47 percent of Americanscant pay for an unexpected $400 expense through savings or credit cards, without selling something or borrowing money.
The economic struggles of ordinary Americans are getting a good airing this presidential season and a statistical finding from the Federal Reserve provides ammunition for a candidate in either party who wants to make the case that too many people have been left behind. Washington PostreporterHunter Schwarzplugged some Fed data into a little segment called By the numbers, in the newspapers June 8, 2015, edition: 47: The percentage of Americans who cant pay for an unexpected $400 expense through savings or credit cards, without selling something or borrowing money, according to the Federal Reserve. The dollar figure caught our eye. It seemed surprisingly low. Other researchers have tried to gauge the financial vulnerability of American households to an economic setback, but typically, the amounts they test are much higher, in the thousands of dollars. We thought wed take a closer look. The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking A few years ago, the Federal Reserve Board began asking Americans how well theyre doing financially. In May, the Fedreleased the 2014 results. The questions ranged from retirement planning, to how people managed any student debt they might have, to whether they think their overall situation is headed up or down. To measure participants sense of financial vulnerability, the survey asked them to imagine they had an emergency expense that cost $400, and it asked them how they would cover it. The better-off group said they would use cash-on-hand or a credit card that they would pay off in a month. Others said they would use a credit card but take time to pay it off, or they might borrow from a family member or a pay-day loan company, or they might sell something. And some said there was no way they could cover an unexpected $400 expense. Across the more than 5,800 people who completed the online survey, 53 percent said they would be able to pay essentially immediately. That left 47 percent who said they could not. Specifically, respondents indicate that they simply could not cover the expense (14 percent); would sell something (10 percent); or would rely on one or more means of borrowing to pay for at least part of the expense, including paying with a credit card that they pay off over time (18 percent), borrowing from friends or family (13 percent), or using a payday loan (2 percent), the report said. Interestingly, making over $100,000 a year was no guarantee of security. About a quarter of the more affluent group said that at the very least, they would pay off the $400 over time. As this chart from the report shows, ethnicity and income strongly affected the ability to absorb a $400 outlay. Other studies George Washington University business professor Annamaria Lusardi and two colleagues (Daniel J. Schneider at Princeton University and Peter Tufano at Oxford University) conducteda similar surveyin the depths of the recession in 2009. Their study asked people how they would handle a sudden $2,000 bill that they had to pay in 30 days. About half the respondents said they would probably or certainly be unable to cope with such an emergency out of their own funds. Lusardi said she considers the results comparable. The Federal Reserve had a lower amount, but it had to be paid right away, she told PunditFact. We gave people more time, so I think the percentages are consistent. In fact, even with five years separating the surveys, it is the similarity in the responses that caught her eye. Lusardi said it is a sign of the recessions deep damage to the typical Americans balance sheet. Until recently, the labor market and wages have been stagnant, Lusardi said. In the recession, many families used up their reserves of liquidity. It takes a long time to reestablish a good financial situation. There are other indications that most Americans live with a limited financial cushion. When the government shutdown for two weeks in 2013, aUniversity of Michigan research teamtracked a hefty drop in household spending among government workers. Even though their paychecks were interrupted only a short time, households cut their outlays in half, and many delayed paying their mortgages and credit card bills. Some racked up high cost credit card debt that took them up to nine months to pay back. Lusardis 2009 research included a number of other western nations. For the record, the United States ranked sixth out of eight in residents saying they would certainly or probably be able to manage a sudden $2,000 bill. Rank/Country Percent able to cope Rank/Country Percent able to cope 1. Italy 80.1 5. Portugal 54.1 2. Netherlands 73.2 6. United States 50 3. Canada 71.7 7. Germany 49.4 4. France 62.8 8. United Kingdom 47.8  Our ruling Schwarz said 47 percent of Americans cant pay for an unexpected $400 expense through savings or credit cards, without selling something or borrowing money. The only caveat here, and its a very minor one, is that figure represents the number of people who say they cant make that payment, based on a Federal Reserve Board survey. The Federal Reserve Board results are in line with a similar study and related research. We rate the claim True.
This legend has circulated in Great Britain at least since 1972. Author Douglas Adams tells the "packet of biscuits" tale in his 1984 novel So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish. He has since recounted it on numerous occasions, claiming it happened to him in 1976 at a station in Cambridge. His claim is doubted by many who point out the self-same tale was around years prior to that, but it is not impossible for events in real life to mimic those of lore. (Indeed, the actual folkloric term for such an event is ostension.) In any case, whether the incident happened to him or not, it is clear the legend did not begin with him: ostension Examples: [Brunvand, 1986] An elderly woman, traveling by bus, had a layover during her journey. She purchased a package of Oreo cookies from a vending machine in the bus terminal and located a table. She placed her cookies on the table, sat down, and proceeded to read her newspaper She was joined by a young man, who, to her surprise, opened the package of Oreo cookies and began to eat them. The woman, saying nothing, but giving him an icy stare, grabbed a cookie. The young man, with a funny look on his face, ate another cookie. The woman again glared and grabbed another cookie. The young man finished the third cookie and offered the last to the woman. Completely appalled, she grabbed the cookie and the young man left. Outraged, the woman threw down her paper only to find her unopened Oreos on the table in front of her.  [Collected on the Internet, 1994] A friend of my aunt was going shopping at the mall, and stopped in a snack bar to rest her feet. She bought a Kit Kat bar, a candy bar which breaks into several pieces. The place was crowded, so the friend was forced to share a table with a meek-looking gentleman. (That's just the way some malls are, I guess.) The expected business happened with the two of them sharing the Kit Kat, but since the Kit Kat had an odd number of pieces, she made sure she got the last one. The man got up without saying a word, went over to the counter and bought a couple of donuts. The friend was working herself into a rage because this guy had eaten her Kit Kat. She imagined that he had bought two donuts to give one to her in apology, and so you can imagine how she got even more angry when he had the gall to go sit by himself at a table far away from her. So, in the strength of her fury, she stalked over to his table, picked up one of the donuts, took a BIG CHOMP out of it, and set it back in front of him. Then she glared at him, said "And a VERY GOOD DAY to you, too!" and stormed out. She got to her car, opened up the purse to get her keys, and you know the rest. [Ann Landers, 1997] A Ferry Story My aunt and uncle own a business in Kamloops, B.C. Here is a true story that happened to one of the women in their office: The woman was taking the car ferry from Victoria to Vancouver. She sat on the deck. Beside her in an empty chair were her newspaper and her chocolate bar. A man sat next to the little pile. He picked up the chocolate bar, ate it, picked up the newspaper, read some of it, threw the candy bar wrapper away, tucked the newspaper under his arm and then walked off. The woman was too shocked to say anything. Having nothing to read, eat or munch on, she decided to go to the cafeteria. There, at a table, sat the man, flipping the pages of the newspaper with one hand, holding a submarine sandwich in