Big Banks Launder Hundreds of Billions of Illegal Drug Cartel Money … But Refuse to Provide Services for Legal Marijuana

The big banks have laundered hundreds of billions of dollars for drug cartels. See this, this, this, this, this and this (indeed, drug dealers kept the banking system afloat during the depths of the 2008 financial crisis).

The HSBC employee who blew the whistle on the banks’ money laundering for terrorists and drug cartels says said: “America is losing the drug war because our banks are [still] financing the cartels“, and “Banks financing drug cartels … affects every single American“.

And see this.)

And yet the banks refuse to provide banking services for LEGAL marijuana in states like Colorado which have blessed the sale of pot.

The Feds are a big part of the problem. After all, they support some ruthless, criminal drug cartels.

On the other hand, the sale of marijuana is still illegal under Federal law pursuant to the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.

This is true even in California and other states which have allow medical or recreational marijuana. U.S. v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Co-op (2001) 532 U.S. 483 (medical necessity is not an exception to 21 U.S.C., §841(a)(1) governing the federal prohibition against manufacture and distribution of marijuana).

As the New York Times reported in May of 2011:

Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, but that has not stopped a fuzzy industry of marijuana farms and dispensaries from rising to serve the 15 states that allow the drug to be used for medical purposes. Under President Obama, the federal government had seemed to make a point of paying little attention — until now.

 

***

 

As some states seek to increase regulation but also further protect and institutionalize medical marijuana, federal prosecutors are suddenly asserting themselves, authorizing raids and sending strongly worded letters that have cast new uncertainty on an issue that has long brimmed with tension between federal and state law.

 

***

 

In Washington, Ms. Gregoire asked for guidance from the state’s two United States attorneys, Mike Ormsby and Jenny Durkan. In a reply to the governor last month, they said the federal government would prosecute “vigorously against individuals and organizations that participate in unlawful manufacturing and distribution activity involving marijuana, even if such activities are permitted under state law.”

 

***

 

When the Legislature was drafting the bill it passed in its most recent regular session, Mr. Ormsby said, “No one consulted with me about what I thought of what they were going to do and did I think it ran afoul of federal law.”

 

Of the state’s current medical marijuana law, he added, “We believe, of course, under federal law no part of the state law is legal.”

 

***

 

Ms. Smith noted that the 2009 memo “says definitively that distribution continues to be a federal offense.”

Indeed, the federal government appears to be escalating its crackdowns of medical marijuana dispensaries in California.

What hypocrisy …

Postscript: The big banks have also been laundering money for terrorists (the HSBC employee who blew the whistle on the banks’ money laundering for terrorists and drug cartels says that the giant bank is still laundering money, saying: “The public needs to know that money is still being funneled through HSBC to directly buy guns and bullets to kill our soldiers …. Banks financing … terrorists affects every single American.” He also said: “It is disgusting that our banks are STILL financing terror on 9/11 2013“. And see this)

But since the American government has backed the most dangerous and violent Muslim terrorists for decades – in order to “contain” rival Muslim factions – the government is partially to blame for this banking abomination as well.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dOErq3 George Washington

Marc Faber Warns “The Bubble Could Burst Any Day”; Prefers Physical Gold To Bitcoin

"The Fed's policies have actually led to a lot of problems around the world," Marc Faber begins his discussion with Bloomberg TV's Trish Regan, especially "people in the lower income groups [who] spend say 30% of their income on energy, transportation, and so forth, electricity and gasoline." The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report author goes on to discuss everything from how the Fed is creating a two-class system around the world, the inexorable growth of governments, buying votes, Bitcoin, interest rates, wealth taxes, and overall market valuations. "We are in a gigantic financial asset bubble," Faber explains, "everybody's bullish," but he sees a slowing global economy (as do we e.g. Baltic Dry Index); "[The bubble] could burst any day. I think we are very stretched." Faber is on fire…

 

Take 10 minutes and listen…

 

 

Prepare yourself… "In China, if I say what I am saying about the USA, they would not let me in the country"

 

Faber on the Fed and how far the 'rubber band can be stretched':

