UPDATE It was all a mistake, but if those border guards were on the wrong side they would be arrested and in jail.

Mexican troops cross U.S. border, hold agent
Wed Aug 6, 2008 6:58pm EDT
PHOENIX (Reuters) - Mexican soldiers briefly held a U.S. Border Patrol agent at gunpoint in a remote stretch of the Arizona desert after they mistakenly strayed north across the border, authorities said on Wednesday.
Tucson sector Border Patrol spokesman Mike Scioli said four Mexican soldiers wearing desert camouflage and carrying weapons confronted the agent early on Sunday morning as he patrolled a border road in the Tohono O'Odham nation southwest of Tucson.
Scioli said the agent repeatedly identified himself in English and Spanish. After four minutes the soldiers lowered their weapons and crossed back in to Mexico on foot.
The stretch of desert is frequently crossed by human and drug smugglers from Mexico, and the border line in the area is not always clearly marked, Scioli said.
A spokesman for the U.S. State Department said the incursion had been brought to the attention of the Mexican government, and appeared to be accidental.
"Our understanding is that this encounter stemmed from a momentary misunderstanding as to the exact location of the U.S.-Mexican border," Gonzalo Gallegos said.
"We recognize that occasional incidents such as this can and do occur. But we take the misunderstanding seriously, as does the Government of Mexico." (the rest at )http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN069920080806

Judge rules Snipes must reimburse government August 6, 2008 - 7:11am
OCALA, Fla. (AP) - Actor Wesley Snipes must reimburse the government in prosecution costs for his tax conviction.
According to court documents, U.S. District Court Judge William Terrell Hodges ruled last week the action film star must reimburse the government about $217,000. Snipes, star of the "Blade" trilogy and "White Men Can't Jump" among other movies, had objected to the cost.
A message left with Snipes' attorney was not immediately returned Tuesday.
A jury convicted Snipes in February of three counts of willfully failing to file his income taxes. He has appealed the convictions and his three-year prison sentence.
http://wtop.com/?nid=114&sid=1335157


Inflationary horror movie By The Mogambo Guru Martin Hutchinson reminds us that "It was established pretty convincingly by Milton Friedman and proved beyond all doubt in the inflationary episodes of the 1970s and 1980s that if you want to bring inflation under control you must set interest rates at a margin above the current inflation level." (See Volcker's best apprentice, Asia Times Online, July 30, 2008.) How much above? He says that savings returns should be roughly "a normal level of 3% plus inflation." So if "official" inflation is at 5%, like it is now, then this means that savings rates should be 8%? Sweet! But real inflation, as measured by John Williams at shadowstats.com, is roaring far above a measly 5%, and while "annual CPI-U Surges to 5.0%", as per the headlines, inflation measured the older, pre-Clinton way is 12.6% in June! Which is up from 11.8% in May! Yow yow yow! We're freaking doomed! So if inflation is actually running at 12.6%, the interest paid on savings should be 15.6%? Even more sweet! This prompted me to do a little research, and I found that in the whole universe there are only three species of organism where the majority of the population do not comprehend the horrific implications of inflation that is more than 3%, which is recognized everywhere in the cosmos as the cutoff between, "Mommy, I am scared!" and "Mommy, something big and ugly ate daddy, and it is looking at us and licking its lips!" But since I don't want to get into a big argument about the relative stupidity of Earth creatures versus, for instance, the Glarth species on Remulac V, which are actually a kind of slug, but they have a gold standard for their money and thus they keep their money supplies strictly controlled. Instead, I want to look at how, with an "official rate of inflation" of 5%, the bank money market rate is 0.72%, a one-year certificate of deposit pays 2.25%, while a five-year certificate of deposit pays 3.39%! Hell, the 30-year T-bond barely yields 4.6%! Hahaha! 8% on bank savings? In our dreams! (you can read the rest here)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JH02Dj01.html