the other. Still angry, the woman strode over to him, grabbed the sandwich out of his hand, took a big bite and then put the sandwich back in his hand. She marched off, saying nothing and not looking back. She then decided to go to her car. On the passenger seat were her newspaper and her chocolate bar. She had never taken them out of the car! Variations: Numerous stories about unwitting thieves abound in the realm of contemporary lore, with the "victim turned thief" motif appearing in such tales since the early 1900s. (Visit our Pocket(ed) Watch, Gun-Toting Grannies, and Jogger's Billfold pages for other legends of this type.) Pocket(ed) Watch Gun-Toting Grannies Jogger's Billfold As folklorist Jan Harold Brunvand put it, "All variations on the theme of unwitting theft portray a plausible situation in which we ourselves might act in such an uncharacteristic threatening manner because of a simple misunderstanding." In this legend, the "plausible situation" impels a woman one presumes would not normally make a spectacle of herself to angrily glare at a stranger, screech at him, lecture him, or even defiantly grab a food item she knows is his and tear a bite out of it. Because of the way the characters are presented (the woman exudes a faintly aristocratic aura while the man is described as a leather-clad punk, a foreigner, or an insolent-appearing young person), the woman's social lapse is more glaring. We forgive her outburst at the time ... but afterwards have a chance to reflect on how she handled the situation and conclude there had to have been a better way. Her lapse and the awareness of how she must have appeared to others serves as a caution against our taking similar action in any potentially confrontational encounter that occurs in public. We might not always have all of the facts we think we do. Moreover, even if we do have all the facts, we're going to look like a right idiot to anyone looking on. Sightings: Both the 1990 film The Lunch Date and the 1989 film Boeuf Bourgignon make use of this legend. In both, a well-dressed white woman goes off to fetch silverware and returns to find a Black man eating her lunch. Only after she shares her dinner with the stranger (at one point he fetches coffee for the two of them) and the man leaves does she notice her own meal sitting on another table. The 2010 Ian McEwan novel Solar contains an interesting sighting of the legend, where it is both related as a true story undergone by the book's protagonist and afterwards challenged by a folklorist he encounters on its basis as an urban legend of long standing. Denton. Lisa.  Chewing Gum Keeps the Hearing Aids In.
 The Chattanooga Times. 30 July 1997  (p. C1).  Kaelber, Randy.  The Biscuit Bullet: Is It My Fault?
 FOAFTale News. June 1996  (p. 8). Kreck, Dick.  A Biscuit with Her Name on It.
 The Denver Post. 6 April 1996  (p. D8). McEwan, Ian. Solar.
  Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf, 2010.  ISBN 978-0-385-53341-6. 
  (pp. 117-8, 119, 121-7, 154-5, 157-8, 179-80). Owens, Gene.  Doughboy Gets Around.
 [Greensboro] News & Record. 11 July 1995  (Food; p. A7). Rose, Allen.  Story of Biscuit Dough Explodes in My Face.
 The Orlando Sentinel. 31 May 1996  (p. D1). Rose, Allen.  Biscuit Dough Makes Impact on Shopper.
 The Orlando Sentinel. 30 May 1996  (p. D1). Sandstrom, Karen.  Joke Telling Done Well Gives Audience More Than Laughs.
 The Plain Dealer. 19 June 1994  (p. B5). Setencich, Eli.  City Shoots First, Asks Questions Later.
 The Fresno Bee. 22 January 1996  (p. B1). Truly, Pat.  The Unthinkable Is Becoming Less So Every Day.
 The [Cleveland] Plain Dealer. 19 January 1994  (p. B5). Venable, Sam.  Highway Shooting Incident Turned Out to Be Poppin Fresh.
 The Knoxville News-Sentinel. 19 April 1998. Viets, Elaine.  The Half-Baked Biscuit Bullet Story Wont Die.
 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 13 December 1995  (Food; p. 3). Wikipedia.  "Ostensive Definition; Ostension in Folklore."
  Accessed 14 November 2018. Claim:  A serious prospectus inviting investors to become part of a cat-and-rat farm was once circulated, the basic premise of which involved skinning cats for their fur, feeding the cat carcasses to rats, then feeding the rats to the cats being raised for their fur.  Origins:  This   grey-bearded leg pull has been around for a whopping 125 years, since that day in 1875 when Willis B. Powell, editor of a newspaper in Lacon, Illinois, pulled the wool over the collective eyes of Associated Press by supplying that newswire with details about a supposedly real cat-and-rat ranch being advertised in that area. Despite its silliness, the story evaded scrutiny, and an obvious prank took on a life of its own in the imaginations of many. Then, as now, the Associated Press imprimatur conferred credibility. Not until April 1940, when an article appeared in Goldfish Bowl (a publication of the National Press Club of Washington, D.C.), was the famous Lacon, Illinois, ranch for felines and rodents widely revealed as a hoax. The spurious prospectus on which the Associated Press news  accounts were based read as follows: Glorious Opportunity To Get Rich!!!  We are starting a cat ranch in Lacon with 100,000 cats. Each cat will average 12 kittens a year. The cat skins will sell for 30 cents each. One hundred men can skin 5,000 cats a day. We figure a daily net profit of over $10,000. Now what shall we feed the cats? We will start a rat farm next door with 1,000,000 rats. The rats breed 12 times faster than the cats. So we will have four rats to feed each day to each cat. Now what shall we feed the rats? We will feed the rats the carcasses of the cats after they have been skinned. Now Get This! We feed the rats to the cats and the cats to the rats and get the cat skins for nothing!Barbara "ratified" Mikkelson Sightings:  The 1934 film Maniac contains this urban legend, and various music lovers have informed me that on its 1985 album New Day Rising, Husker Du features a song called "How to Skin a Cat." The lyrics, I'm told, go something like "We'll feed the rats to the cats and the cats to the rats . . ." Just goes to show that you can't keep a good story down. Last updated:  10 August 2011 Hoaxes   Sifakis, Carl.  The Big Book of Hoaxes.  New York: Paradox Press, 1996.  ISBN 1-563-89252-9  (p. 41).  The Big Book of Hoaxes    Tan, Paul Lee.  Encyclopedia of 7700 Illustrations.  Rockville, Maryland: Assurance Publishers, 1979.  ISBN 0-88469-100-4  (p. 289). Topic:  A discussion of the history and various types of chain letters. Origins:  The practice of circulating letters to other parties beyond their original recipients has existed for centuries, so pinpointing the exact origin of chain letters is problematic. While all manner of written materials (letters, speeches, eye-witness accounts, polemics, recipes, cures, prayers) have in the past been circulated to ever-widening circles of recipients, the first full-fledged chain letter recorded by Daniel W. VanArsdale in his massive archive of the genre is dated 1888. If we accept that a true chain letter must contain within its text an explicit instruction to the reader to make copies of the mailing and put them into the hands of a specified number of new recipients, that 1888 date is a defensible notch on the timeline of  first archive  history to point to as the moment of origin. If, however, we're willing to settle for an implied instruction topass the item to others for their benefit, protection, or well-being, certain written communications dating to the Middle Ages could fairly be considered the first of this sort. In them, their writers set down what they believed to be useful cures, on the understanding that such missives were to be recopied by those who received them then distributed to those people's loved ones, who in turn would themselves recopy these wisdoms to hand to their nearest and dearest. These letters were also sold by peddlers and fortune tellers. The cures detailed therein were typically combinations of recipes for simple nostrums and special prayers to be recited as the concoctions were mixed or administered. Our modern world sees chain letters of a variety of descriptions circulated by surface mail, fax machine, and in e-mail. While folk cures and accompanying prayers have dropped from favor (as medical information and resources became easier to access, such intelligences became less vital), other sorts of "Send this to five of your friends!" mailings emerged to fill this gap.  