"We have to distinguish between the financial economy, the financial sector, and the economy of the well-to-do people that benefit from rising asset prices, from rising prices of wines, and paintings and art, and bonds, and equities, and high-end properties in the Hamptons and West 15 here in New York and so forth — and the average person, the typical household, the so-called 'median household', or the working class people. And the Fed's policies have actually led to a lot of problems around the world in the sense that they're not only responsible, but partly responsible that energy prices are where they are, they're up from $10 or $12 in 1999 to now around $100 a barrel. Food prices are up and a lot of other prices are up. So on your income, energy prices have very little impact because you at Bloomberg – you, young man – you make so much money. But for the poor people, it has an impact. Some people in the lower income groups, they spend say 30% of their income on energy, transportation, and so forth, electricity and gasoline."

On whether the Fed is creating a two-class system:

"Correct, largely. The problem is then that you have people like Bill de Blasio, they come in and say: 'you know what's the problem? All these rich guys. Because of these rich people, you are poor. They take advantage of you. So, let's go and tax them.' The IMF has come out with a paper in Europe that essentially the well-to-do people should pay a 10% wealth task — a one-time wealth tax. I can assure you, a one-time wealth tax, 10%, will become an every-year's tax eventually."

On how to help the people on the lower end of the economic spectrum:

"This is the point I'd like to make. All of these professors and academics at the Fed who never really worked in the private sector a single day in their lives, and write papers nobody reads and nobody's is interested in. Why would they want not write about how you structure an economic system that lifts the standard of living of most people? You can't lift everybody."

 

"We had that in the 19th century in the U.S. because we had very small government at the time. The entire government — local, state federal — was less than 20% of the economy. Now it is close to 50% of the economy."

On whether the government is spending too much money:

"The larger the government becomes, the less economic growth you have and the more crony capitalism and corruptions you have. Because big corporations — and especially the money printers, they're the most powerful people in the world, they control the governments. The U.S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the government is one and the same. The Fed, they finance the Treasury, so the government can go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then they finance transfer payments to essentially buy votes so you can get elected."

On bitcoin:

"I prefer physical gold and silver, platinum to bitcoin. Bitcoin can have a lot of competition. Gold, silver, platinum — they have no competition. How do you value a bitcoin? I can value gold to some extent and compare say gold to the quantity of money that is floating around the world, to the wealth increase, and to the monetary base increase, to the credit increase, and so forth and so on, and to the production costs. So I have an idea of where gold should be. I'm not sure because prices overshoot. How do you value Netflix? Is it overpriced or underpriced? Is Tesla overpriced, underpriced?"

On interest rates:

"But one thing I wanted to show you and talk about because you said that lower interest rates help people. Well, if money trending helps everybody, then why does not everybody in the whole world always have zero interest rates? And everybody would be rich. You keep on printing money and you don't need to work here, you don't need to put on makeup. I could stay in bed the whole day and go drinking in the evenings. So, let's just print money and be all happy. It doesn't add up. One thing about the figures you showed: first of all, you live in New York. Do you really think that your cost-of-living increase is a 1.2% per annum? You really believe that? It doesn't feel like more, it feels like five times more, or even ten times more."

 

"Number two, by keeping interest rates at zero percent on the Fed fund rate — i want to emphasize that this is now going on in March of 2014 for five years. It is not something new. For five years this has happened. You penalize the income earners, the savers who save, your parents, why should your parents be forced to speculate in stocks and in real estate and everything under the sun?"

On his view of overvalued stocks, including Facebook:

"I think it is to a large extent a fad. People they go on Facebook – what they do is they put pictures on and the only people that watch these pictures are themselves. They all want to be stars. It is a very distractive kind of occupation. I can't imagine that this would have a lot of value. I would rather own – I don't own it because I think it is very highly priced – I would rather own a company like Alibaba or Amazon or Google, than Facebook, personally. This is my view. Other people have different views. That's what makes the market. Some people are buying it and some people are selling it.”

