Can Bill Clinton fix small business for Hillary?

Small business just happens to be the largest employer in America. Wipe out small business and you destroy jobs.

When he was president Bill Clinton understood this; but that was then and now is now. After eight years of Obama, small business has been all but destroyed by regulations, banking corruption and global priorities. 

The seeds for the 2008 crash were actually sown on Bill Clinton’s watch, an inept president who didn’t really understand, and his greedy banking cronies who took advantage. Bernie Sanders pushed to get this fixed with Glass Steagall. However, now that Clinton has chosen Tim Kaine over Elizabeth Warren as her VP, is it likely she will follow through on this very needed banking correction?

To Regulate or not to Regulate; that is the question . . . 

Wells Fargo: Another major banking scandal: so what’s new?


The economy got turned around after the 2008 crash, but the Wells Fargo scandal shows us that while the danger was handled in 2008 (taxpayer bailouts of both American and Foreign Banks) a Federal Reserve in bed with Obama, saved the system, but they failed to fix the problem.

Hillary is propitiating the corrupt banking Industry. Hillary is the establishment candidate.

2008 halved the value of many homes and if Americans were able to keep their houses it was a small miracle. Many walked away from the biggest investment of their lifetime.  Now, paying sometimes exorbitant rents, to foreign owner capitalists in a global world, our Moms & Pops live from paycheck to paycheck. Their kids, having lost jobs to India, China and Mexico, are being forced to move back in with them.

Note well: It was the crash of 2008 that brought on the income inequality that is now destroying our culture?

A little background on Glass Steagall: bringing this back has has been included in the GOP platform.

In the roaring twenties there was so much easy money in risky-investments that several big Wall Street banks began salivating. They then decided to pull the deposit money out of trusted accounts and use this money to speculate. It wasn’t their money and it wasn’t ethical, so it all went appetite over tin cup; bankers jumped out of high windows and America went a slipping and a sliding into a great Depression.

The Glass Steagall Act of 1933 is a set of good reforms that ushered in a crisis-free period in USA financial history.

Today we see that banking corruptIon still exists. We can hope that Wells Fargo will become the head on a pike and corrupt bankers will be put on notice that they commit crimes, they get locked away. Don’t hold your breath with a Hillary presidency. She will protect the corrupt justice department and the numbers tell us she is in bed with the industry.,

We should learn from our past mistakes.

1933 the evidence of banking corruption was irrefutable: After the then ethics investigation, it was found that BANKING & BROKERING WAS A POISONOUS MARRIAGE.


Hillary is making noises to placate the Bernie voters, but once in power can we trust her? Her banking connections tell us, otherwise! Follow the money.

Is the danger real that we could have another banking crash?  Don’t take my word on it, look at the graph for yourself and check out the numbers.


Then read my story so that you, too, understand.

“Young Bobby has just turned thirteen and in honor of his teenage status Dad has decided to give him a weekly allowance.  Bobby is a born entrepreneur and he and his neighbor friend, Goldy owned a lemonade stand (this was in the days before bureaucrats made this kind of endeavor illegal)

Goldy like Bobby, was also a producer and although young,she had a knack with food and drinks. Their little corner business was popular for the word had gotten around that stopping there was well worth the wait. So it came to be that Bobby had not only his allowance but also his profits. What to do with all the extra money?Bobby went to talk to Dad.

Dad called the boys together to educate them about income and outgo and savings – it seemed the right time. (Bobby had a big brother called George and Dad included him) Dad gave the boys a collective savings bank (his first mistake) and entrusted the bank to George’s care; after all he was the oldest and he was tall enough to reach to put the box on top of the closet. (Dad’s second mistake)

There was one small problem that neither Bobby nor Dad figured into the equation; George was into Pokeman Cards and his obsession had quickly got him outspending his own allowance.  George unlike Bobby and Goldy was not a producer, he was a gambler. Are you surprised that he began to steal from the box? 

As time went along it got hotter; summer is the best of all times to sell lemonade. The little entrepreneurs decided they needed a canopy. Bobby asked to get the savings-box down and was devastated to find that it was empty. What were they to do? They really needed that canopy! It was hot. 

George whined that he had always intended to pay the money back; he suggested that Dad step in and make it right and buy the canopy for Bobby, after all Dad didn’t want to see his little brother suffer, right? George’s strongest argument (which Dad bought), was that Bobby wouldn’t have been able to do the Pokeman investing by himself, so he was really trying to help him. I mean what did Bobby know about Pokeman?  He was always out there making lemonade and Goldy was now also baking. George knew a man who knew a man who said they were going to close the stand down because the kids didn’t have a licence.

Should George sell all the cards, he wasn’t sure how much he could get for them now?

