will be voting at Greenwood Hills Elementary School, 1313 West Shore Drive. Richardson North Junior High will not be a polling location for this election.
Click here for a sample ballot for the Constitutional Amendment / Joint Election.
If you’re interested in early voting, click here for a list of early voting locations.
Early Voting Times:
October 19, 2009 (Monday through Friday) October 23, 2009 8:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M.
October 24, 2009 (Saturday) 8:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M.
October 25, 2009 (Sunday) 1:00 P.M. – 6:00 P.M.
October 26, 2009 (Monday through Wednesday) October 28, 2009 8:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M.
October 29, 2009 (Thursday through Friday) October 30, 2009 7:00 A.M. – 7:00 P.M.
This election is especially important for property owners as it deals with eminent domain and uniform tax standards for property appraisal. Here are a few different perspectives on the ammendments:
According to numbers released by the Federal Reserve, the amount of money that the Fed has put into circulation is more than double of what it was a year ago. In simple terms, every dollar you have is now worth half of what it was last year. That’s 100% inflation in one year.
Click here for more info by Downsize DC.
Regardless of what many so-called financial experts say, inflation causes high prices, not the other way around. Inflation is an increase in the amount of money in circulation. When that happens, the value of your money drops and prices rise. If our dollar was based upon a commodity (like gold or silver), the value of your dollar would remain virtually the same forever because it would be backed by something tangible. As it stands now, the Federal Reserve prints money out of thin air.
To the left is a picture of a Zimbabwean carrying a pile of cash to buy something. While it looks like a lot of money, the pile of cash is probably worth less than 100 US dollars. Zimbabwe is suffering from an inflation crisis where prices double every 24 hours in that country.