On overall market valuation concerns:

"I think we are in a gigantic financial asset bubble. But it is interesting that that despite of all the money printing, bond yields didn't go down. They bottomed out on July 25, 2012 at 1.43% on the 10-years. We went to over 3.0%. We're now at 2.85% or something thereabout. But we're up substantially. Now, this hasn't had an impact on stocks yet. In fact, it pushed money into the stock market out of the bond market. But if the 10-years goes to say 3.5% to 4.0%, then the 30-year goes to close to 5.0%, the mortgage rates go to 6.0%. That will hit the economy very hard."

 

"[The bubble] could burst before. It could burst any day. I think we are very stretched. Sentiment figures are very, very bullish. Everybody's bullish. The reality is they're very bullish because they think the economy will accelerate on the upside. But my view is very different. The global economy is slowing down, because the global economy's largely emerging economies nowadays, and there's no growth in exports in emerging economies, there's no growth, in the local economies. So, I feel that the valuations are high, the corporate profits have been boosted largely because of the falling interest rates."


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dpuDWM Tyler Durden

Marc Faber Warns "The Bubble Could Burst Any Day"; Prefers Physical Gold To Bitcoin

"The Fed's policies have actually led to a lot of problems around the world," Marc Faber begins his discussion with Bloomberg TV's Trish Regan, especially "people in the lower income groups [who] spend say 30% of their income on energy, transportation, and so forth, electricity and gasoline." The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report author goes on to discuss everything from how the Fed is creating a two-class system around the world, the inexorable growth of governments, buying votes, Bitcoin, interest rates, wealth taxes, and overall market valuations. "We are in a gigantic financial asset bubble," Faber explains, "everybody's bullish," but he sees a slowing global economy (as do we e.g. Baltic Dry Index); "[The bubble] could burst any day. I think we are very stretched." Faber is on fire…

 

Take 10 minutes and listen…

 

 

Prepare yourself… "In China, if I say what I am saying about the USA, they would not let me in the country"

 

Faber on the Fed and how far the 'rubber band can be stretched':

"We have to distinguish between the financial economy, the financial sector, and the economy of the well-to-do people that benefit from rising asset prices, from rising prices of wines, and paintings and art, and bonds, and equities, and high-end properties in the Hamptons and West 15 here in New York and so forth — and the average person, the typical household, the so-called 'median household', or the working class people. And the Fed's policies have actually led to a lot of problems around the world in the sense that they're not only responsible, but partly responsible that energy prices are where they are, they're up from $10 or $12 in 1999 to now around $100 a barrel. Food prices are up and a lot of other prices are up. So on your income, energy prices have very little impact because you at Bloomberg – you, young man – you make so much money. But for the poor people, it has an impact. Some people in the lower income groups, they spend say 30% of their income on energy, transportation, and so forth, electricity and gasoline."

On whether the Fed is creating a two-class system:

"Correct, largely. The problem is then that you have people like Bill de Blasio, they come in and say: 'you know what's the problem? All these rich guys. Because of these rich people, you are poor. They take advantage of you. So, let's go and tax them.' The IMF has come out with a paper in Europe that essentially the well-to-do people should pay a 10% wealth task — a one-time wealth tax. I can assure you, a one-time wealth tax, 10%, will become an every-year's tax eventually."

On how to help the people on the lower end of the economic spectrum:

"This is the point I'd like to make. All of these professors and academics at the Fed who never really worked in the private sector a single day in their lives, and write papers nobody reads and nobody's is interested in. Why would they want not write about how you structure an economic system that lifts the standard of living of most people? You can't lift everybody."

 

"We had that in the 19th century in the U.S. because we had very small government at the time. The entire government — local, state federal — was less than 20% of the economy. Now it is close to 50% of the economy."

On whether the government is spending too much money:

"The larger the government becomes, the less economic growth you have and the more crony capitalism and corruptions you have. Because big corporations — and especially the money printers, they're the most powerful people in the world, they control the governments. The U.S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the government is one and the same. The Fed, they finance the Treasury, so the government can go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then they finance transfer payments to essentially buy votes so you can get elected."

On bitcoin:

"I prefer physical gold and silver, platinum to bitcoin. Bitcoin can have a lot of competition. Gold, silver, platinum — they have no competition. How do you value a bitcoin? I can value gold to some extent and compare say gold to the quantity of money that is floating around the world, to the wealth increase, and to the monetary base increase, to the credit increase, and so forth and so on, and to the production costs. So I have an idea of where gold should be. I'm not sure because prices overshoot. How do you value Netflix? Is it overpriced or underpriced? Is Tesla overpriced, underpriced?"