Bobby didn’t want silly cards, he wanted a canopy, a canopy to give him and Goldy and his customers good shade in the summer for his lemonade stall; a local enterprise that the whole, local neighborhood agreed was a gem, was a neighborhood thriving business.

Unfortunately Dad backed George, buying into the theory that might is right.

Dad was also intimidated by the bureaucrat, clipboard in hand who had come to call.

Dad did promise to buy Bobby a canopy for Christmas, but it was too little, too late. It would be cold for a lemonade stand in December, no canopy would be needed.  And maybe, after all long before then, the city would close down the best lemonade stand in the neighborhood.

This is how two enthusiastic and enterprising entrepreneurs bit the dust.

Of course they could still work their lemonade stand without a canopy, that is until the nearby bakery persuaded the authorities that they were stealing his business.

“What?” said Bobby. 

“Regulations are designed to protect established businesses that pay taxes,” said Dad.


The lemonade stand continued for a brief while for it was still popular but it wasn’t the same. Then the city closed them down.

Neither Bobby, nor Goldy would ever recover from the betrayal after trust. It would stay with them and limit them as entrepreneurs for the rest of their lives.


mom&PopWith rumblings that we could again have another banking crash, having the big banks again steal assets from these hardworking little Mom & Pop shop enterprises is not an option. It is totally unacceptable. It is little Mom & Pop enterprises that depend on the banks to keep their meager money safe.

Purists argue that we should let the big banks be forced into bankruptcy for that is how a free market system works. The American voter thinks this banking danger has gone away, but all that has happened is that it has been swept under a dirty carpet that is still big banking today.

It all comes back to a good law deliberately wiped out for banking greed and one inept President who lacked any kind of personal ethics. Do we want his wife to bring back all the same bad laws and advisers? Do we want Hillary to perpetuate banking corruption?

When originally introduced, Glass-Steagall gave banks a year to decide: they could get out of the securities business, and enjoy the benefits of deposit insurance and access to the low-interest credit of the Federal Reserve; or they could choose to be investment banks and brokerage houses, and forego the banking privileges given them by depositors.

It is one or the other, and once again in 2016 it is time for we the people to force the banks to make the choice.


Bobby said to his Dad, “I think I will put my money in a real bank next time.”

Oh yeah?

Until the banks get their act together not such a good idea Bobby?


It is true that most regulations are counter productive but there are some like the Glass-Steagall Act that are absolutely vital to our economic prosperity and the stability of our culture. America survived the Great Depression because there was effective ethics investigation, effective reorganization of the banking sector and new, strong policy put in place to make sure t didn’t happen again.

Quote for the Week

It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.

Henry Ford


About the AuthorLynn Verhoeff (Grandma Thunder) has been writing for twenty years.  She has published two books, “Politics IOU” and “Magic Money” both on Kindle.You can read more posts t fb Grandma Thunder – an Independent Voice or

Foreign Aid

old man pointing(Part 2 in Grandpa’s series on improving the economy)

 “Rich nations have the moral duty to help poor nations,” so the saying goes. Of course, this would apply to America in particular. Oh, really? In terms of which country has the largest debt, America is not the richest, but the poorest nation on Earth. That changes the perspective, doesn’t it?

One becomes richer by spending less money than one has coming in and using the surplus to make even more. That is simple economics and applies to nations as well as to individuals. It is illegal for people to create a money surplus by printing their own money. It’s called cheating. Having the Fed, or the banks for that matter, create money out of thin air is cheating also.

I think we can all agree that a healthy economy requires honest money that people can have confidence in and a country that is debt-free. One way to approach that ideal more closely is to cut back on foreign aid. Would you borrow money you can’t pay back and then give it away to the poor? That would be foolish, wouldn’t it?

where does the money go

A government does not have a duty to help other countries. Its duty is to serve its own people.

Of course it would be cruel to suddenly cut off all foreign aid overnight. We should do this gradually – say reduce the amount by ten percent a year. By the same token we can also reduce our military presence in foreign countries by ten percent a year.

There is a proverb that states, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” To help reduce the pain of less foreign aid we can set up training centers inside the US to educate representatives from developing nations to help their countries become more self-sufficient and prosperous. That way, foreign aid money stays within the US and creates employment opportunities. Plus, we can ensure that the funds are put to good use instead of lining the pockets of politicians.

The training centers could be set up along the Mexican border, as proposed in my earlier post, The Road to Economic Recovery  Additional training centers could be set up in economically depressed areas in the US, where they could also benefit the locals.

Americans are a generous people. They volunteer, they donate. They want to contribute to good causes. How can they do that with reduced foreign aid? No problem. They can contribute by flowing to the training centers, where folks are taught entrepreneurial skills and greater independence.

Of course, this is not to discourage individuals and charitable organizations from reaching out and improving conditions in economically disadvantaged nations. That is highly commendable. But it is wrong to burden all our tax payers, without their individual agreement, with foreign aid to countries they may not even have heard about.

