Jesse speaks the truth again.

I've largely quit listening to Public Radio because it should be renamed Mideast News. Where is the national debate on things that matter to the (former) middle-class, working-poor, poor, and disenfranchised in this country?

Politicians had their head in the sand when it was being set up -- and they still do now. Clearly, it's a partnership/safe-zone set up between the politicians and MSM. Politicians are expert at evading questions, and they're also expert at answering alternative questions (Rumsfeld gained notoriety as being able to ask himself questions, saving media the trouble of going through that now-empty ritual). So while the MSM is to blame here, so are the politicians. They could have brought up any issue they wanted, sneaking it in between the lines.

Tell me again how a deregulated financial industry benefits 'all'?

It's trickle-up economics, silly.

It's pretty obvious that having media whores moderate the debates will insure that the real questions facing Americas today will not be asked. Our whole election process is a joke. Millions of hours and billions of dollars wasted as the country is slowly dying.
Hoa binh

Why is it so hard to believe that we want some substance from our media? We are choking on the treacle that comes forth nightly. Oh where, oh where is Walter Cronkite? Give me more Bill Moyers, he's about the only one.

Growth vs. sustainability. Why would we need growth if we had economic democracy and a sustainable world resource/population ratio? Growth has brought us global warming and Jesse is still falling for realism.

why don't we just start using all these resources that are right in front of our faces.....oh yeah, and treating each other as worth a diddily....

there are a whole slew of solutions, but an older generation is holding on just a bit too hard....and doesn't realize that they are getting left behind...

IAH,
Ken Hausle

I'm pretty sure my two girls and the many more of the younger generation are going to judge "our" behavior by the choices that we make during this most crucial time....don't you think so?

Peace,
Ken Hausle

Ezeflyer has it right on: our infatuation with "growth" is exactly what has gotten us into this dilemma. Growth is not what will get us out. What is this thing we have for continual unending growth anyhow? What are we--some sort of fungus that must needs spread everywhere and consume everything? If we look at this critically and leave behind the "traditional, accepted" paradigms on how economies should be run, we can easily see that growth can only be sustained for a limited time when one is faced with limited resources (see Rifkin's book Entropy). We aren't required to use up every resource as fast as we find it--in fact, that's incredibly short sighted. Okay, it's the course we've been following but I don't see that we are exactly profiting from it, except for the short term. The Club of Rome published a book awhile ago (years ago!) called "Limits to Growth." Maybe I should send a copy to Jesse Jackson.

Its coming folks. Gather your children around you and tell them you love them.

Instead of giving them more "stuff" this Christmas. Show them what its like to be courageous, honest, inquisitive, trustworthy and dependable.

They'll need every memory of goodness to hang onto, after we are gone.

You know what offers hope to me....it is easy (and it feels good) to tell your children that you love them. Same goes for working with your neighbors.

One theory might be that we have spread "to our capability for fitting in". So now, it is just a matter of reconsidering and better understanding how we "really" "fit" in this grand blue planet.....

Peace is what i think we need. I suppose it may sound "goofy", but nonetheless, it seems obvious to me.

Well, this has just got to be it for awhile. I do not want to outlast my welcome.

Peace,
Ken Hausle

This was bound to happen. The Boomers outsourced/offshored the cost of production to places where labor costs are a fraction of that in the US, in doing so they devalued the earning power of the X/Y-Gen, and then expected them to have Boomer-comparable purchasing power. They were in a state of severe denial, or perhaps they were happily looking at their rising stock portfolios (perhaps largely a product of outsourced/foreign labor at this point).

The cost of labor is a consequence of the cost of living, which is a consequence of whether the real estate market reflects genuine supply/demand prices -- or whether it reflects criminally inflated prices due to speculation, usury (hidden in monthly amortization), widespread folly.

The criminal part is that the boom-bust cycle is one thing if we're talking about gold, lumber, the stock market, etc. It's something else altogether when we're talking about a roof over people's heads.

With no roof then we have no choice but to gather in the streets.

So on second thought, we better keep a few in their homes, so they're manageable. Some extra police with riot gear, extra room in the new jails. Where they watch the same fox news.

Hey Jesse ... I voted for you in '88. I wish I could do it again this year!

Unscrupously ripping people off is the American Way, the media is sensitive to this situtation, by occasionally reminding us "it's those fools who got in over their heads who are to blame." Even now we are seeing a crime wave of refinance rip off artists helping to flip people right out of their homes at a higher velocity. It's punishment dished out from above. There isn't any debate about this at all, the rich are always protected. If you're a victim of sub-prime violence, you're on your own: We're sorry you needed a place to live, you can't be permitted to afford it during these unsteady times.

