Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe “No BAILOUTS Act”
There is nothing more frustrating than listening to defenders of fundamentally flawed bailout plan that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and top Democratic and Republican leaders failed in passing Monday must be "saved" by Democrats who recognized when the House voted on Monday that this was the wrong response.
Pelosi's plan is based on Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson's wrongheaded scheming. Democrat leaders may have tinkered a bit with the Bush aide's proposal, but certainly not enough to make it acceptable -- let alone wisely enacted.
Oregon Congressman Peter DeFazio says, correctly, that the problem with the Democratic speaker's bailout measure, which the House rejected by a 228-205 vote - with progressive Democrats joining fiscally conservative Republicans to say "no" - is that it "is still built on the Paulson-Bush premise."
DeFazio, a Democratic dissenter, says that the bill Pelosi tried to get the House to back Monday demands that taxpayers take on too much of the risk which creating openings for Wall Streeters to pocket millions (perhaps billions) in federal dollars. While the Pelosi plan may put some limits on so-called golden parachutes, it still allows for what DeFazio describes as "camouflage parachutes"--hidden payouts to the corporate CEOs who created the crisis.
"We can do better," says DeFazio. "We should start again on a new package."
That's exactly what the Oregon populist is doing with a new proposal, the "No BAILOUTS Act" (Bringing Accountability, Increased Liquidity, Oversight, and Upholding Taxpayer Security). Introduced Tuesday with co-sponsorship from some of the most outspoken critics of the Paulson machinations - including Ohio Democrat Marcy Kaptur, a leader of the anti-bailout movement in Congress - the measure would impose a securities tax equivalent to one quarter of one percent of profits and empower the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to deal more effectively with bank failures.
The plan is based on a proposal made last week by former FDIC chair William Isaac, who recalled that in the 1980s Congress enacted a "net worth certificate" program - which allowed the federal agency to shore up the capital of weak banks to give them more time to resolve their problems - and the FDIC resolved a $100 billion insolvency in savings banks for a total cost of less than $2 billion.
"It was a big success and could work in the current climate," argued Isaac.
The chair of the FDIC during Ronald Reagan's first term explained that that:
If we were to (1) implement a program to ease the fears of depositors and other general creditors of banks; (2) keep tight restrictions on short sellers of financial stocks; (3) suspend fair-value accounting (which has contributed mightily to our problems by marking assets to unrealistic fire-sale prices); and (4) authorize a net worth certificate program, we could settle the financial markets without significant expense to taxpayers.Say Congress spends $700 billion of taxpayer money on the loan purchase proposal. What do we do next? If, however, we implement the program suggested above, we will have $700 billion of dry powder we can put to work in targeted tax incentives if needed to get the economy moving again.
The banks do not need taxpayers to carry their loans. They need proper accounting and regulatory policies that will give them time to work through their problems.
DeFazio, Kaptur and their allies essentially agree.
So, too, does the powerful Service Employees International Union, which has endorsed DeFazio's proposal.
"We finally have a plan that will restore confidence in the financial markets without writing a blank check to the same Wall Street banks and CEOs who got us into this mess," said SEIU President Andy Stern. "This is an important, short-term solution that protects taxpayers and their savings accounts. To revive the economy over the long-term, we must address rising unemployment, stagnant wages, the healthcare crisis, and a tax system that is tilted in favor of the wealthy."
160 Comments so far
Show AllI don't share your progressive views on most issues but on this one I do.
This not about being a conservative versus being a progressive or being a Republican versus being a Democrat; this issue is about the ordinary citizens of our nation standing up to an arrogant condescending elite that wants to steal from us. This is about us slapping down both Barack Obama and John McCain.
After last nights Senate vote last night I would encourage you all to contact the presidential candidates of both major political parties and let them know you will be voting for a third party candidate. Vote for anyone, Ralph Nader if that is what it takes. But for god’s sake don’t vote for either Barack Obama or John McCain!
Now here are two links. The first link is the recorded roll call vote on Monday. The second link is to the congressional staffers. Some the email addresses are not valid and you will return notifying you of the error. But many of those addresses are valid.
Don’t vent on a stupid Message Board.
SPAM the CONGRESS INSTEAD!
Let them receive so much negative email that their SERVERS CRASH!
SPAM the CONGRESS, CRASH the SERVERS!