Contemporary chain letters fall into five broad categories:  Money-generating (aka pyramid or Ponzi schemes) Luck-generation (or ill luck avoidance)  Altruistic Something for nothing Humor Money-generating (pyramid or Ponzi scheme) chain letters hold out the promise of untold riches to those gulled into participating in their circulation. In their most common form, recipients are instructed to send a token set dollar figure ($5, for example) to the name at the top of the group's roll call, strike that name and address from the list of those involved, add their own to the base of the register, recopy the amended letter, and mail it to five of their acquaintances. If all goes according to plan, their small investment will reap them a fortune once their names percolate to the top of the list. (Pyramid schemes exist in many forms and go by many names. Deserving of particular mention are "gifting circles" or "gifting clubs" wherein folks pay substantial chunks of cash [$5,000, for example] to be included on a chart of like-minded investors, the object being that as new people are added behind them, they will move higher on the diagram one tier at a time until ultimately they occupy the top spot, at which moment they will receive the pool of money accumulated behind them.  Such endeavors have operated under the names of "Elite Activity," "Women Empowering Women," "The Dinner Club," "Spirit of Giving" and so many more that we couldn't possibly ever list them all.) So much can go wrong with pyramid contrivances that their pitfalls hardly needs explaining. First, for pyramid investments to work, the world would need an endless supply of people, each of them with money in hand and determined to participate in the process. Because each level of the pyramid increases exponentially the throng of investors involved, the numbers soon lose meaning. For instance, suppose the money-generating come-on you received in the mail displayed five names. If everyone in the chain had followed instructions and mailed it to five of their friends, by the time it reached you it had already been through 3,905 pairs of hands, and that only provided the first person listed was the one who began the progression. Add one more level (either from having a sixth name on the roll or through one of the names having already been moved off from the top), and the number involved jumps to 19,530. Add two, and it reaches 97,655. Second, not everyone is honest, so there will always be those who will simply insert their names near the top of the roll rather than at its base. Names added honestly, therefore, will fail to move up past this ever-changing invisible ceiling (as new people enter the chain, they too will try this trick). Also, that someone receives the circular and passes it along to five acquaintances does not necessarily mean he sent his requisite sum to the name heading the roster.  However, the biggest argument against money-generating chain letters is their illegality. Missives that request money or other items of value and promise substantial returns to the participants are against the law. Sending them through the mail (or delivering them in person or by computer, but mailing money to participate) violates Title 18, United States Code, Section 1302, of the Postal Lottery Statute.  At various times the unscrupulous have tried to circumvent the aspects of money-generating chain letters that render them illegal. One common attempt is the inclusion of the additional step of having participants send recipe cards or other relatively-worthless small items along with the cash, thereby transforming the process into a legitimate enterprise wherein those particular trifles are being vended. Another is to go the opposite way, that is, label all monies involved as "gifts" (see section above about gifting clubs). Yet another is to process as much of the proposition as possible via non-postal routes. However, no matter what technology or plausible-sounding subterfuge (e.g.; sale of credit reports or mailing lists) is used, if at any point anything passes by surface mail, the entire maneuver becomes illegal. Says the USPS: USPS Recently, high-tech chain letters have begun surfacing. They may be disseminated over the Internet, or may require the copying and mailing of computer disks rather than paper. Regardless of what technology is used to advance the scheme, if the mail is used at any step along the way, it is still illegal. An example of a "money generating" chain letter: [Collected via surface mail, 1975] DO YOU NEED $8,000? ? ? ? ? ?Let Bill Nelson tell you how I have run one of these promotion letters  four times in the past year. The First time I received $7,000 in cash and around $7,800 the other three. It this letter is continued as it should be, everyone profits!  Yes, and don't worry about financing or paying money back.  After the first time, you'll see what I mean, and next time you will be more eager and glad.  Now, let me give you the complete story and details.  Please forward them and in about 30 days you will be $8,000 richer.  This letter will pay up to $8,000 because there are only four names at all times.  Three moves and you are in a position to receive one dollar from each participant.  This chain letter was initiated by William Neham from Nashville, Tennessee, for the purpose of investment capital.  But, now this has been expanded.  Your participation is one dollar to the first person or firm in the Number One position below, while omitting the name to whom you sent the dollar.  Then, move the list of names up one place and place your name at the bottom.  Mail a copy of this letter to 20 new prospects.  MAIL YOUR LETTERS within 48 HOURS AND DO NOT BREAK THE CHAIN.  When your name reaches the Number One position, it will be your turn to collect the fees. They will be sent to you by 8,000 persons like yourself.  Please DO NOT BREAK THE CHAIN BECAUSE IT REALLY WORKS!!  In fact, I guarantee it, provided you do not break the chain and follow the simple rules above.  Try it and see.  You are investing ONLY, ONE DOLLAR, and that is all you can lose.  Be sure to copy this letter completely. Don't leave any of it out.  Send your report to Imperial Sales Company, 3096 Ivey Avenue, Knoxville, Tennessee 37914.  Let us know when your fee was sent and how much you received within nine days.  We have at the present time almost 100% return to the people carrying out this letter promotion.  The majority received $7,800.  If four names should be listed on your promotion, the one in Number One position is omitted, after you send him your one dollar. Then, put your name and address in the Number Four position.  $8,000 is capital absolutely free!  Send letters only to people who have secretaries or whom you personally consider "Doers." Look  20 times 20 times 20 equals 8,000!!!!. While money-generating chain letters flourish in both the off- and online worlds, "Make Money Fast!" hustles have become so much a part of online culture that they have spawned any number of parodies. This next example is one such howler we particularly treasure: [Collected on the Internet, 1998] MAKE CLUBS FAST Recent evidence has come to light that suggests that pyramid style chain letters may have pre-dated Dave Rhodes by a considerable margin. Palaentologists recently deciphered the following, painted on a cave wall on the slopes of Kilimanjaro. MAKE SPIKY CLUBS FAST!!! Hello, not-tribe-member. Urk name Urk. Many moons ago, Urk in bad way. Urk kicked out of cave by Thag. Thag bigger than Urk, Thag take Urk spiky club, Urka (Urk wo-man). Urk not able kill deer, must eat leaves, berries. Urk flee from wolves. Today, Urk big chief. Urk have best cave, many wives, many spiky clubs. Urk tell how. WHAT DO: make one spiky club and take to cave places below. Add own cave place to bottom of list, take cave place off top. Put new message on walls many caves. Wait. Many clubs soon come! This not crime! Urk ask shaman, gods say okay. HERE LIST: 1) UrkFirst caveOlduvai Gorge few) Thag (not that Thag, other Thag)old dead treeby lake shaped like mammoth few) Ogbig rock with overhangnear pig game trail Many) Zogriver caveswhere river meet big water Urk hope not-tribe-member do what Urk say do. That only way it work. While Urk and his quest for spiky clubs leaves a smile on our faces, the second sort of chain letters provokes the opposite response: a worried frown. Even the most rational and level-headed can't help but feel a bit uneasy when they drop luck-generation chain letters into the nearest trash bin. This type of imploration, which promises good luck even as it threatens ill fortune to rain down on the heads of those who fail to speed it on its way, tends to follow a standard outline. (Not all chain letters of this ilk scrupulously adhere to this formula; certain elements may be omitted in some of the entreaties you encounter.)  