On interest rates:

"But one thing I wanted to show you and talk about because you said that lower interest rates help people. Well, if money trending helps everybody, then why does not everybody in the whole world always have zero interest rates? And everybody would be rich. You keep on printing money and you don't need to work here, you don't need to put on makeup. I could stay in bed the whole day and go drinking in the evenings. So, let's just print money and be all happy. It doesn't add up. One thing about the figures you showed: first of all, you live in New York. Do you really think that your cost-of-living increase is a 1.2% per annum? You really believe that? It doesn't feel like more, it feels like five times more, or even ten times more."

 

"Number two, by keeping interest rates at zero percent on the Fed fund rate — i want to emphasize that this is now going on in March of 2014 for five years. It is not something new. For five years this has happened. You penalize the income earners, the savers who save, your parents, why should your parents be forced to speculate in stocks and in real estate and everything under the sun?"

On his view of overvalued stocks, including Facebook:

"I think it is to a large extent a fad. People they go on Facebook – what they do is they put pictures on and the only people that watch these pictures are themselves. They all want to be stars. It is a very distractive kind of occupation. I can't imagine that this would have a lot of value. I would rather own – I don't own it because I think it is very highly priced – I would rather own a company like Alibaba or Amazon or Google, than Facebook, personally. This is my view. Other people have different views. That's what makes the market. Some people are buying it and some people are selling it.”

On overall market valuation c
oncerns:

"I think we are in a gigantic financial asset bubble. But it is interesting that that despite of all the money printing, bond yields didn't go down. They bottomed out on July 25, 2012 at 1.43% on the 10-years. We went to over 3.0%. We're now at 2.85% or something thereabout. But we're up substantially. Now, this hasn't had an impact on stocks yet. In fact, it pushed money into the stock market out of the bond market. But if the 10-years goes to say 3.5% to 4.0%, then the 30-year goes to close to 5.0%, the mortgage rates go to 6.0%. That will hit the economy very hard."

 

"[The bubble] could burst before. It could burst any day. I think we are very stretched. Sentiment figures are very, very bullish. Everybody's bullish. The reality is they're very bullish because they think the economy will accelerate on the upside. But my view is very different. The global economy is slowing down, because the global economy's largely emerging economies nowadays, and there's no growth in exports in emerging economies, there's no growth, in the local economies. So, I feel that the valuations are high, the corporate profits have been boosted largely because of the falling interest rates."


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dpuDWM Tyler Durden

China Expands Military “With Peace In Mind”

The Chinese military, especially the navy, made great strides last year in improving its combat capabilities, enabling it to better defend the nation against threats to its sovereignty, according to analysts. As China Daily reports, less than a month after being named the head of China’s Central Military Commission, President Xi Jinping asked PLA officers to adopt realistic combat criteria in military training. “It is the top priority for the military to be able to fight and win battles,” he said during an inspection to the Guangzhou military theater of operations in December 2012. While some have suggested the rapidly expanding PLA navy is driving a seismic shift in Asia’s military balance, Chinese experts have refuted such rhetoric, saying military moves by China are only aimed at creating improved self-defense by providing capabilities to match the other parties in the region.

 

 

Via China Daily,

China should have a military that can match its power status,” said Ma Gang, a professor at the People’s Liberation Army National Defense University. “It is the only big country that has not achieved reunification and faces serious challenges to its sovereignty and several territorial disputes.”

 

 

In November, China announced the creation of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone, which requires aircraft to report their flight plans and establish identification communications while flying through the zone.

 

 

Japan’s illegal purchase triggered strong protests from China and prompted it to start regular patrols around the islands last year. In July, five PLA warships steamed out of the Sea of Japan, through the Soya Strait and completed the Chinese navy’s first circumnavigation of the Japanese archipelago.

 

Cao Weidong, a researcher at the PLA Naval Military Studies Research Institute, said such activities would not increase tensions and that China’s stance remains defensive, while its naval forces are still dwarfed by traditional maritime powers.