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml
http://www.outsourcecongress.org/outsource/congress/schstaffers.html
This is the tip of the iceberg compared to what McCain would do. There is a vast difference in McCain and Obama. When are people going to learn not to throw their votes away on someone like Nader, while you are having your little righteous snit-fit because the world doesn't exactly fit your vision? Get real.
Oh, who gets more money from Wall St. Obama or McCain, hint his name starts with O...
http://www.counterpunch.org/martens05052008.html
http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/4517
Now I may vote for Obama to keep Palin from being near the nuclear trigger but it is not under the delusion that Dims will do ANYTHING good for poor or middle class people or the environment. The do nothing 2006 Dim Congress who did NOT filibuster to stop the war is proof enough of that to me, as is Bill Clinton's sorry record of starving a million people, bombing Serbia, ending welfare "as we know it," promoting "salvage logging" of old growth forests, and putting hundreds of thousands of non violent drug offenders in prison.
First come up with a bail-out plan for all those people facing the loss of their homes and then, and only then, continue talking. Let the rats drown!
Like Iraq, the drumbeats are sounding, but there is no evidence. The MSM reports the one day loss, but not the recovery. The DOW is still well above 10,000 and climbing. What crisis? MSNBC had the gall last night to put on none other than Tom Delay, of all people - to claim that the whole crisis was brought on by poor (black) people with subprime mortgages. What a load of crap.
The 50% approval now claimed by certain congressmen is a lie. The total outrage of the middle class does not die overnight by the claim of making the bill 'better'. The commentary is controlled by the complicit mainstream media, and you see no mention of DeFazio's bill, Kaptur or Kucinich, as usual. The renaming of the bill from Bailout to "Rescue" is insulting to the intelligence of every American. If this is not stopped, we will be witnessing the greatest robbery in history - once again - as always, from the so-called middle-class to the ruling class. I will be calling and emailing all day, and expect to find the phone lines jammed and email servers down, so the denial and lies about voter compliance will continue unchecked. Remember - primary residences will not be renegotiable by bankruptcy judges, but second homes will be. Outrageous.
Well with Bush wanting to help his Wall Street friends I guess there isn't any money left over for a health care plan. Remember that was the hot topic a couple weeks ago and millions behind it about 3/4's of the US population talking about it and wanting it. Hell it almost got to a point Obama and McCain would have to answer questions about it.
This vote will be the end of the Empire of the United States of America. From now on they will have to phone China, and the rest to buy a bullet or tank or ship. Bush has done it and went out as the last King of the US Empire. It was a great country at one time and could have been a world leader in health, feeding the hungry or poor. No not the USA is wants to be remembered as the country that screwed itself so far in dept our grand kids will still be paying for this and other mistakes Bush made. THANK YOU G.W.Bush
i hope you all get ready to revolt. we, the people, of this country refuse to be railroaded by the senate like this. find every loophole you can to not pay your "fair share" of taxes. bail out yourself on credit cards, loans, etc. withdraw money from the banks...or have only tiny amounts in several banks. do not play the corporate game any more. it is not working for 'we the people.' this country is 'we the corporations.' we don't represent the working class whatsoever.
Look, I'd like to buy the U.S. but I'm having trouble putting a value on it. It seems to owe more money than it has which, in economic terms, makes it bankrupt.
Look, I'll offer 100,000 Australian dollars for the whole, stinking mess. Am I offering too much?
www.dangerouscreation.com
Actually, thats not how you value a company. You look at it's assets, not how much cash is in the bank, and it's earning potential. For a country, the assets are people, corporations, resources, land, buildings, infrastructure and production capacity, not to mention government assets like our military, intelligence, NASA, etc.
The US might be worth, if you could buy it all, 200 quadrillion. Our public and private debt is 60 trillion, and another 50 trillion in government obligations, so deduct 110 trillion, and you can have us for 189 quadrillion.
Money is created out of thin air, it is simply a medium of exchange. It has no intrinsic value in and of itself. It's not redeemable in gold or anything.
Don't listen to him. He's trying to drive the price up.
I'll give you a deed of trust by my hand for everything in the continental U.S. but MY property.
That should explain how much I think it's worth.:)
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” — John F. Kennedy
The down trodden, the masses and the proletariat have begun to erect and sharpen the guillotines
The Wall Street Aristocrats and Bourgeoisies in this New immerging World rob and ignore the down trodden masse sand the proletariat at their peril
It will be David and Goliath , Gulliver and the Lilliputians and finally the storming of the Bastille
Edward Bernays’s mind games are slowly being exposed for what they are.