Invocation:  The letter begins with an admonition to pray, trust the Lord, or kiss someone as an expression of love.  Origins:  A description of the person who began the letter (a priest, a saint, a sea captain, a doctor) and where (Great Britain, Italy, the Netherlands) is given. Often included is a claim of the letter's having been around the world a stated number of times.  Success Story:  Accounts of the happy circumstances of a few people who followed instructions to send the letter on its way are given, with their rewards (financial windfall, sudden luck in matters of romance, miraculous recovery from illness) described in glowing detail.  Punishment Story:  Accounts are given of the setbacks or tragedies (job loss, broken heart, injury or death) that befell a few people who ignored the letter or threw it away.  Instruction and Promise:  The recipient is told how many copies of the letter to distribute and is reassured that good luck will swiftly follow. An example of a contemporary "luck generation" chain letter sent by e-mail.  [Collected on the Internet, 2000] CASE 1:  Kelly Sedey had one wish, for her boyfriend of three years, David Marsden, to propose to her.  Then one day when she was out to lunch David proposed!  She accepted, but then had to leave because she had a meeting in 20 min.  When she got to her office, she noticed on her computer she had e-mail.  She checked it, the usual stuff from her friends, but then she saw one that she had never gotten before. was this letter.  She *simply deleted it without even reading it all. BIG MISTAKE!  Later that evening, she received a phone call from the police. It was about DAVID!  He had been in an accident with an 18 wheeler.  He didn't survive. CASE 2:  Take Katie Robbenson. She received this letter and being the believer that she was, she sent it to a few of her friends but didn't have enough e-mail addresses to send out the full 10 that you must. Three days later, Katie went to a masquerade ball. Later that night when she left to get to her car to go home, she was killed on the spot by a hit-and-run drunk driver. CASE 3:  Richard S. Willis sent this letter out within 45 minutes of reading it.  Not even 4 hours later walking along the street to his new job interveiw with a really big company, when he ran into Cynthia Bell, his secret love for 5 years.  Cynthia came up to him and told him of her passionate crush on him that she had had on him for 2 years.  Three days later, he proposed to her and they got married.  Cynthia and Richard are Still married with three children, happy as ever! This is the letter: You must send this on in 3 hours after reading the letter to 10 different people.  If you do this, you will receive unbeleveably good luck in love.  The person that you are most attracted to will soon return your feelings. If you do not, bad luck will rear it's ugly head at you. THIS IS NOT A JOKE!  You have read the warnings, seen the cases, and the consiquences.  You MUST send this on or face dreadfuly bad luck. *NOTE*  The more people that you send this to, the better luck you will have. P.S.  I did not make this up,someone sent it to me and I am passing it on!  You Send it by clicking forward on the side The avoidance of ill luck features in numerous chain letters, especially the "crazed killer" sort prized by prepubescent girls who delight in forwarding "a crazed killer or vengeful spirit will come for you if you don't forward this message to others" tales. These next examples were sent by text message via cell phone: [Collected via e-mail, September 2009] A picture of a girl with a graduation cap on the caption read: "Hi, my name is Alexis, I am 7 years old about 1 year ago me and my dad got into a big fight, he slit my throat and threw me down the sewer.  There was this girl named Alissia and she got the same text message you are getting now and she just erased it and didn't think about it.  Later on, around midnight, she heard laughing coming from her bathroom and she quickly sent that message to 10 people.  Later on that night, her parents heard laughing and cutting.  When they came it to check in the bathroom, Alissia's blood was everywhere.  Now that you have read this message about Alissia's death, I must kill you too unless you send this message to 10 people  no send backs.  I'll be waiting for you at midnight if you don't do this.  don't ignore this. once a little girl was so obsessed with taking pictures of herself and one day she took a picture of herself and when she looked at herself she thought something wasn't right. she heard a girl laughing and turned... this was the last picture she took before she went missing. they found her in the backyard with scratches and blood everywhere... one girl named Aliie dint belive this and deleted it. that night she heard laughing and went and forwarded this message, but it was too late. an hour later her parents found her in the bathtub covered in blood. fwd this to ten ppl or she will be waiting under your bed at 12 tonight. if you don't belive it, then save the pictures and zoom in to the right bottom corner. NO SEND BACK!!!!Piggy back 09 Altruistic chain letters are those that present themselves as seeking benefit for others rather than the financial enrichment or improvement of luck of their recipients/forwarders. Into this category fall prayers for the suffering and collections made on behalf of charitable groups or the needy themselves. While this form of the genre might indeed be the oldest (according to Daniel W. VanArsdale, the first full-fledged chain letter was of this sort; it called for the donation of dimes to "poor whites in the region of the Cumberlands"), the Internet has added new expressions of it. Many "dying child" hoaxes circulate online, each of them asserting every forward of their supplications will result in  benefactors (either named charities or corporations or unnamed millionaires) directing set sums towards the care of the stricken youngsters. While these lack the specificity of "Send this to four people" instructions (they instead direct recipients to "Forward this to everyone you know"), the languishing children are imaginary, and the forwarders add nothing of themselves to the mix (neither prayers nor donations), they are a close enough fit with the altruistic class of chain letters to be considered a legitimate variant.  first dying child Closer yet are the myriad prayer requests (e.g., the Delaney Parrish appeal) that have sprung to life on the Internet. While the "Send this to ten people" command is still absent ("Send to as many as you can" and its ilk being used instead), the people being pled for often do exist, with their travails often as described, and those moved to keep the chain going are adding something of themselves (their petitions to God) to the process.  Delaney Parrish Similarly, various appeals of the "dying child intent upon collecting specific items" nature (e.g.; the Craig Shergold appeal for business cards) are also close fits.  While not all entreaties of this sort are on the up-and-up, a fair number are  the children and their situations are real, as are their requests. Those participating in these chains not only pass along the requests to their circles of acquaintance but also themselves donate the items requested and transport them to the youngsters.  Craig Shergold Moving to the "something for nothing" category, we find online appeals aimed at augmenting the bank accounts or wardrobes of their participants, bringing them fame, or entertaining them. Of the first sort, the granddaddy of them all is the e-mail tracking hoax: Bill Gates is testing an e-mail tracking program and for taking part by forwarding his note you will receive $1,000. (Or Disney will reward you with a trip for two to Disney World. Or Nike will give you free shoes. Or Veuve-Clicquot will bless you with some gratis champagne. Or Applebees will treat you to a dinner for you and your date. Or, well, the list is endless.) These differ from "money-generating" chain letters in one important way: those involved do not themselves send any of their own money or possessions to anyone else, they merely forward the leg-pulls in the expectation that by doing so the promised goodies will come their way. e-mail tracking A less mercenary example of a "something for nothing" chain letter that plays upon the urge to seek fame rather than fortune is the Guinness World Book of Records hoax which states as its goal the establishment of a world record. For years, children have been gulled into participating in these mailings by the promise of their names being listed in that fabled book if the chain is kept alive long enough for a record to be set. More recently a snail mail version has supplemented the e-mail jape of the same design, so the hoax exists in both the offline and online worlds.  