Ever notice how if one person lights up a cigarette, the other smokers soon follow? I think the media doesn't want to discuss the housing crisis for fear that people will react all at once, potentially begin a run on the banks, etc. If the average American really understood the depth of US debt, the lack of US industry, the orchestration that has sent key manufacturing overseas; if they really understood the tax cuts under Bush or the extent of $ squandered on this war to unscrupulous profiteers, and how that's left the budget an empty cabinet with no goodies left for things that matter... IF people knew, they wouldn't be sitting around watching the TV shows that numb them. The use of MSM to mesmerize while the great heist got underway is a spellbinding tale of depravity on an epoch scale. How does it feel to be fleeced?

The banks themselves have some creative leeway as to what they choose to do with foreclosed properties. Rather than lose the entire loan, they can change the terms to accept a smaller loss by revaluing a home to its new devalued worth. Or they can waive the interest increases that are killing budgets and keep the loan on the books at the lower intro rates. They have more choices about how to handle their losses than the homeowners do.

I'd like to add that I'm sick to death of hearing that tax increases are wrong. Not all tax "increases" are the same. RESTORING taxation to the rich and to corporations is an "increase" when compared to what they paid last year, but is not an increase when viewed against what they had to pay in the 60s-70s. Clinton even said that subjecting higher wages to social security taxes would be an "increase", but making the rich foot some of the bill for social services in this country merely puts them on the same footing as the working poor--that's the kind of tax increases that are direly needed right now. Don't worry--the rich will be able to pay them and still put groceries on the table.

American has become little more than a debtors prison between housing/mortgage debt, college/grad school debt, car debt, taxes/federal reserve debt and healthcare debt. Debt is the only growth industry in America it seems.

Ezeflyer wrote...Why would we need growth if we had economic democracy and a sustainable world resource/population ratio?

ncycat wrote...What is this thing we have for continual unending growth anyhow?

Growth is the life blood of capitalism. An investor doesn't risk his/her money for a company to loose money, or maintain it's current level of revenue and profit. If the company can't pay a dividend or show price appreciation in it's stock, the investor has lost money. Since no rational person will do that, there is no capital to replace worn-out equipment, modernize equipment, or conduct R&D to produce new products that use less energy, pollute less and are safer.

A company could do all of this with retained earnings; however, that might take a long time. A competitor who is growing can attract investors and do the same thing much faster, beat the competitor to market, probably with a superior product since they have more money for R&D, and realize economies of scale the smaller, slower competitor can't match. Game, set and match, the smaller company that lacks capital goes out of business.

Unless we are willing to part company with our Capitalist economic system, we are stuck with the "growth imperative." Good luck selling that to the American public which has been tricked into believing that Capitalism is not only the "best" way, but the only way to meet our economic needs.

SIOUXROSE---been thinking about removing my modest savings and totally paying off my little house here in the sticks. At least then, no bank can take it, if the proverbial kaka hits the fan.

Are you suggesting that this might be a real good idea? I know it's a house of cards ( not mine) the economy, but been going on some of the (channeled) information indicating that the real shift in how we conduct "business" i.e. currency, will be radically transformed in a few years. Is it sooner rather than later? Guess I need to consult my own oracle---my own HIgher Self

The economic crisis that is upon us is intimately connected to the obscene and growing inequality of wealth and power in the US and in the World. That includes the disparity between people who are making the things we consume for 20 cents per hour and the CEO's of the multinationals who are making $100,000 an hour. A point comes where this global economy can't generate a demand for the stuff that's being produced. And this is all connected with the Middle East - as the US and the EU pour more and more money and effort into "keeping the lid on" in an empire that's going unstable.

Damn straight we need to get the debate focused on these economic issues; that's where the shoe pinches. That's where the failure of the system to meet peoples' most basic needs becomes apparent. We need to lead on these issues, or we leave the field to well-funded demagogues and fakirs like Guiliani and Clinton. And we simply cannot hope the pundits, people whose livelihood depends on their not understanding will facilitate this.

We are getting good at talking to each other on sites like CD, but to reach the tens of millions we need a different kind of access. We can keep the pressure up and take whatever access we can get, as Dennis Kucinich is doing so brilliantly, but it will never be enough. We need our own mass-circulation media.

If we could produce a leaflet and 100,000 people all produced 500 copies and went out and handed them out we would have reached 50 million people. That admittedly is technology from a bygone era and we are nowhere close to having that kind of organization or commitment. Any other bright ideas out there? Networks of low power FM stations playing music to popular tastes with news and analysis mixed in? What? How do we reach the people?

It's going to take a while but that's where we need to go.

Lets have a real debate, let DemocracyNow be the host..Let Amy ask them a few questions! What-ya think? What about it Amy?

Rev Jackson has one thing right -- this needs to be a major part of public discourse. Our entire economic situation needs to be a major part of public discourse (as many of you have eloquently stated).

However, I question his motives. This statement in particular is interesting "We need action. Initiatives now are needed to save homeowners headed to foreclosure."