It was Bernays who taught the ruling class how to manipulate the masses. He who was one of the first to manipulate public opinion using the psychology of the subconscious.
For their is an awaikening , they, the down trodden, the masses and the proletariat will not eat cake
You can't fight City Hall. Can you fight Capitol Hill? No way, Josey. They will win as they have always won. What is left to do, people?
Stop paying tax en mass,
surround Pentagon's recruiting office,
stop going to work on the next president's inauguration day,
vote for the Third presidential candidate or simply stop voting,
put a black ribbon on every lamp-post in the city,
stop buying mainstream newspaper,
i agree. let's do all this and what i suggested above. just stop playing 'the game' anymore. this game is what you are being "forced" to play to cope with this corrupt corporatized country.
i can hardly believe that so many senators en masse ignored the soundest advices from leading economists around the world.
The sellouts do what they do best!
Majority Leader Reid, a Nevada Democrat, exercised his authority to attach the bailout plan to an unrelated piece of legislation already on the Senate calendar, a bill that mandated equal treatment by healthcare insurers for mental and physical illnesses. This parliamentary maneuver allowed the Senate to evade the constitutional requirement that all spending legislation originate in the lower house.
read more: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/sena-o02.shtml
VOTE FOR BARAK McSAME!
Here's the bill's text [very large PDF]. Much has been added, but I'm already dozing-off trying to read through it--and it's quite long; it makes DeFazio's bill look like an ink blot by comparison. As I recall, back in the 1880-90s, before senators were directly elected, there were similar problems with this Millionaire's club that usurped pro-people legislation passed by the house or railroaded bills, like this one, the Hiouse had already rejected. This behavior led to the constitutional amendment that made senators directly elected. A literal interpretation of the Constitution would render this bill unconstitutional because only the House may initiate appropriation legislation.
Lots of lies coming from lots of senators.
$.$..$$$...$$$$$......;$$$$$$$$.......$$$$$$$$.......$$$$$$$.......$$$$$$$$
...........$.$.$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.......$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$>>>>>>...$
What a weird article coming from an industrial strengnth Obama-fawner.
I love the way the Dims reveal themselves. For over a year millions of Americans have been loosing their homes and the Democratic-Republicans have done nothing except amend the bankruptcy laws to make it harder for them. Then the Dims declared there isn't any money for single payer. Now within a week the Dims find and come running with $800,000,000,000.00 for the Wall Street bailout most Americans oppose. What a shame! One more sell out and one more thing on my list for DPAs that are dumb enough to try to explain and rationalize. Good luck DimWits.
The 74-25 vote saw both the Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and the Republican presidential candidate John McCain voting to approve the bailout.
A host of leading liberal Democrats joined in approving the bill, the largest single transfer of wealth to the financial elite in US history, including Democratic vice presidential candidate Joseph Biden, Hillary Clinton, the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, Majority Leader Harry Reid, Majority Whip Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer of New York, and Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer of California. Only a handful of Democrats opposed the bill, joined by about 20 conservative Republicans.
Barely 48 hours after the House defeated the bailout bill—at least in part because it is overwhelmingly unpopular with the American people—congressional leaders are now engaged in an anti-democratic effort to push the legislation through over mass opposition.
read more: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/sena-o02.shtml
This is a strong, logical argument to which I will subscribe. My comment has observational value to support this. What this article gave me was this Senatorial below the radar BULLSHIT. It never ends with these scumbags. Wanna see a response from Feinstein, Senator from the great state of California, my native state?
"Thank you for your letter expressing concern about Congress' consideration of a plan to meet our Nation's credit crisis with financial help from the Federal Government. This is a difficult situation for which there are no perfect solutions, and I would like to share my thoughts and concerns about this issue with you.
On September 19, 2008, Secretary of the Treasury Henry M. Paulson, Jr. announced a legislative proposal to use $700 billion to purchase illiquid mortgage-related assets from ailing financial institutions. Secretary Paulson's three-page proposal was a non-starter, and without critical changes it has no chance of approval from Congress.
This proposal would have given a blank check to an economic czar who would have been empowered to spend it without administrative oversight, legal requirements, or legislative review. Decisions made by the Treasury Secretary would be non-reviewable by any court, agency, or Congress. The proposal also lacked a requirement for regular reports to Congress on the status of the program. This was simply untenable.
Since this announcement, my offices have received thousands of comments from Californians like you concerned about how this action will affect them. Yet, I believe prudent action must be taken. The bill should include the following principles: a phase-in of funding; oversight, accountability and transparency; a mechanism allowing the Secretary of the Treasury to modify mortgages to prevent additional foreclosures; and a precise cap on executive compensation.