 

“Instead, Washington is shifting 60 percent of its warships to the Pacific and Tokyo is gearing up to build a fully fledged military. China is suffering from the threat of escalating conflict,” he said.

 

James Holmes, a maritime strategist at the US Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, and a former US Navy surface warfare officer, said, “Naval commentators suggest the bellicose rhetoric shows that both sides are struggling to adjust to their new rivalry.

 

“And, the Japanese do regional tranquility no service by being alarmed when China’s navy transits international straits in a perfectly lawful manner,” Holmes told Reuters.

 

 

A stronger Chinese military will be able to play a bigger role in serving global peace, he said.

 

Of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, China is the largest contributor of personnel to UN peacekeeping missions.

 

In the past five years, China has sent 16 fleets composed of 42 warships to the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia, escorting 5,465 vessels and rescuing 42 ships attacked by pirates.

 

It is normal for the world to have some suspicions about the Chinese military build-up, while mutual understanding can only be improved through communication.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/4pPo43-DFVg/story01.htm Tyler Durden

China Expands Military "With Peace In Mind"

The Chinese military, especially the navy, made great strides last year in improving its combat capabilities, enabling it to better defend the nation against threats to its sovereignty, according to analysts. As China Daily reports, less than a month after being named the head of China’s Central Military Commission, President Xi Jinping asked PLA officers to adopt realistic combat criteria in military training. “It is the top priority for the military to be able to fight and win battles,” he said during an inspection to the Guangzhou military theater of operations in December 2012. While some have suggested the rapidly expanding PLA navy is driving a seismic shift in Asia’s military balance, Chinese experts have refuted such rhetoric, saying military moves by China are only aimed at creating improved self-defense by providing capabilities to match the other parties in the region.

 

 

Via China Daily,

China should have a military that can match its power status,” said Ma Gang, a professor at the People’s Liberation Army National Defense University. “It is the only big country that has not achieved reunification and faces serious challenges to its sovereignty and several territorial disputes.”

 

 

In November, China announced the creation of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone, which requires aircraft to report their flight plans and establish identification communications while flying through the zone.

 

 

Japan’s illegal purchase triggered strong protests from China and prompted it to start regular patrols around the islands last year. In July, five PLA warships steamed out of the Sea of Japan, through the Soya Strait and completed the Chinese navy’s first circumnavigation of the Japanese archipelago.

 

Cao Weidong, a researcher at the PLA Naval Military Studies Research Institute, said such activities would not increase tensions and that China’s stance remains defensive, while its naval forces are still dwarfed by traditional maritime powers.

 

“Instead, Washington is shifting 60 percent of its warships to the Pacific and Tokyo is gearing up to build a fully fledged military. China is suffering from the threat of escalating conflict,” he said.

 

James Holmes, a maritime strategist at the US Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, and a former US Navy surface warfare officer, said, “Naval commentators suggest the bellicose rhetoric shows that both sides are struggling to adjust to their new rivalry.

 

“And, the Japanese do regional tranquility no service by being alarmed when China’s navy transits international straits in a perfectly lawful manner,” Holmes told Reuters.

 

 

A stronger Chinese military will be able to play a bigger role in serving global peace, he said.

 

Of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, China is the largest contributor of personnel to UN peacekeeping missions.

 

In the past five years, China has sent 16 fleets composed of 42 warships to the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia, escorting 5,465 vessels and rescuing 42 ships attacked by pirates.

 

It is normal for the world to have some suspicions about the Chinese military build-up, while mutual understanding can only be improved through communication.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/4pPo43-DFVg/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Tonight on The Independents: The Father of Kelly Thomas Speaks Out, Obama’s Executive Orders, Bieber’s “Molly” Problem, TV Teen Moms, Coinye West, and More!

I honestly can't take seeing that other picture any more. |||Because of pre-emption by live
event coverage, tonight’s episode of The
Independents
will first air at midnight ET instead of 9 PM
on Fox Business Network. The show will mix pop culture banter with
the heaviest of heavy topics, the latter including yesterday’s

not-guilty verdict
of the Fullerton cops who beat the homeless
and schizophrenic man Kelly Thomas to death in 2011. Thomas’ father
Ron—who Kelly was desperately crying out for on the infuriating,
heartbreaking video of
his fatal beating—will be on the show to discuss his reaction to
the verdict. Read Reason’s coverage of the case at this link.