For years, residents of inner city neighborhoods (often Black-American) have found themselves in a seemingly endless cycle of poverty. Often they've endured drugs, crime, and poor education. While Rev. Jackson made efforts to increase Black-American presence in corporate America and sports franchises, he and his organization made very few efforts to directly assist people in breaking this cycle.

Now that many of these people have tried to change their situation but are caught up in bad loans (often due to a lack of knowledge regarding home buying and the loan process), Rev. Jackson says "We need action." I suppose by "action' and "initiatives" he means gov't action and initiatives to assist people in avoiding foreclosure. Why is it that Rev. Jackson made little effort to help these people get off gov't assistance (for example, helping set up centers to teach about the home buying process) but when these people made the effort themselves, and are having difficulty, he swoops in and says let get you some gov't assistance? Does he ever want these people to get off gov't assistance?

When I was growing up my mother would work 3 jobs before taking taking gov't assistance. We celebrated when someone no longer needed aid from Uncle Sam.

Not that gov't assistance is bad or those using it are less than anyone else. That is far from the truth. It's just that from my experience -- past and present -- many people want to move beyond it and I like helping them do so. Rev. Jackson could have done much more on the front end of this situation to avoid the current crisis but he was absent. I sincerely hope he isn't using the struggles of real people to simply push a political agenda.

When I was born the US population was 132 million, when my daughter was born it was 180 million and today it is over 300 million. Does that tell you anything?
Does anyone understand exponential growth? Of course we are going to run out of everything, no matter what we do ,if we don't control the population. Remember the one about the lily pad that will doubles in size every day. In thirty days it will cover the whole pond. On the 29th day it covers half he pond. On the 28th day only a quarter of the pond. Where would you say we are at this time?

And this really is a major part of the problem. How on earth are Americans supposed to understand their world when the media has its head buried so deeply up its own (corporate) patootie?

Like most other things, it is incumbent on us to inform our fellow citizens as much as possible. How we do that is up to each of us, but it seems like something we should just be resigned to do.

STAR OF THE SEA: Jupiter is the planet of expansion. Its intended cosmic counterpart is Saturn. Jupiter tends to move towards the idea of unlimited growth, whereas Saturn speaks of being conservative. Smart people with well-balanced ethics tend to have a positive alignment between Jupiter and Saturn in their birth charts, and it helps if these planets also connect with their natal sun or Mercury.

Jupiter enters Capricorn, the sign of big business (and portends all that money that can and will be made from selling fear, i.e. surveillance technologies) beginning on December 18 and holding for a year. 2008 looks to be a highly conservative year as no element is more earthbound and materialistic than earth and that element gets the lion's share of powerful planetary impacts during 2008. Capricorn is the sign opposite the US/Cancer, and suggests that our fiscal rubber band will be stretched to the max. Those with $ to invest will do well in the autumn of 2008 as earth is the pragmatic element, and Jupiter (Capricorn) accords with Saturn (Virgo) in earth at that time. This is why i don't think a recession will be ALLOWED until 2009 of after. Things will be buoyed up at least till the election.

The planets get FIERCE at the end of 2009 and into 2010. Uranus Aries returns to its position (84 year orbit) during the great depression, and at that time it made the extremely difficult square to Pluto then in Cancer. Pluto will now make that square, this time from Capricorn. I do think conditions that look to involve enormous challenge begin at the end of 2009 and grow.

I have talked to several people with $ and investments, one has read The Shock Doctrine and we all realize we're looking at a new animal, that the old rules cannot work given the factors at play. I live very simply... I have lived on $900 a month for the past 5 years. The men around me know how to fish and hunt. I figure I have better odds keeping a good figure and getting a guy to "hunt and gather," then learning these macho skills myself. Only time will tell if the strategy pays off, but meanwhile, I bike, swim, do Yoga and keep fit! (Which also helps to leverage the fact I have no medical insurance.)

Look at it this way: if there were absolutely NO CREDIT available to ANYONE in the purchasing of a home, there would be an instant revolution.

You'd probably have 75+ million homeless, the price of property would immediately fall to a fraction of its current bloated rate, and people wouldn't be spending 60-70%+ of their monthly income on housing.

The usury "industry" is largely to blame here. We should take any opportunity we get to argue for lower interests rates, for anyone.

Tijuana,

I believe Jesse has called for a chance for homeowners to renegotiate their mortgages at lower rates, (non-ARM), etc. The crux of the problem is runaway usury in our society, the price of housing is based on how much everyone is willing to take the shaft from the big lenders. The problem is that most people have a comfort level far beyond mine. Amortization over 30 (even 50 now) mortgages hides intense usury. If people could renegotiate at much lower interest (like under 3%), their equity would not suffer -- but their monthly bill would likely go down quite a bit (especially if they've just bought in the past few years). Only entity to lose would be that which is going to lose anyway, and that which has the most to lose: the giant lending institutions.

There will be a downward devaluation either way, no question about that. But we may as well take this opportunity to point out the root cause: predatory usury.