The current credit crisis affects all Americans. If action is not taken to stem the crisis, Americans risk losing their homes, jobs, personal savings, life insurance and more. Banks will cease to lend to businesses and homeowners, and credit will be increasingly difficult to come by for average Americans. I strongly believe that the consequences of failing to act now would be greater than not acting at all.
Attached please find a statement I recently made on the floor of the Senate expressing my feelings on this issue. Please know that I will keep your thoughts in mind as this situation unfolds.
Once again, thank you for writing. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. Best regards."
In 1986, before i moved to colorado, a wall street buddy of mine offered me a job selling bundled stock options to institutional investors --
he was nuts over it -- he said, "reagan deregulated this stuff, bundled stock options are now a 'prudent' investment -- everyone involved is going to get filthy rich -- the sky's the limit if you want it" (I turned down the offer, but think of all the people who jumped at it)
now that these people who sell junk securities are falling to earth, it's our job to put out a net??? incredible!!!
if people only knew the length and breadth of the derivatives market and all the stealing that has gone on day by day since Reagan -- wow!!!
just insane that they're doing this -- screwing the american public beyond belief, in front of everyone's nose, with most of the insanity of it plain as day and impossible to deny --
wild!!!!
“I think anybody who doesn’t think I’m smart enough to handle the job is underestimating.”
[George W. Bush]
Hi, I heard that some of those traders are making trillions not billions who were on the right side of the options called swaps on the mortgages. That is why the ones on the wrong side lost so much. They have lost way more than the amount of the mortgages.
Lets hope the House can come up with an intelligent bill that works for all instead of the few. It was a sad night in the Senate. Seventy four, know-it-all, arrogant Senators disregarded the wisdom of 200 economists from prestigious universities and said to hell with the opinions of the American public. It passed the bailout bill as presented by the Administration with a few tweaks; but generally, the bill designed by the banking industry and for the banking industry remained basically intact. No wonder Americans are completely frustrated over what has happened to our, so called, democracy.
Historian Howard Zinn explains in "A People's History of the United States" that the Continental Congress (a single legislative body in the early days of the republic) was split into two - the House and the Senate. While the standard interpretation is that this was done as part of a checks-and-balances scheme, Zinn explains that people were successful in lobbying a single body of Congress.
The purpose of the bicameral Congress is to thwart the people's will should democratic demands prove unstoppable. In the case of the proposed Wall Street bailout, you can see how this sort of thing is done.
Another tactic is to bring the same legislation up after people have moved on or become distracted. I think Congress will have a difficult time doing that, though. The fact that they are doing this in a election year shows the overt contempt for the people. Truly astounding.
-TIA
The main trouble is that everyone thinks he is right.
H.L. Mencken said: "There is always an easy solution to every human problem--neat,
plausible, and wrong.
Most of us are just worried that about still having a job and not loosing our savings.
"74-25? Vote in Senate as political cover is given to those that need it. And now it goes to the house. So no one is fooled by the vote as each got what he/she came to get.
Battles ahead will take actions that are planned to achieve the expected goals rather the reactionary huddles that attempt to scuttle the plans of others" -Robert
"I do not understand how universal bankruptcy can do any good or bring us nearer to prosperity."- John Maynard Keynes
Impeach Pelosi! Send a message to Washington. If you live in San Francisco, vote, volunteer, and support Cindy Sheehan in her attempt to unseat Pelosi.
If you do not live in San Francisco, stop giving to Obama, and start giving to Cindy. Money talks bullshit walks.
Switch your voter registration to Green. Even if it's too late for this election cycle, it will send a message to the Democrats and Republican, that will shake them to the ground.
http://www.cindyforcongress.com
H.L. Mencken said: "There is always an easy solution to every human problem--neat,
plausible, and wrong.
http://socialistparty-usa.org/statements/nobailout0908.html
Here is a platform you can vote for and maintain your self respect
I just watched the entire press conference of DeFazio and Kaptur, and here is the link (you have to find it in the listing of the page and use the link there):
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN2_wm.aspx
DeFazio was asked near the end whether the House leadership will allow the bill to come to a floor vote. The answer was "this is a work in progress," so they have to do their best to persuade the Speaker they have the support to insist this alternative be considered. DeFazio said he was working with leadership on one idea of the package and was getting support, until the Speaker sent Laura Tyson to speak with him. Tyson, he said, was presented as the Clinton economic adviser, but she turns out to be on the board of Morgan Stanley. Tyson told DeFazio "Wall Street wouldn't like it," and that was the end of those discussions with House leadership. So DeFazio knows Wall Street is largely calling the shots with the Speaker, but is not backing off.
