Interview: Game-changing CAFR surplus trillions explained

Is the California CAFR scandal for real? (28-minute interview)

Guy Evans of Smells like Human Spirit has interviewed me to walk interested people through the documented objective facts that taxpayers have TRILLIONS of their dollars in surplus accounts held by various government agencies. These astounding funds are disclosed in official Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs).

Government and media “leaders” claiming no options but austerity while failing to honestly communicate surplus trillions is OBVIOUS criminal financial fraud. The 2014 Worldwide Wave of Action from April to July 4 will work to expose such game-changing crimes for public awakening, arrests of obvious criminals to end these crimes, and initiation of policies in good faith effort for all Earth’s inhabitants. In the single issue of CAFR trillions, those funds alone solve almost every single economic problem people face today; see the data below for your verification.

Three papers I reference in the interview:

My paper from the 2012 Claremont Colleges economic conference: Monetary and credit reform: full-employment, end of debt slavery

How a government teacher easily proves Occupy’s claim of US War Crimes

CAFR facts from my 2012 article (and copied below): CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?

Let’s summarize what we’ve documented so far about the data of California’s 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and what it means for the state’s 12 million households (22-minute television interview to explain this data here):

So the natural question is if the state’s withholding of $600 billion in our cash and investments does not fund pensions, address a budget deficit, or prevent devastation to infrastructure, how can we best restructure the purpose and use of OUR MONEY for optimal public benefits?

I see three obvious solutions.

I asked this of my two state representatives, Senator Carol Liu and Assemblymember Anthony Portantino. Carol and her consultant, Robert Oakes, has not yet answered this question. Anthony responded, but failed to address the question.

* The final official responses from my two representatives: “No comment.”

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • jadan

    It would be helpful to get the point of view of those who administer these funds. Why does Jerry Brown ignore the issue? Bureaucracy has its reasons for behaving as it does. Why can’t the governor access these funds. What laws or statutes justify the situation as it is?

    • Carl_Herman

      jadan: YOU HAVE TO READ the article to understand the issue. You show zero evidence of having listened to the interview that addresses your question.

      My two state reps did everything they could for five weeks to dodge answering two questions:

      1. Is my understanding of the CAFR data correct that California claims ~$100 billion in surplus cash and liquid assets in face of a ~$16 budget deficit that we’re told requires our austerity, and ~$500 billion in investments?
      2. Could these excess funds be put to professional economic cost-benefit analysis to consider redesignation to pay our budget deficit?

      The “official” justification is that these funds are “designated.” Ok, that means the same people who designated could submit the financial data for public and professional consideration for the possibility of redesignation.

      But, if you care, why not pick up the phone tomorrow morning and call the governor’s office yourself, see what you find out about this data, and get back to us?

      Do you accept my offer, jadan? His office phone number is (916) 445-2841.

      You could also try the state Treasurer’s office: (916) 653-2995

      Care enough to act and report your findings, jadan?

      • jadan

        Not a CA resident, Carl. No, I haven’t followed all your links. This is your issue, not mine. I’m listening and learning and time is limited. Jerry Brown is undoubtedly aware of these designated funds, but he can’t touch them, apparently. It ain’t a natural situation when a governor can’t get his paws on money. Walter Burien, and this CAFR thing is his baby, seems to think this is the sinister nature of cliquish government colluding with Wall Street. I don’t really buy that. The issue has to be framed a little better. Anyway, you’re making efforts and I appreciate them, but don’t browbeat me. I don’t like the holier-than-thou activist trip. Nobody does, actually.

        • Carl_Herman

          jadan, next time invest the time to at least listen to the interview of an article with a title beginning with the word, “interview” before you feel qualified to comment.

          This trillions-of-our-dollars issue is one person’s “baby”? Ok, so you’re surrendering our and your money if that’s what you really want.

          And you continue to opine about what you buy and don’t buy? I appreciate your appreciation, AND will defend this issue for accurate understanding.

          • jadan

            I’ve read everything you’ve written on the topic in the past, Carl. That’s my qualification. And I
            repeat, you’re not getting through. You’re not making your case in an
            effective way. Walter Burien comes across as a conspiracy theorist, preaching to a choir.
            You come across as a zealot with messianic tendencies. You need to
            reframe the issue if you want to reach the people out there who are by and large ignorant of the way their government works and how it came to be the way it is.

          • Carl_Herman

            Ok, jadan, you:

            1. claim you’ve read everything without showing any evidence by discussing any of the data; just claim I as a messenger pointing to data am “not getting through.”

            2. character-attack Walter Burien and me as messengers while thrice praising the character of the criminal governor overseeing this fraud.

            So, I’ll counter to invite people to listen to the interview themselves and come to their own conclusions. Good luck.

  • Pronto

    Isn’t the guy who owns the Examiner a really rich Oil man who hates Government when it proves to be inconvenient? I see three obvious solutions to dangerously rich land and oil owners in this country, gut their subsidies, redistribute their income, go after ‘em with RICO or anti-trust. Why do we need to listen to a .01 tell us what’s wrong with gov’mint?

    • Carl_Herman

      You look at data in this case, “pronto;” not listen to anyone.

  • not you

    excellent, thank you

 

 

Twitter