Guinness "Something for nothing" e-mail chain letters that hold out as the forwarders' reward the promise of entertainment are a form of practical joke of the "Made you look foolish" variety. Potential victims are told their sending these e-mails to the requisite number of new people (as spelled out in proposition) will cause them to receive the next installments of intriguing stories they have become caught up in reading or their computers to spontaneously begin playing either humorous animated clips (e.g. Ronald McDonald beating up the Taco Bell dog) or videos of lusted-after celebrities caught off-guard doing naughty things. But of course the promised carrots never arrive; the next chapters of novelettes fail to mail themselves and videos don't spring to life. We detail a great many such hokey come-ons in our Clip Artless article. Clip Artless We now come to the final category of chain letter: Humor. Though these offerings mimic the form taken by their money-generating cousins, those who receive them don't mistake them for anything other than jokes. These mailings are solely meant to provoke rueful smiles or outright guffaws among those they are happily flung to; they are not intended to prompt recipients to actually mail off the items or persons described in hopes of getting back a great many more of like nature. For instance, one well-known humor chain letter instructs dissatisfied wives to bundle up their good-for-nothing husbands and mail them to the woman whose name appears at the head of the list; when the senders' names arise to the top spot they are guaranteed to receive thousands of similarly-discarded spouses, some of which might prove worth keeping (the implication being that most will not). Yet don't break the chain, admonishes the letter  one woman who did got her own husband back! husbands Barbara "return to sender" Mikkelson Additional information:      Ponzi Schemes  (Securities and Exchange Commission)      Pyramid Schemes  (Securities and Exchange Commission)      Gifting Clubs  (Federal Trade Commission)  Last updated:  27 September 2009    Sources:   Degh, Linda.  Legend and Belief.   London: Souvenir Press, 1978.  0-285-63396-1  (pp. 189-193).    Waring, Philippa.  A Dictionary of Omens and Superstitions.   Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2001.  0-253-33929-4  (p. 52). Making an economicspeechat the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse on July 2, 2015, Barack Obama ticked off a list of his accomplishments as president -- and made a bolder version of a claim we have heard before about slashing the federal budget deficit. So, weve got a record streak of private-sector job growth, Obama said in his remarks, which includedveiled criticismsof Gov. Scott Walker on the day Walker filed federal papers as a precursor to announcing his run for president. Weve cut the deficit by two-thirds. Our stock market has more than doubled, restoring 401(k)s for millions of families. This is progress. Step by step, America is moving forward. Middle-class economics works. It works. Yes!Here's why the deficit claim caught our attention: In September 2014 in Milwaukee, Obama said he had cut the deficit in half. Werated that statement True, and it has become one of our most-clicked fact checks. Could it be that, less than a year later, the deficit is down by two-thirds? Deficit vs debt Lets be clear at the top that Obama is talking about the deficit, which has been getting smaller -- not the debt, which is getting bigger. The deficit is an annual number. Its the difference between what the government collects in revenues and spends in one year. The United States hasnt seen budgetsurplusessince the days of President Bill Clinton. The debt, meanwhile, is a running tally -- its the total of annual deficits minus any annual surpluses. The nation's debt currently exceeds$18 trillion, and it has risen by more than$7 trillionunder Obama. (Heres agood primerfrom PolitiFact National on the difference between the two.) Tracking the deficit numbers In reviewing the cut-the-deficit-in-half claim, our baseline was fiscal 2009. That period started on Oct. 1, 2008, when George W. Bush was still president, and ended on Sept. 30, 2009, eight months after Obama took office. We found the deficit was $1.41 trillion in 2009 and $679.5 billion in 2013 -- a drop of more than half. Measured another way, the deficit made up 9.8 percent of the economy (gross domestic product) in 2009 and dropped to less than half of that -- 4.1 percent -- by the end of fiscal 2013. But now we have figures for fiscal 2014. PolitiFact National examined those figures in January 2015, after Obama said in his State of the Union speech that we've seen our deficits cut by two-thirds. Our colleagues rated his statementMostly True. The 2014 deficit was $486 billion -- a drop of two-thirds from the $1.41 trillion in 2009. And it was 2.8 percent of GDP, a reduction of more than two-thirds from the 9.8 percent in 2009. (In June 2015, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected that 2015 will end with a deficit that, as a percentage of GDP, will be the lowest since 2007.) So, math wise, Obamas two-thirds claim is solid. But there are a few caveats. Yes, we reduced the deficit two-thirds from its peak in 2009, but that was after deficits had just increased by nearly 800 percent to theirhighest leveloutside of World War II, Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget told us. Indeed, Obamahelped growthe 2009 deficit with his stimulus spending, although he can take some credit for the economy, which has improved since the Great Recessionendedin June 2009 and helped bring down the deficits. And although the Congressional Budget Office projects that deficits relative to GDP will decline slightly over the next few years, they will then rise and add more to the debt. Largely as a result of the aging population and rising health care costs, CBOprojectsthe deficit to grow from less than 3 percent of GDP in 2015 to more than 6 percent in 2040. Our rating Obama said: We've cut the deficit by two-thirds. In raw dollars and as a percentage of the overall economy, the annual federal deficit in 2014 was two-thirds smaller than in 2009, the year Obama took office. But there are several caveats, including the fact that his stimulus spending helped raise the 2009 deficit and the economy, for which he can take some credit, has improved since the end of the Great Recession the same year. For a statement that is accurate but needs additional information, our rating is Mostly True. For years Facebook users have been seeing posts advertising giveaways for the Kroger grocery store chain such as "Get $55 in Free Groceries" coupon offers.  However, such posts are just versions of the common "free coupon" or "free gift card" scams that frequently plague social media. On more than one occasion the Kroger Company has taken to Facebook to warn customers that these coupon offers are not an authorized promotion and to advise them not to visit sites promoting them: Facebook  These fake coupon and gift card offers are typically scams that promise rewards to anyone who follows a simple three-step process: Share the message on Facebook, leave a comment, and like the message. These three steps ensure the scam message circulates to thousands of people on Facebook. @SocialNewsDaily That offer is a scam -- we are not affiliated w/ that website. Our Digital Coupons can be found at https://t.co/rvO3m1IXTf. @SocialNewsDaily https://t.co/rvO3m1IXTf  Kroger Support (@KrogerSupport) October 15, 2014 October 15, 2014  Previous versions of the scam, for example, featured a similar message that invaded Facebook promising a $250 gift card. The message redirected to a web page that was not affiliated with Kroger despite the fact that it was adorned with the company's logo:  This page instructed shoppers to follow "three simple steps" in order to get a free gift card. Once the steps were completed, however, users were not greeted with a coupon code. Instead, they were asked to fill out a brief survey and provide personal information such as home address, telephone number, e-mail address, and date of birth. Users were also required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in subscription programs in order to obtain their "free" gift cards. Kroger has repeatedly warned their customers not to fall victims to this form of scam:   These fraudulent surveys are quite popular on Facebook, and if you frequently use that social network there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Patterson, Emily.  "Customer Survey Scam Lures Victims with Gift Card."