We must give DeFazio and his allies all the support we can by emailing our Reps and demand they co-sponsor his No Bailouts Act. We should also dig up additional links between Pelosi and Wall Street, and write letters to editors detailing the above and other links to keep the pressure on.
I did contact my congressperson yet again, but he voted for it on Monday and will vote for it on Friday, too. Evil has won yet again. This is further proof that we have to take down the duopoly and stop voting for both Democrats and Republicans.
bob burleson I PERSONALLY WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT VOTES FOR A BAILOUT... AND THATS FINAL....
My hope (although it is unlikely to happen this way) is that the same number of picked up Republican votes are offset by some defections from the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Think about it: if the same numbers from each party switched their votes, we would be at exactly the same vote totals we had on Monday. Unfortunately, I think the Republicans and even some more Democrats will cave in to the emotional blackmail - and the lack of leadership from Obama and McCain. I am FOR the DeFazio plan.
Bernie Sanders just tried to propose a good amendment--it did not make it right--but , at least, it would have taken the burden off of the middle class taxpayers.
The Democratic Party should be very ashamed of themsevles tonight. This was one big ass kiss for Wall St. and the shills who funds their campaigns.
Gop ahead and vote for them---just dont pretend that they give a rat's ass about the average person.
"I do not understand how universal bankruptcy can do any good or bring us nearer to prosperity."- John Maynard Keynes
Waa, waa, I didn't get my bailout so I'll keep trying until they give in.
All the economists from leading universities interviewed on TV have all said this bailout would make things worse, so why are we forced to listen to media salesmen pushing this unfair bill? Are they getting some bonus or promise of a better job for pushing the establishment's cause?
Forget both McCain and Obama. They are CFR puppets and nothing more. Do we really need more of the same for years to come? More debt, more war, more division, on and on.
Vote third party. Give the Constitution a chance to come alive again.
But, but, but...Obama says it's all OK and we have to do it! So it's gotta be, right?
Of course not, but I'm still voting for him. He didn't create the shituation, and everyone but me thinks speed is of the essence. I'd prefer an new agency in Treasury (hiring the soon to be jobless minions who by now know that if they want a job they have to blow the whistle when "improvident" becomes absurd) to make cash for loans to Main Street available when reasonably appropriate. This would add some competition to the reticence and ultimately to a bit of socialized capital available for CommonWealth stuff like universal health caare, education, infra-structure rebuilding and roughly implementing Gore/Pickens. Since it's our money and fundamentalist freemarket capitalism has proved a failure, we need to control our economy more directly and not leave it to the invisible hand of greed.
Funny though, isn't it, that they have been telling us for years that we couldn't afford healthcare, for example--despite the fact that it is presently far more the costliest healthcare by comparison, and the majority supports it, and now we know they can pull the money out of the hat if the cause is theirs alone at our expense--but now Mr Obama claims that we have to sacrifice or postpone programs to benefit all of us because...we can't afford it. The way it is set up now they can never fail and we can never win. Did you know that they are denying the people's access to their representitives, claiming that it will crash the system, but now they are claiming that constituents calls are running 50-50. How can that be if they are denying access? Notice the change to "rescue" from "bail-out" as if that makes it more palatable to the masses. The fear-mongering and scare tactics are a repeat performance of the Iraq buildup with claims like credit will freeze up and all the terrible consequences if we don't act immediately to save their asses. Well, hasn't the problem been that too many people were overextended on credit--or living on credit and had zero savings? And how about that bone thrown that FDIC insurance would be elevated to 250K when apparently Americans has a zero savings rate? How much more can it hurt us when it never helped us?