Is the U.S. Banking System Safe? By: Jim Quinn Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson delivered an upbeat assessment of the economy, saying growth was healthy and the housing market was nearing a turnaround. "All the signs I look at" show "the housing market is at or near the bottom," Paulson said in a speech to a business group in New York. The U.S. economy is "very healthy" and "robust," Paulson said.
~ CBS Marketwatch 4/20/07
"At this juncture, the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime market seems likely to be contained."
~ Ben Bernanke during Congressional Testimony 3/2007
"We will follow developments in the subprime market closely. However, fundamental factors – including solid growth in incomes and relatively low mortgage rates – should ultimately support the demand for housing, and at this point, the troubles in the subprime sector seem unlikely to seriously spill over to the broader economy or the financial system."
~ Ben Bernanke 6/5/07
"It is not the responsibility of the Federal Reserve – nor would it be appropriate – to protect lenders and investors from the consequences of their financial decisions. But developments in financial markets can have broad economic effects felt by many outside the markets, and the Federal Reserve must take those effects into account when determining policy."
~ Ben Bernanke 10/15/07
"We’ve got strong financial institutions…Our markets are the envy of the world. They’re resilient, they’re…innovative, they’re flexible. I think we move very quickly to address situations in this country, and, as I said, our financial institutions are strong."
~ Henry Paulson 3/16/08
Deception
After reading the above quotes, it should be clear to you that these gentlemen do not have a clue. Our economy and banking system is so complex and intertwined that no one knows where the next shoe will drop. Politicians and government bureaucrats are lying to the public when they say that everything is alright. They do not know. Therefore, it is in our best interest to cut through all the crap and examine the facts with a skeptical eye.
Last week, bank stocks, which had been falling faster than President Bush’s approval rating, soared higher based on earnings reports that were horrific, but not catastrophic. Again, the talking heads, like Larry Kudlow, were calling a bottom in the financial crisis. The bank with the largest increase in share price was Wells Fargo. Their earnings exceeded analyst expectations and the stock went up 22% in one day. Wells Fargo has $84 billion of home equity loans, with half of those in California and Florida. Coincidently, Wells Fargo decided to extend its charge-off policy in the 2nd quarter from 120 days to 180 days, in an effort to give troubled borrowers more time to reach a loan workout. A skeptical person might think that they did not change this policy out of the goodness of their hearts. Maybe, just maybe, they changed this policy to reduce their write-offs for the 2nd quarter, to beat analyst expectations. (you can read the rest here)
http://news.goldseek.com/LewRockwell/1217944800.php

Economists Plumb the Depths of the Downturn
By ABHA BHATTARAI
Published: August 5, 2008
Even if the economy continues to deteriorate, economists generally agree that the United States is not heading for another Great Depression.
Not only are the conditions far less dire, eight economists said in interviews, but the government is playing a heightened role in trying to cushion the impact of the housing downturn, losses at financial institutions and rising unemployment.
“The government is larger now and it acts as an anchor,” said Richard Parker, senior fellow at the Shorenstein Center at Harvard. “During the Great Depression, the government had neither the means nor the capability to serve as a backstop.”
But the economists — who range from academics to policy researchers, liberals to conservatives — disagreed about just how bad this economic slowdown, led by the worst housing slump since the Depression, could be.
“I think we’ll see a miserable job market and, consequently, an eroded standard of living for the vast majority of Americans for several years,” said Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal research organization in Washington.
“This is indistinguishable from a recession for a working family,” Mr. Mishel said. “They’re losing jobs, and they’re getting a double bite as wage growth slows down and inflation kicks up. People are losing out on both ends.”
But others said that the economy would probably grow in the second half of this year, although at a low 1 to 3 percent pace.
“You read the headlines and you look around and you think the world is coming to an end,” said Charles W. Calomiris, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative research group in Washington. “But I don’t think so. If you’re going to tell a worst-case scenario story at this point, it’s only going to be because the Fed loses control."
The Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department have already stepped in. The Fed has cut its benchmark federal funds rate to 2 percent, from 5.25 percent last August, though it left rates unchanged at its meeting on Tuesday.
In March, the government worked out a rescue plan for Bear Stearns when it became clear the investment bank was on the brink of collapse. And last month, Congress approved legislation that includes money for homeowners facing foreclosure and a possible bailout of the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Most of the economists who were interviewed blamed Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, for his unwillingness to clamp down on either the technology stock bubble or the run-up in housing prices.
“The Fed isn’t the whole story, but it’s a big part of it,” said Gerald P. O’Driscoll Jr., who was vice president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas from 1982 to 1994 and is now a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian research organization in Washington. “It allowed these absolutely insane bubbles to happen. The lesson is, you can’t let these bubbles continue unabated with no policy making.”
But the economists said others were to blame, too: investors, banks and rating agencies, as well as the current chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben S. Bernanke, and the Clinton and Bush administrations.
“They thought it was just a great thing that the stock market kept going higher and higher,” said Dean Baker, co-director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a liberal research group in Washington. “Then, of course, Wall Street just ran wild. It was some mix of irresponsibility and downright greed. They’re all sort of on the hook, but Greenspan sits front and center.”
The economy’s woes might have been preventable, the economists all agreed, if the actors involved had made more realistic assumptions about the future. And about the laws of gravity.
“People are way too willing to extrapolate from history,” said Jan Hatzius, chief domestic economist at Goldman Sachs. “If it’s 2005, you can’t look at a 40-year run of data and say, ‘It must be a law of nature that housing prices never fall.’ ”
The fact that average wages have not kept up with inflation has compounded the economy’s problems. Unemployment has also been creeping higher. Still, joblessness remains at 5.7 percent, while in 1933, one-quarter of the American work force was unemployed. In addition, the economy lost one-third of its value from 1929 to 1933.
Peter Cappelli, a management professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, compared the current battered economy to a boxer.
“The punches haven’t stopped long enough for him to catch his breath,” he said. “If the punches would stop, even for a second, the economy could catch its breath and pick itself up.”
The conservative economists said they thought market forces would play a dominant role in turning around the economy.
“This economy will get back on its feet, no thanks to Washington,” said J. D. Foster, senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research group in Washington. “There’s not much that politics can do at this point for the markets.”
Mr. Calomiris of the American Enterprise Institute said: “We do need some regulation — smarter regulation — to prevent the abuse of the safety net. But first we need to fix our broken regulations.”
But the liberal economists said what was needed was a combination of government regulations and policies, international negotiations, lower commodity prices and stabilization in the financial sector, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
All the economists agreed that regulators should have been looking more closely at Fannie and Freddie.
“Everybody turned a blind eye,” Mr. O’Driscoll of the Cato Institute said. “The Fed deliberately and consciously refused to regulate the mortgage industry like it was supposed to have done. I’m not a big fan of government regulation, but sometimes the government can do something to help — and in those cases, it has to.”
Mr. Parker, from Harvard, said: “Wild fluctuations have made it harder and harder for the average American family to improve their lives. You need to strike a balance between freedom and security for your citizens. This is a democracy, but we need to pick between a market-led democracy and democracy-led markets.”
A version of this article appeared in print on August 6, 2008, on page C3 of the New York edition.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/business/economy/06economists.html?_r=2&scp=3&sq=great%20depression&st=cse&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