  Better Business Bureau.  4 July 2014. Critics of former U.S. President Donald Trump often share photographs in which he poses with his daughter Ivanka, allegedly behaving inappropriately towards her.One such photograph, shared online for years, purportedly showed her when she was a teenager, posing on a bed with her father. The photograph is authentic. It was featured in a 1995 issue of InStyle magazine. Therefore, we have rated the claim  The photo surfacedon X (formerly Twitter) inearly 2024 and has existed on various other social media platforms, includingFacebook, Imgur, Pinterest, Quora, and Reddit. Facebook Imgur Pinterest Quora Reddit   (X user @MarioVe69225752) TinEye reverse-image search results showed it has circulated online at least since 2016."Does [Trump] have any clue how this looks to strangers?" one Reddit user commentedon the image. reverse-image search results at least since 2016 commented Snopes reached out to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign to ask about the in-question image. We will update this report when, or if, we receive a response. It's worth noting that, in many early postswith the image, it was seemingly a photo of a printed photograph. "From the Trump family photo album," one X post claimed without evidence. in many early posts claimed Donald Trump and daughter Ivanka photographed for a Pretty Baby-esque publicity shoot in the '90s pic.twitter.com/3jMLTZTjAg pic.twitter.com/3jMLTZTjAg  Anna Biller (@missannabiller) October 17, 2016 October 17, 2016  We did notice that the photograph's background seemingly matched that of otherphotographs from inside Donald Trump's penthouse in New York (see image below). photographs   (X user @missannabiller, France24.com) After the initial publication of this article rating the claim "Unproven," a reader shared with us what appeared to be digital scans of pages from a printed article featuring the in-question photograph. The reader confirmed via email that they owned a physical copy of the article and had scanned the image. shared with us   (Email from Snopes' reader) We uploaded the reader's images into TinEye's reverse-image search. Using those results and Wayback Machine, an internet archive, we found the images indeed matched media that appeared in an articlepublished byInStyle magazine in December 1995. We tracked down that magazine'scover, which teased the article, "at home with [...] Donald & Marla Trump." cover  Inside, the article with the in-question image was titled "Breakfast Above Tiffany's" and was written by Leslie Marshall, according to a 2015 post by InStyle. We were unable to locate a digital version of the entire magazine issue. 2015 post by InStyle   (Wayback Machine) Based on the images, Firooz Zahedi photographed the Trumps. We reached out to Zahedi  as well as Marshall, the article's author  for more information about the 1995 piece. Firooz Zahedi Zahedi confirmed via email that he took the in-question photograph for a 1995 issue of the In Style magazine. He said he has "not given the right to anyone else to publish it," so whoever put it online first "scanned it from the article." We will update this report when, or if, we receive a response from Marshall. Two books by Gwenda Blair about the Trump family ("The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders" and "Donald Trump: The Candidate") cited the 1995 article by InStyle. The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders Donald Trump: The Candidate   (Google Books) This was not the first rumor about Donald Trump and his children that Snopes has fact-checked. For instance, in January 2024, we confirmeda photo authentically depicted Donald Trump with two of his children, Ivanka and Eric, alongside Jeffrey Epstein in 1993. We alsoinvestigatedrumors that Donald Trump said he'd like to date Ivanka anddebunked a false claim that Ivanka once said she would "mace" him if he wasn't her father. confirmed investigated debunked Evon, Dan. "Did Donald Trump Say He'd Like to Date His Daughter?" Snopes, 10 July 2015, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-date-daughter/. ---. "Ivanka Trump Said If Donald Trump Wasn't Her Father, She Would 'Mace' Him?" Snopes, 25 Nov. 2016, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ivanka-trump-said-if-donald-trump-wasnt-her-father-she-would-mace-him/. Mahdawi, Arwa. "Donald Trump Was Allegedly Creepy about Ivanka  but Will His Fans Care?" The Guardian, 1 July 2023. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/01/donald-trump-ivanka-miles-taylor-book-claims. PerryCook, Taija. "Were Trump and 2 of His Kids, Ivanka and Eric, Seen with Jeffrey Epstein in '93?" Snopes, 3 Jan. 2024, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-ivanka-and-eric-with-epstein/.