Also up for discussion: President Barack Obama
promises/threatens a flurry of
Congress-bypassing executive orders
, which some might say
contradict his criticism of executive power
back before he was president
. And New Jersey Gov. Chris
Christie tries to
put the bridge scandal behind him
in his State of the State
Address. Addressing both will be New Jersey Republican type
Bill Spadea and

52 Reasons to Vote for Obama
author Bernard Whitman.

Or not. |||In
teenagers-misbehaving news, nosediving heartthrob Justin Bieber had
his house ransacked by cops who reportedly found an ecstasy variant
called “Molly” while investigating, um, a potentially $20,000

egg-tossing incident
; also, new study proves* that MTV’s 16
and Pregnant
leads to
fewer teen births
. Plus:
The Pope auctions his Harley
, Kanye West sues the
Bitcoin-inspired “Coinye
West
” out of existence, and more.

Again—tune in at midnight ET for the assembled
Independentsage. And heckle what you see on Twitter at @IndependentsFBN

* Ancient
Internet joke
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2014/01/14/tonight-on-the-independents-the-father-o
via IFTTT

The Single Most Important Element About Stock Investing

 

… is making sure you get paid.

 

When you buy shares in a company, you want to make money.

 

However, there is no guarantee that the shares will rise in price. Indeed, if you are investing simply because you believe prices will rise, you are essentially betting that someone else will want to pay more for your shares at a later date.

 

No matter how much research you perform, there is no guarantee this will happen.

 

Dividends, however, DO make sure you make money. Because the company is actually paying you to own shares. And this makes a heck of a difference.

 

If you had invested $1 in stocks in 1950 and held onto your position until 2010, you would have made EIGHT TIMES more money through dividends than share appreciation.

 

Let me restate that: by receiving and reinvesting dividends you’d make 800% more money than without them between 1950 and 2010.

 

The difference is even more incredible if you go back further.

 

Historically dividends have accounted for 70% of all stock market gains.

 

According to a study performed by the London Business School, when you remove dividends, stocks have returned a mere 1.7% in average annual gains over the last 109 years. To put this into perspective, this is less than you’d make from owning long-term US Treasury bonds (2.1%) over the same time period.

 

Indeed, if you’d invested $1 in stocks in 1900 and reinvested your dividends, by 2009, you’d have made $582 (adjusted for inflation). Take out dividends and you’d have only seen $6 from price appreciation. Yes, $6 from 109 years’ worth of capital gains.

 

Put another way, by focusing solely on capital gains when it comes to stock investing you’re only doubling your money about every 18 years (remember, this analysis simply focuses on the returns generated by the market… which outperforms most professional and individual investors).

 

So unless you’re buying stocks with dividends, you’re likely not making diddly in the long-term.

 

Again, if you’re going to buy stocks… make sure you get PAID. And there’s no better way to do this than with dividends.

 

For a FREE Special Report outlining how to protect your portfolio from this, swing by: http://ift.tt/170oFLH

 

Best Regards

Phoenix Capital Research 

 

 

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1iQVDzE Phoenix Capital Research

These 10 People Collectively Own 33 Million Acres, Or 1.5% Of All US Land

It is a well-known fact that when it comes to ownership of rental properties in the US, Wall Street, and particularly Blackstone, has become the single largest landlord in the country. But what about undeveloped land? As summarized by Vizual-statistix, according to The Land Report published by Fay Ranches, the top 100 owners of US land collectively have 33 million acres in their private holdings.  This equates to about 1.5% of all USA land – that may seem like a small percentage, but it’s actually a massive area.  The chart below lays out the top 10 largest private landowners with the areas of Puerto Rico, Delaware, Rhode Island, and Washington, D.C. included for scale. As can be seen, all of the top 10 own a piece of the USA that is bigger than Rhode Island, and five have a piece that is at least as big as Delaware. John Malone, who is the largest land owner in the country with 2.2 million acres, owns private property the size of Puerto Rico.