U.S. Olympians say they're sorry for wearing masks to Beijing
We told you yesterday that some American cyclists wore black masks when they arrived at the airport in Beijing. Today, the Olympians say they regret the incident.
"They have written letters of apology to Bocog, and they now understand that it wasn't in the best judgment," U.S. Olympic Committee chairman Jim Scherr says, according to The Guardian.
Here's an excerpt from the athletes' statement to the press: "The wearing of protective masks upon our arrival into Beijing was strictly a precautionary measure we as athletes chose to take, and was in no way meant to serve as an environmental or political statement. We deeply regret the nature of our choices. Our decision was not intended to insult BOCOG or countless others who have put forth a tremendous amount of effort to improve the air quality in Beijing."
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/08/us-olympians-sa.html

Third-party candidates try for ballot spots in most states
WASHINGTON — Bob Barr and Ralph Nader, the best-known third-party presidential candidates, are on their way to getting onto most state ballots.
Barr, a former Republican congressman who is the Libertarian Party nominee, is on 34 ballots and hopes to be on 48 by Election Day, party spokesman Andrew Davis said. Nader, the longtime consumer advocate running as an independent, has submitted petitions to be on 23 ballots. He said Wednesday he hopes to be on at least 45 state ballots before Nov. 4.
Getting onto state ballots has long been an issue for third-party candidates. Republicans and Democrats are routinely on the ballot, but third-party candidates have to meet requirements such as submitting petitions of voters. "Ballot access is one of the unknown evils of the American electoral process," Davis said.
Nader spokesman Chris Driscoll said Texas, North Carolina, Georgia, Oklahoma and Indiana pose challenges. They include the number of signatures required on petitions, upcoming deadlines and certification requirements. Davis said it's hardest to get on the ballot in West Virginia and Oklahoma.
Barr's campaign manager, Russell Verney, is no stranger to the ballot challenges. He was a top aide in the 1992 and '96 campaigns of Texas billionaire Ross Perot, whose fortune made it easier to hire people to collect voter signatures in all 50 states.
Nader said he is running because Barack Obama and John McCain have been "deficient" on "any aggressive crackdown on corporate crime, fraud and abuse." He said neither major party wants to scale back the "huge, bloated military budget."
"The country is essentially paralyzed," he said. "It can't respond to problems."
Barr could not be reached for comment. He has said he is running to curb big government. Barr has criticized the Iraq war and called the U.S. presence there an "occupation." He lauded the recent Supreme Court decision declaring gun ownership a personal constitutional right.
"There can't be change by electing a Republican or a Democrat," Verney said.
Both third-party candidates are blips in national polls: Nader had 3% and Barr hit 2% in an Associated Press-Ipsos Poll released Tuesday. Democrat Obama led Republican McCain 47% -41% in the same poll.
Nader won 97,488 votes in Florida during his 2000 bid — overwhelming the 537 votes that separated George W. Bush and Al Gore after the Supreme Court stopped a statewide recount.
Merle Black, a political scientist at Emory University, agrees with many Democrats who say Nader cost Gore the presidency. He's not sure what the third-party impact will be this year.
"I don't think either of these guys are going to do much," he said.
Black said Barr may have an effect in Georgia, where he won four terms in the House of Representatives. McCain leads state polls there by an average of 7 percentage points, according to RealClearPolitics.com. Obama has said he wants to be competitive in the traditionally "red" GOP state and has campaign staff on the ground.
Nader said he and Barr have discussed issuing a joint statement challenging Obama and McCain on some issues, such as subsidies to companies that the independent candidates call corporate welfare, an overhaul of the election system and post 9/11 curbs on civil liberties. Some of these issues are "still ignored by the two parties," Nader said.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-06-thirdparty_N.htm

Here ia an article about the safety and security of Safety Deposit boxes i have others also if you wan them. It is a shame, just be careful.

Not-So-Safe-Deposit Boxes: States Seize Citizens' Property to Balance Their Budgets
Resources to Search for Unclaimed Property in Your Name
By ELISABETH LEAMY May 12, 2008

The 50 U.S. states are holding more than $32 billion worth of unclaimed property that they're supposed to safeguard for their citizens. But a "Good Morning America" investigation found some states aggressively seize property that isn't really unclaimed and then use the money -- your money -- to balance their budgets.
State governments are seizing contents and auctioning off citizen's valuables.
Unclaimed property consists of things like forgotten apartment security deposits, uncashed dividend checks and safe-deposit boxes abandoned when an elderly relative dies.
Banks and other businesses are required to turn that property over to the state for safekeeping. The problem is that the states return less than a quarter of unclaimed property to the rightful owners.
Not-So-Safe-Deposit Boxes
San Francisco resident Carla Ruff's safe-deposit box was drilled, seized, and turned over to the state of California, marked "owner unknown."
"I was appalled," Ruff said. "I felt violated."

Unknown? Carla's name was right on documents in the box at the Noe Valley Bank of America location. So was her address -- a house about six blocks from the bank. Carla had a checking account at the bank, too -- still does -- and receives regular statements. Plus, she has receipts showing she's the kind of person who paid her box rental fee. And yet, she says nobody ever notified her.
"They are zealously uncovering accounts that are not unclaimed," Ruff said.

To make matters worse, Ruff discovered the loss when she went to her box to retrieve important paperwork she needed because her husband was dying. Those papers had been shredded.
And that's not all. Her great-grandmother's precious natural pearls and other jewelry had been auctioned off. They were sold for just $1,800, even though they were appraised for $82,500.
"These things were things that she gave to me," Ruff said. "I valued them because I loved her."
Bank of America told ABC News it deeply regrets the situation and appreciates the difficulty of what Mrs. Ruff was going through. The bank has reached a settlement with Ruff and continues to update its unclaimed property procedures as laws change.
California's Class Action Lawsuit
Ruff is not alone. Attorney Bill Palmer represents her and countless other citizens in a class action lawsuit against the state of California.
"They figured the safety-deposit box was safer than keeping it under the mattress," Palmer said. "In the case of a lot of citizens, they were wrong, weren't they?"
California law used to say property was unclaimed if the rightful owner had had no contact with the business for 15 years. But during various state budget crises, the waiting period was reduced to seven years, and then five, and then three. Legislators even tried for one year. Why? Because the state wanted to use that free money.
(Getty Images)
"That's absolutely correct," said California State Controller John Chiang, who inherited the situation when he came into office. "What we've done here over the last two decades has been dead wrong. We've kept the property and not provided owners with the opportunities -- the best opportunities -- to get their property back."
Chiang now faces the daunting task of returning $5.1 billion worth of unclaimed property to people. Some states keep their unclaimed property in a special trust fund and only tap into the interest they earn on it. But California dumps the money into the general fund -- and spends it.
"It's supposed to be segregated and protected," Palmer said. "California has taken all of that $5.1 billion and has used it as a massive loan."
California became so addicted to spending people's money, that, for years, it simply stopped sending notices to the rightful owners. ABC News obtained a 1996 internal memo in which the lawyer for the Bureau of Unclaimed Property argued against expanding programs to notify rightful owners. He wrote, "It could well result in additional claims of monies that would otherwise flow into the general fund."