This should come as no surprise to anyone--eventually the gravy train was going to run out of track and Enron era tricks, loopholes, dirty dealing, crooked accounting, political accessibility and influence were derailing the billions made on air. It is a little late now to confiscate the parachutes after the gold has already bailed--but it isn't to late to restructure and police and it isn't even an option as if it was an unrelated issue. What is going to stop them from carrying on as they always have after the S&L, after Enron, since a new train is flying down the tracks with the same engineer? It will be, all aboard, free ride, the sun is shining and there is plenty of hay to be made and we will be shoveling the coal while simultaneously being strapped to the rails.. It is really mindboggling in it's scope from the urgent scaremongering and fear tactics, to the indifference to the people while expecting the people to not only pay for the consequences of the corruption that made billions for a few--but to continue to fund it without any accountability. Every time Obama instructs the dissenters to "step up to the plate", he strikes me as little more than a "tom" doing his master's bidding. He ain't no Roosevelt who as a "traitor to his class" demonstrated his love of country by his allegiance to it's people. They say that Roosevelt saved capitalism, but our government will destroy the country to prevent it from failing. But what do the aristocracy of wealth care? They say, "After us, the deluge..."
But not too funny. We won't have another opportunity to revamp our economy until 6 months from now when they come back for another 700 billion. We absolutely should set aside a trillion in a "CommonWealth Development Fund" to manage the credit flow problem and fund items which invest in the future instead of bind the future to others' unmanageable debt with the Full Faith and Credit clause.
All these pro bailout legislators are so myopic that they can only see how to xontinue business as usual, when business as usual has just failed as monumentally as the collapse of communism.
At the very least the government ought to enter into competition with the bums who are so bound up by fear and constipation that they're witholding business as usual credit unless we pay them tribute.
"I do not understand how universal bankruptcy can do any good or bring us nearer to prosperity."- John Maynard Keynes
I subscribe to Salon.com for one reason: Glenn Greenwald. (I generally enjoy Tom Tomorrow's "This Modern World", but that's available elsewhere.)
The site has become an extension of Obama Campaign Headquarters. Just now I made a quick stop, and the lead article is bubbling about Obama's terrific speech supporting the bailout, and how promising it is that his Democratic colleagues are falling all over him enthusiastically-- unlike their tepid support for Kerry.
Not a hint of a down side anywhere!
"so why are we forced to listen to media salesmen pushing this unfair bill? "
Who owns the media?
Corporate America
Who benefits from this bailout plan?
Corporate America
Who should even listen to the media?
Corporate America. Everyone else should just turn them off.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
Hi Samson, and everyone else:
I think yall'l find this 3 page item here and one it links to here worth the time to read. Especially the first as it documents gross Wall Street linked manipulation of Wikipedia, while revealing a bit about Wiki's ownership culture that most will find specious. The second item details the underlying causes of the criminality involved in generating the current crisis, and should be read in tandem with my short post below: Paulson's Depression.
Perhaps I should repeat that the current situation was generated through illegal market manipulation and securities fraud on a massive scale that was denied by the business press for years, and are only now admitting since the cat is clearly out of the bag. Again for emphasis, it wasn't bad loans to unthinking/undeserving people or massive amounts of predatory lending that caused this "crisis"--that''s what the Propaganda and Indoctrination Systems [and the "leadership" of both political parties] want you to believe. Rather, it was umnmitigated GREED coupled with a political culture of impunity that caused this whole affair.
I don't want to scare anyone, but this comparison of how nations (might) cope with a total collapse of their state is pretty interesting, I find. I can't find any overt mistakes either:
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/23259
While it is certainly interesting, with a whole lot of viable comparisons, the premise is premature.
And since Russia was so unprepared/prepared and, obviously, successful, having more nuclear warheads, etc., free rent, refrigerators so much better, ubiquitous transportation what was his motivation for establishing residence in such a third world country as ours? No, seriously. Was he offered professorship?? Something motivated him. I mean, hell, by his accounting our SS is BS, our ed system is BS (which is a straight up neocon lie), our food supply is BS, health care is BS, etc. Why did he bother?
He knows he can sell the gullible American people the same con job he was selling in Russia for ten times the money. HARHAR.
Quack.
It looks like we've lost this one. We the people sure did get their attention though, judging from the way they are all falling over each other to tell how they are only doing this for us. And how as soon as this bill is passed, they'll really get down to the business of reforming the system. Yeah right.
Watching Sen. Bernie Sanders right now. He knows how bad the Bush/Paulsen plan is and he's blasting it.
Opal
I just love the constant messages out here that we've lost.
If you know the difference between the Senate and the House, then you know the House is going to vote again. And they were the ones that said no. It was always a given that the millionaires club known as the US Senate would go along.
Quit being defeatist and start pressuring your Representative now! Call, email. Go visit them in person. Go protest outside their offices. Get your friends and neighbors to do the same. Let every house member approach this next vote deluged in phone calls and with thousands and thousands of people protesting outside all their local offices.