 February 20, 2024: This article was updated to include a response from photographer Firooz Zahedi to Snopes' inquiry about the photo.  February 21, 2024: This article was updated to include additional information from the reader who sent Snopes digital scans of the printed article featuring the in-question photograph. In the summer of 2020, readers sent Snopes multiple inquiries about widely shared social media posts claiming that PepsiCo, the company that makes Pepsi, had donated $100 million to the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. In May 2020, a Black man named George Floyd died in police custody in Minneapolis, Minnesota, prompting a renewed wave of nationwide and international protests against racial injustice and police brutality. The BLM movement spearheaded much of that protest and debate, and in response, critics of the protests targeted BLM, often deploying false, exaggerated, or distorted allegations.  targeted During the summer of 2020, those critics sought to target several major U.S. companies, including PepsiCo, by claiming they had each donated substantial amounts to BLM. Social media posts in July read that: Social media posts BankofAmerica Gave them $1 BILLIONPepsiCo - $400 MILLIONWalmart - $100 MILLIONApple - $100 MILLIONComcast - $100 MILLION Right-wing activist Charlie Kirk alluded to an incident in St. Louis, Missouri, in June 2020, in which local residents Mark and Patricia McCloskey pointed firearms at protesters, writing on Twitter:  pointed firearms writing "In America if terrorists show up to your home, you get charged for showing that you own a weapon after they tear down your gate. And the thugs who entered on to your property get $400 million from PepsiCo. as a reward." In August 2020, social media users focused on PepsiCo, and the amount of the company's purported donation to BLM shifted from $400 million to $100 million, for reasons that are unclear, but may have resulted from a misreading of earlier posts that claimed Walmart, Apple, and Comcast had each donated $100 million to BLM.  A typical version of the post claimed that: "PEPSI JUST GAVE BLM A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS... PLEASE BOYCOTT PEPSI!" typical version post claimed   The August posts that claimed PepsiCo had given $100 million to BLM appeared to have been based on the earlier claims that the company had donated $400 million. In turn, those earlier posts stemmed from an announcement the company made in June 2020. On June 16, PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta wrote: wrote "Today, I am announcing the next step in PepsiCos journey for racial equality: a more than $400 million set of initiatives over five years to lift up Black communities and increase Black representation at PepsiCo. These initiatives comprise a holistic effort for PepsiCo to walk the talk of a leading corporation and help address the need for systemic change." Specifically, the company pledged to spend, over the course of five years: We asked PepsiCo whether it, or any charitable entities associated with the company, had donated to groups or projects associated with BLM, including the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the movement. We also requested a list of any recipients of charitable disbursements from the $400 million investment announced in June. We did not receive a response in time for publication. However, since $415 million was reserved for supporting Black-owned suppliers, restaurants, and small businesses, as well as starting a fellowship program, it was therefore mathematically impossible for $100 million to have been pledged for BLM. The only component of that spending that appears to leave room for any involvement with BLM is the $6.5 million reserved for "community impact grants to address systemic issues." So even if that entire portion of funding went to BLM, it would still constitute only a small fraction of the $100 million and $400 million claimed in social media posts in the summer of 2020. None of those who promoted those claims presented any evidence that linked PepsiCo's pledged investment with specific, named organizations or projects associated with the broader BLM movement or the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. The claim that PepsiCo had donated $100 million (or $400 million) to BLM appeared to be based on a basic misunderstanding of the company's June 2020 announcement  or the false assumption that any investment associated with the Black community or rectifying racial injustice must be directly connected to BLM.  Laguarta, Ramon.  "Pepsico's Journey to Racial Equality: A Message from Our CEO."
  PepsiCo. 16 June 2020. [Collected on the Internet, 2001] To anyone with love and respect for life: In New York there is a Japanese who sells bonsai-kittens". Sounds like fun huh? NOT! These animals are squeezed into a bottle. Their urine and feces are removed through probes. They feed them with a kind of tube. They feed them chemicals to keep their bones soft and flexible so the kittens grow into the shape of the bottle. The animals will stay their as long as they live. They can't walk or move or wash themselves. Bonsai-kittens are becoming a fashion in New York and Asia. See this horror at: https://www.bonsaikitten.com https://www.bonsaikitten.com Please sign this email in protest against these tortures. If you receive an email with over 500 names, please send a copy to: anacheca@hotmail.com. From there this protest will be sent to USA and Mexican animal protection organizations.  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] FOR EVERYONE WHO LOVES ANIMALS A site that we were able to shut last year has returned. We  have to try to shut it down again! A Japanese man in New York breeds and sells kittens that are called  BONSAI CATS. That would sound cute, if it weren't kittens that were put in to little bottles after being given a muscle relaxant and then locked up for the rest of their lives!! The cats are fed through a straw and have a small tube for their faeces. The skeleton of the cat will take on the form of the bottle as the kitten grows. The cats never get the opportunity to move. They are used as original and exclusive souvenirs. These are the latest trends in New York, China, Indonesia and New Zealand. If you think you can handle it, view https://www.bonsaikitten.com and have a look at the methods being used to put these little kittens into bottles. This petition needs 500 names, so please put your one name on it!!! Copy the text into a new email and put your name on the bottom, then send it to everyone you know. If you notice that there are 500 names on the list, please send it to: anacheca@hotmail.com Bonsai kittens are not real. Nobody is making bonsai kittens. Nobody is selling equipment to help people make bonsai kittens.  Nobody is instructing people in the "lost Eastern art of sealing kittens inside rectilinear jars."   When it was running (the site is no longer active), the Bonsai Kitten web site was a joke, not an actual promotion for the making of bonsai kittens. Investigations by law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, determined no real cats were harmed in the creation of the pictures used on the Bonsai Kitten web site. Signing a petition to shut down the Bonsai Kitten web site will not prevent any kittens from being harmed, because no kittens were harmed in the first place.  It was all a joke, one which some say was in terribly poor taste. If that was your reaction, take comfort in the knowledge that many others thought the same. How could you have known the Bonsai Kitten site was a satire despite its lack of "This is a joke!" banners emblazoned across it? Satire doesn't always announce itself as such (some feel that would ruin its humor), so in cases like this, one dusts off the common sense and aims it at the problem: The process described is impossible: animals so treated would die long before they could be "molded."  The web site offers no way to purchase the materials advertised.  A real commercial enterprise wouldn't build consumer interest through a flashy web site then fail to offer anything for sale.  (The site does include a page of "Helpful Tools & Supplies" but provides no form through which they can be ordered.)   The "Bonsai Kitten" site displays no actual pictures of the finished product.  There are plenty of pictures of kittens in jars which can comfortably accommodate them (cats are quite elastic and can fit into very small spaces without discomfort), but there are no photographs of molded kittens on display. The cruel.com web site offers an article entitled "Happiness is a Rectilinear Kitten," its comprehensive history of the furor and media coverage generated by the Bonsai Kitten web site throughout its first year of existence. history Emery, Theo.  "Animal Lovers Not Laughing About Joke Internet Site 'Bonsai Kitten.'"
  Associated Press.  22 February 2001. 

 Hoffmann, Bill.  "Furor Over 'Bonsai Kitten' Site."
  New York Post.  12 February 2001.

 Jacobson, Jennifer.  "Created at MIT, A 'Bonsai Kitten' Web Site Stirs Animal Lovers' Passions."
  The Chronicle of Higher Education.  21 February 2001.
 Kornblum, Janet.  "Bonsai Kitten Site Brings an Animal-Rights Roar."