Seizing More Than Safe-Deposit Boxes
It's not just safe-deposit boxes. A British man went to retire and discovered the $4 million in U.S. stock he had been counting on had been seized and sold for $200,000 years earlier -- even though he was in touch with the company about other matters.
A Sacramento family lost out on railroad land rights their ancestors had owned for generations -- also sold off as unclaimed property.
"If I had hung onto it, I would be a millionaire, multimillionaire," said John Whitley. "But that didn't happen because we didn't get to hold it."

State Reforms
California's unclaimed property program was so out of control that, last year, the courts issued injunctions barring the state from seizing any more property until it made reforms. Since then, Chiang has taken several steps to try to clean up the program.
For example, the state now sends notices alerting citizens about unclaimed property before it is handed over to the state -- the only state to do so. Once unclaimed property is delivered to the state, it is now held for several months while the state tries to contact the owners, rather than it being immediately sold off or destroyed.
Which raises the question, in the Internet era, is anybody really lost anymore? California and other states are just beginning to make use of modern databases that can find most anyone in minutes. Unfortunately, California only uses those databases to search after it has already seized a citizen's property.
If California does get better at locating people, that could present another challenge. Remember, right now, the state spends the money.

"It's like the last guy in line at a pizza parlor," Palmer criticized. "There is only so much pizza. At the end, when I get up to the counter to claim my pizza, there may be no pizza for me."
California's fiscal problems are legendary and once again in the news, so it's reasonable to question whether the state can afford to repay its citizens if a bunch of them surface at once.
"There is always going to be money to give the owners when they make their claim, " Chiang insisted. "I don't want my legacy to say I continued a broken program. I want my legacy to be 'this guy was the guy who truly cared about the people and returned their money.'"
California is not the only state to come under fire for its handling of unclaimed property. In Delaware, unclaimed property is the third largest source of state revenue. Idaho recently passed an unprecedented law that says the state gets to keep unclaimed property permanently if the rightful owners don't claim it within 10 short years. And all 50 states pay private contractors 10 to 12 percent commissions to locate and seize accounts for them. It's an inherent conflict of interest: the more rightful owners are found, the less money the contractors make.
Of course, there are some states who handle their people's property with respect. Oregon never takes title to unclaimed property. Instead, it holds it in a perpetual trust fund.
Colorado uses the interest on its unclaimed property fund to pay for some state programs, but leaves the principal untouched.
Missouri, Iowa and Kansas make extra efforts to reunite people with their property –even setting up booths at state fairs to get the word out. The State of Maryland actively compares the names on unclaimed accounts with state income tax records. If it finds a match, the state simply cuts a check and sends it to the citizen.
Protecting Your Property
So, the question for citizens is, how do you protect yourself?
Make contact with your bank, your brokerage firm, etc. at least once a year, in a way that creates a paper trail. Make sure they have your current address.
If you own stock, occasionally vote your proxies or take other steps to keep your stock ownership active. Stay in touch with your broker.
Write a list of all your accounts and keep it with your will, so your heirs will know where to look.
Consider insuring valuables even if you keep them in your safe-deposit box. That way, you're covered financially if the bank or state makes a mistake and empties your box. Plus, safe-deposit contents have been known to be destroyed by fire or flooding.
If you want to search for unclaimed property in your name, you do not need to pay other people to do it for you. Check out the following links for more information:
National Association of Unclaimed Property Administratorshttp://www.missingmoney.com/

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4832471&page=1&CFID=140960&CFTOKEN=db7e0677249fea39-F2FED62F-FF70-A07E-9C33AE45E19CFA8F