Surround Capital Hill with a few hundred thousand Americans all protesting this massive giveaway of our money.
Why are so many people so willing to so quickly concede defeat? Does no one on the left know how to freakin fight!
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
"Surround Capital Hill with a few hundred thousand Americans all protesting this massive giveaway of our money."
This is a VERY IMPORTANT point.
It maybe to osoon for permits and whatnot if the House passes this abomination this week, but if it gets killed again or gets stalled in the Joint Committee negotiations because of some glaring differences there would be time.
If ANYONE knows of ANY group planning ANY such action in D.C., please let us all know!
I live on the other coast, but I've just been layed off so even I might get there if I have time.
THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FIGHT OF THE TIMES!
Will they be able to ignore mass protest THIS time?
The answer is for sure "yes" if no such protest occurs.
http://www.codepink4peace.org/
There is this one. I might find others. The SP-USA is against it. The CP-USA has caved.
Anybody else know of one?
You bet!
"Y'know, a town with money is like a mule with a spinning wheel. No one knows how he got it, and danged if he knows how to use it!"
-- Lyle Lanley, monorail salesman
Socialism looking better, or do you still want "you choice of doctors and fast food restaurants"?
Go Bernie. Go Socialism. Capitalism kills.
Karl Marx, "The Capital" (a pity they don't teach you that at school in America):
"If the profit is right, capital becomes bold:
10%, that's safe, can be done everywhere,
at 20%, it gets lively,
at 50%, positively reckless,
for 100%, it tramples on every human law,
at 300%, there is no crime it doesn't risk, even on pain of the gallows."
And our current political system gives capital paybacks of 300% or more.
They can contribute millions to campaigns.
They get hundreds of billions of benefits in return.
That's much higher than 300%.
Now you understand politics in our corrupt system.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
CIA world fact sheets about statistics, state that USA has 280 million internet users. (But what the f*ck is happening with US internet users, that they are not using the internet for political activism and for political knowledge because mst US voters still trust and rely on Democrats and Republicans to rule USA, instead of internet candidates like Nader, Ron Paul, Cindy Sheehan etc.)
There is no differentiation between, say, 3 computers in a house connected and 3000 telecommuter workstations. I'm sure of it, besides that there are all those proxies.:)
If you want to make money on the internet, start a porn site.
Hmmm, there's an idea. Maybe we start a porn site with a political message. Nudes for Nader!
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
What can a mule do with gold?
Spin golden lies on the spinning wheel referenced above.
.The Senate is voting tomorrow on their own plan and, with apologies to Sara Palin, its just more lipstick on that pig. Then the Senate will adjourn and stick the House with this bad boy.....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Any bailout loan to Wall Street and Bad Banks from the taxpayers should be made with terms similar to the average working slave's interest on their credit card.
For example 23% interest, with a 39% rate interest and a large fee if the payment is one day late. Also, like the banks, the taxpayers should be able to change the terms whenever they want. If the terms are not met, the bank should be prevented from borrowing any more money because the taxpayers have collected a huge database with all the banks financial information, salaries of CEO's, personal shopping habits of their executive officers and past credit defaults.
If there are any delinquencies, the Insurance rates on the banks, and their Ceo's homes, and cars should go up because - (and the insurance companies pressed for this legislation) - there is a correlation between bad credit and higher insurance claims. Otherwise NO DEAL.
Your suggestion is brilliant!! Beat the money changers at their own game, after all, isn't turn about fair play?
Fair Play. What a radical concept!
Oh, you bad girls!
I like karma, I like watching these parasites wiggle in their own shit. Keep it going. Jeez, I cannot imagine these people being under my control like that. But I could use some reflective S and M. I won't sign up though, unless we get all the corporate lawyers, too!
WATCH THIS VIDEO-PANEL, CONFERENCE ANALYSIS ABOUT THE CURRENT ECONOMIC CRISIS FROM A WORKERS'S POINT OF VIEW
THESE PANNELS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL NOVEMBER
http://workers.blip.tv
.
Great link!
Capitalism kills.
Obama's campaigning for the bailout today, people, when are you naive apologists for Democrats going to wake up? I hope you have enough money stuffed in your mattresses for retirement.
Why give $700 billion to bankers when the money should be given to people facing foreclosure for heavens' sakes?
This is Bush & Cheney committing one last robbery before they leave office with Pelosi and her party's cut at at least 10%.
Got Nader? Got McKinney?