  USA Today.  20 February 2001  (p. D3). In perhaps one of the worst miscalculations in modern political history, Adolf Hitler was appointed chancellor of Germany in January 1933 in the hopes that he could successfully form a coalition government amidst a collection of competing minority parties (including his own Nazi Party) and that the worst impulses of Hitler and the Nazis could be "controlled" or "tamed" once they bore responsibility for leading the national government (rather than criticizing others' administration of it).   But shortly after Hitler's swearing-in as chancellor on Jan. 30, 1933, the Nazis began to systematically suspend civil liberties and eliminate political opposition, with the passage of the Enabling Act two months later effectively establishing Hitler's government as a legal dictatorship that could issue decrees without the involvement of the German parliament (Reichstag) or president. Enabling Act One example of the navet that held sway in Germany at that time caught the attention of Americans in February 2020, in the wake of impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald Trump.  That example took the form of a snippet from a purported 1933 Wall Street Journal article which was widely circulated via social media:  This article did in fact appear in the Feb. 2, 1933, edition of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ).  Under the headline "Berlin Views Hitler Calmly," the report from the WSJ's Berlin bureau briefly referenced contemporaneous assessments of Hitler -- that "there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power," that Hitler would not "disrupt the nation's affairs," that it was "not believed" Hitler would "accomplish a change in the constitution" -- and that a rise in stock prices indicated public confidence in these assessments:     Rise in Stocks Reflects Confidence He Will Not Disrupt Nation's Affairs Berlin is settling down to pass judgment on political developments. Politicians, economists and bankers declare there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power. Consequently, it is not believed that Hitler will accomplish a change in the constitution or that [Reich Minister of Economics Alfred] Hugenberg will bring about a general reduction of interest rates. The government wants to obtain an adjournment of the Reichstag for several months, but it is questionable whether the Centre [Party] will approve of such action. After calmly dismissing the threat that Hitler posed (and which would come to pass in just a few short months) the article provided a short summary of the "considerable gains in stocks" that supposedly indicated good times were ahead under the new government -- including, ironically, a rise in the price of stock in I.G. Farben,  the German chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas later used to kill millions of Jews during the Holocaust: I.G. Farben The Boerse closed with considerable gains in stocks. Rhenish Coal advanced 7, Mannesmann Tube 5, I.G. Farben 4 and Rhine-Westphalia Electric 4. Bonds registered average losses of 2 points. Common stocks were favored as being less susceptible to talk of devaluing the currency or of other inflationary experiments. Furthermore, profits are expected to increase for many industries from expanded public works projects. The Wall Street Journal.  "Berlin Views Hitler Calmly."
  1 February 1933  (p. 12) Claim:   The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is seizing bank accounts from innocent American citizens under civil forfeiture laws. : Civil forfeiture laws enable law enforcement agents and the government to seize the assets of Americans who are neither guilty nor even suspected of any wrongdoing.      Civil forfeiture laws are new or exclusive to the IRS.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] Just read a Facebook post.  It was an article regarding the IRS seizing bank accounts of innocent American citizens who have done nothing criminally wrong.  Inspite of the problems this has caused individuals the IRS seems relatively unconcerned except they want to collect money for whatever reasons.  Is this true?  Does the IRS have the right to just take the money of American citizens from their accounts? Are they an acting collections agency for the government now? I found this article a tad disturbing to say the least. Thank you for amy information you might have regarding this article and subject matter. Origins:  On 5 October 2014, the issue of civil forfeiture  and its effects on American citizens entered the spotlight after HBO host John Oliver addressed the matter at length on his show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. During the segment, Oliver and guest Jeff Goldblum focused on seemingly arbitrary, unfair, and corrupt civil forfeiture practices allegedly perpetrated by law enforcement agents in a number of jurisdictions.  Oliver's civil forfeiture segment sparked a number of conversations about the laws surrounding confiscation of assets under related laws. Then, on 25 October 2014, the New York Times profiled an individual who claimed the IRS had seized more than $30,000 in assets from her checking account under laws meant to ensnare drug cartels and organized criminals: For almost 40 years, Carole Hinders has dished out Mexican specialties at her modest cash-only restaurant. For just as long, she deposited the earnings at a small bank branch a block away  until last year, when two tax agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had seized her checking account, almost $33,000. The Internal Revenue Service agents did not accuse Ms. Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes  in fact, she has not been charged with any crime. Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report. Using a law designed to catch drug traffickers, racketeers and terrorists by tracking their cash, the government has gone after run-of-the-mill business owners and wage earners without so much as an allegation that they have committed serious crimes. The government can take the money without ever filing a criminal complaint, and the owners are left to prove they are innocent. Many give up. It seems Hinders' run-in with the IRS was triggered by her practice of keeping deposits under the mandated reporting threshold of $10,000. Deposits that exceed $10,000 must be reported to the government under the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, but Hinders told the Times that she believed large deposits created unnecessary paperwork for bank employees: Bank Secrecy Act My mom had told me if you keep your deposits under $10,000, the bank avoids paperwork. I didn't actually think it had anything to do with the I.R.S.   Former federal prosecutor David Smith, an expert on such seizures, told the paper that the practice of civil forfeiture has shifted to focus on individuals not historically targeted by such laws: They're going after people who are really not criminals. They're middle-class citizens who have never had any trouble with the law.   Richard Weber, Chief of Criminal Investigation at the IRS, described the seizures as "structuring" related, referring to suspicion triggered by a large number of deposits near the $10,000 threshold for reporting under the Bank Secrecy Act. In response to sudden interest in the IRS's policies regarding "structuring cases," Weber issued a statement indicating the IRS will curtail its seizure activities in cases where no crime is suspected: statement After a thorough review of our structuring cases over the last year and in order to provide consistency throughout the country (between our field offices and the U.S. attorney offices) regarding our policies, I.R.S.-C.I. will no longer pursue the seizure and forfeiture of funds associated solely with "legal source" structuring cases unless there are exceptional circumstances justifying the seizure and forfeiture and the case has been approved at the director of field operations (D.F.O.) level. While the act of structuring  whether the funds are from a legal or illegal source  is against the law, I.R.S.-C.I. special agents will use this act as an indicator that further illegal activity may be occurring. This policy update will ensure that C.I. continues to focus our limited investigative resources on identifying and investigating violations within our jurisdiction that closely align with C.I.'s mission and key priorities. The policy involving seizure and forfeiture in "illegal source" structuring cases will remain the same.   The IRS is just one of several agencies engaging in civil forfeiture, and Oliver's segment also addressed its application by local and regional law enforcement:  Prior to Oliver's segment and the Times' profile, civil forfeiture practices had been extensively profiled in the media: In general, you needn't be found guilty to have your assets claimed by law enforcement; in some states, suspicion on a par with "probable cause" is sufficient. Nor must you be charged with a crime, or even be accused of one. Unlike criminal forfeiture, which requires that a person be convicted of an offense before his or her property is confiscated, civil forfeiture amounts to a lawsuit filed directly against a possession, regardless of its owner's guilt or innocence. One result is the rise of improbable case names such as United States v. One Pearl Necklace and United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins. "The protections our Constitution usually affords are out the window," Louis Rulli, a clinical law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a leading forfeiture expert, observes. A piece of property does not share the rights of a person. There's no right to an attorney and, in most states, no presumption of innocence. Owners who wish to contest often find that the cost of hiring a lawyer far exceeds the value of their seized goods. Washington, D.C., charges up to twenty-five hundred dollars simply for the right to challenge a police seizure in court, which can take months or even years to resolve. Although the IRS has pledged to restrict its civil forfeiture activity to mainly "illegal source" cases, the practice is not limited to the tax agency and remains legal. Last updated:  28 October 2014    Stillman, Sarah.  "Taken."   The New Yorker.  12 August 2013.