Some additional perspective from The Land Report:

  Investing in rural, undeveloped land continues to be a popular strategy among the affluent, according to the 2013 Land Report 100, the latest annual survey and ranking of the largest private landowners in the United States just published by The Land Report and presented by Fay Ranches. Increasingly seen as a “safe deposit box with a view,” acreages continue to be purchased by leading landowners at solid rates. In 2012, the country’s top 100 landowners cumulatively increased their private holdings by 700,000 acres to a total of 33 million acres, nearly 2 percent of U.S. land mass.

 

Liberty Media Chairman John Malone and his 2.2 million acres under ownership topped the Land Report 100 list, which focuses exclusively on deeded acreage owned by individuals, families, family-owned companies and family-controlled foundations and excludes leased and public lands. Malone edged out Ted Turner, who currently possesses more than 2 million land acres. Rounding out the top five in order were: the Emmerson family, Brad Kelley and the Irving family. The 2013 edition of the Land Report 100 presented by Fay Ranches can be downloaded at http://ift.tt/1cl6OuU.

 

“It’s refreshing to continue seeing large landowners find value in aggregating their land for conservation and agriculture purposes versus parceling it out and developing it,” said land broker Greg Fay, founder of Fay Ranches, which is sponsoring the Land Report 100 for the third straight year and is a longtime supporter of the magazine. “Everyone at Fay Ranches congratulates leading landowners for their commitments to the land, to conserving our wild places and preserving our agricultural heritage.”

 

This year saw a shake-up in the top ten as Stan Kroenke elevated his position from No. 10 to No. 8 after his recent purchase of the historic Broken O Ranch, described nationally as “one of the largest agricultural operations in the Rocky Mountain West.” Kroenke also owns the 540,000-acre Q Creek Ranch, the largest contiguous ranch in the Rocky Mountains.

 

There are several landowners new to this year’s 100 list, including No. 28, Dan and Farris Wilks, billionaire brothers who recently purchased more than 400 square miles of land, mostly in the eastern half of Montana. Oil field services entrepreneurs, the Wilks brothers own the prized N Bar Ranch in Montana, which is known for its wildlife and fishery resources. Another new addition to the Land Report 100 presented by Fay Ranches is No. 96, Arthur Nicholas. The co-founder of Nicholas Investment Properties owns Wyoming’s historic Wagonhound Land and Livestock, an AQHA Ranching Heritage Breeder.

 

“America’s largest landowners continue to recognize land as a compelling asset, one whose numerous attributes go well beyond ROI,” said Eric O’Keefe, editor-in-chief of The Land Report. “It’s a story you’ll see again and again in the Land Report 100, one that features familiar faces and some new ones I’m sure readers will instantly identify. ”

So here is how Bernanke’s trickle down supposedly works: US millionaires – rich in assets – become billionaires, increasingly buying up US land, i.e., more assets, while everyone else, read the not so wealthy, buy Made in China trinkets, purchased mostly on credit so loading up on liabilities, i.e., debt.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1m2a8n0 Tyler Durden

The Middle East Explained – In One Minute

With Islamic extremists raising their ominous-looking flags over Falluja and Ramadi again, it’s not looking too good in Iraq (or the rest of the Middle East). Sure, Mark Firoe notes, Iraqi government forces may take back some territory they lost, but it’s never a good sign when you have to shell your own country to maintain order. Confused at the proxy-wars, terrorists, statists, and just who the US is friends with? Have no fear, the following brief clip will explain it all…

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1gHcEuR Tyler Durden

Coventry medical insurance customers roiled in Piedmont contract tussle

Coventry healthcare insurance policyholders in Fayette and Coweta counties got a troubling letter in the last few days — notice that the main hospital and physicians group in this area would no longer be “in-network” for them.

If Piedmont Healthcare and Piedmont Physicians Group would no longer be available to thousands of Coventry policyholders as in-network providers, costs could skyrocket for the patients.

The uncertainty results from last-minute contract negotiations, something the Georgia Department of Insurance has no jurisdiction over, according to spokesman Glenn Allen.

read more

via The Citizen http://ift.tt/1d1XsHY