The troops that were withdrawn from foreign soil could help build and set up the training centers. The destructive powers of the military should be balanced by constructive activities and this would be one such activity. More on this in a future post.

“Aid leads to more aid and more aid and more aid and less independence of the people that are receiving aid.” – Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda

“I don’t know of any country in the world where a bunch of foreigners came and developed the country. I don’t know one: Japan? Korea? No! No country did that. I know about countries that developed, on trade and innovation and business.” –  Herman Chinery-Hesse

Bribe Money

Bribe Money

“Foreign Aid is taking money from poor people in a rich country and giving it to rich people in a poor country.” – Ron Paul.

More information about foreign aid at



The Road To Economic Recovery

Grandpa says, “Something can be done about it.”Old Man Pointing a finger

There has been an economic slump in the US since 2007, with no end in sight

In this post and subsequent posts I want to examine some underlying causes and suggest remedies that can get us back on track.

But first I want us to examine what constitutes a healthy economy. That will help us in identifying what is wrong and suggest a remedy.

In a nut shell, a healthy economy is based on production. An economy goes out of whack when there is more consumption than production. We are talking about production of goods and services that are needed or wanted. But there is more to it than that.

farmerLet’s take the example of a farmer. If he produces just enough food to feed his family, he won’t have enough left over to exchange with the community for other things he may want or need, nor will he be able to prepare against farming hazards, such as blight, floods, droughts, frost or any of the many calamities that may befall him. If, on the other hand, he produces an abundance of crops, he will prosper and so will the community he delivers to. Of course the farmer should be able to sell his produce for a profit, otherwise he will go bankrupt.

How does this translate to the economy?  Taking into account the basic human needs of food, clothing and shelter, we need farms, clothing manufacturers and builders, plus raw materials, tools and machinery, as well as a distribution system. The final cost of these products should be affordable for the consumer.

Now, what happens when a country like China or India, with lots of poor people, starts to compete with our country for providing those goods and services? They can produce these things much cheaper than we can, because their wages are so much lower. No kidding. Check out the 99 cent and dollar stores that are springing up all over the US. They sell goods produced overseas at ridiculously low prices. There is no way American manufacturers can compete with that. So what do they do? They either go out of business, or they move their manufacturing overseas. Either way that reduces employment here in the United States.

Then what is the solution? Should we stop trading with other nations? No, I don’t think we should, but we should work on leveling the playing field. Instead of free trade we balance imports with exports by imposing tariffs (import duty) on imported goods to the extent that our own manufacturers can once again be viable. I am sure the Chinese government will not be happy about that, but they are a Communist regime and the Communists were supposed to be our enemies, remember?

factory3On a slightly different, but related subject, there is the matter of illegal immigration. As long as we have a standard of living in the US that is higher than in countries to the South, there will be a migration of people wanting to live here. Besides, illegal immigrants represent cheap labor. Ah, cheap labor! Why not turn this to our advantage?

Now, I am going to make a radical proposal here, but nothing ventured, nothing gained. Nothing else has worked so far. What I propose is to create a buffer zone, a free zone, inside the US, along the Mexican border, maybe 30 miles wide, but excluding any major cities. And what do we do with that zone? We encourage struggling industries to set up their facilities there. We encourage them by waiving any restrictive laws in the zone. No minimum wage, no taxes. The factories that operate there have the obligation to provide adequate free housing, food, clothing, recreation and basic medical care for their employees, as well as some pocket money. Then we invite able-bodied workers from South of the border (and from the US) to work there. If they are healthy and without a criminal record, they can apply.

If they sign a 5-year contract, at the end of the five years they can apply for permanent residence in the US. To qualify they have to attend English classes in their own time, so they can speak the language when their contract is up. I envisage paying them a dollar for every hour worked (remember, they have no living expenses) plus an equal amount into a compulsory savings account, payable when they leave. For a 40-hour work week that adds up to $2000 per year in savings. That’s more than many of us in the US are capable of saving. Any medical visits, other than scheduled check-ups, take a deductible out of the savings, as well as any fines imposed for violating the few rules necessary for maintaining order. Any children born in the free zone do not automatically become US citizens, but assume the nationality of the mother.

Even though this would be a radical departure from the existing scene, think of the advantages.

1. It would to a large degree solve the problem of illegal immigration
2. It would provide a more secure border
3. It would provide cheap goods without having to import them
4. It would be a great opportunity for creative entrepreneurs to start a new business
5. It would reduce unemployment
6. It would make us more self-sufficient
7. It would provide an opportunity for struggling enterprises to become viable.

The economy is a big subject and for clarity I am covering it in several posts. My next post will be about Foreign AidStay tuned.

“Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” – Paul J. Meyer

(To be continued.)