If Obama says it's Ok than it is! Right? Got that?
Of course! I heard Dem whore Randi Rhodes yesterday trashing the bailout on her show, but completely changing the subject today (to Sarah Palin) when it became way beyond even her prostitute skills to keep apologizing for her pimp Obama and how he embraced the larceny lock, stock and barrel.
Sick hypocrite.
I hope you Obama supporters will at least admit that this is a big ass kiss to Wal St. ...oh, well, he can do no wrong, to you.
Obama is a legislator--why doesnt he legistlate.
The Dems have been calling him the "head of the Democratic Party". Why dosent he step up?
He did, I guess---for all of his Wall St. backers. To pretend that he will do anythign else, once in office, is merely delusional.
when i listened to democracy now today, i got the feeling the fix is in. the senate will be passing a bailout bill tonite that caves in to the repub right-wingers in the house. the golden boy barack will probably vote for it. if he does, fuck it...i'm voting for nader...enuf is enuf!!!!!!
This is a bailout for "laissez faire", a detachment from the requirement that market demands should develop spontaneously among the people to serve the society's better interests. With "laissez-faire", the elites manipulate and cultivate market demands to serve the accumulation of capital into elite hands.
NOW more than ever we have our boot to the neck of capital and we better put some force into it, NOW. We can crush "laissez-faire" capitalism, NOW, by pushing our federal reps. to suspend any bailout and allow the institutional criminals to destroy themselves as they deserve. The people owe the elites NOTHING.
Here's further insight written by a very credible investigator into the cause and reasons why Paulson wants the $700B:
Paulson’s Great Depression:
It is difficult to believe that Paulson is not intentionally destroying the world economy, since his company, Goldman Sachs has been so intimately involved in setting the stage for this fiasco.
Goldman Sachs was involved in many sub-prime securitizations, and then was instrumental in setting up the ABX index, which Goldman then shorted to death after selling the index to its clients. By shorting the ABX index, Goldman not only made huge profits, but also eliminated all financing for real estate securities by spreading the notion that they had no resale value, because the value “indicated” by the ABX index was so low. The notion of “toxic securities” was sold to the world by Goldman and their confederates. Once new real estate lending was substantially restricted, a broad decline in real estate prices was a certainty, and recently adopted “mark-to-market” accounting rules forced lenders to report balance sheet losses even for loans that were current.
Goldman also helped develop and sell complex securities, that have magnified the extent of the damage done. Collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps can magnify any actual loss, since there are many more credit default swaps sold than actual loans made. A $1 actual loan loss can become $10 or more of losses to one side of the swap transaction, and $10 or more of gain to the other side of the transaction.
Paulson has made the financial crisis much worse by his publicly stated intention to “punish” some companies. While Bear Stearns was “bailed out”, Lehman was allowed to fail. Fannie and Freddie were “rescued” in a way that arbitrarily removed $10 to $15 billion of capital from banks that had invested in the preferred stock, which then reduced those banks’ lending capacity by $100 billion, making the “credit crisis” much more severe than it was before the “rescue”. Instead of stopping a run on Washington Mutual by providing cash loans, Washington Mutual was unnecessarily liquidated, to demonstrate the urgency to authorize $700 billion to Paulson’s Treasury.
Of course because of credit default swaps sold around the world, financial institutions’ losses on the Washington Mutual liquidation are vastly larger than the cost of keeping Washington Mutual open as an independent entity.
Now we come to the $700 billion. If this is used SOLELY to purchase whole loans, then the institutions now holding those loans do not experience losses that get magnified by credit default securities, and the government is in a position to rework the loans with affordable payment terms, so that people keep their homes, and the government recovers its entire investment. If this money is used to purchase “downstream securities”, such as securitization interests, CDOs, and credit default swaps, then vastly more money is required, and homeowners still lose their homes.
Why would Paulson seek the authority to buy “downstream securities”? Could it be that Goldman and its confederates hold these securities, and make vastly more money at taxpayer expense by selling these securities than by allowing people to remain in their homes, eliminating the defaults that make these credit default swaps so valuable to one side of the contract, and so costly to the other side of the contract, the US taxpayer, if Paulson gets his way.
The other way to say it is the "laissez-faire" gang violated in some perverted way the basic rules that make markets work for people. On the local scale markets do work for people. Let's recognize that markets function best at the local scale, and let's shift the great majority of our exchanger/association to the local level. We can also do business with the great variety of small enterprises outside our local community that are serving small communities elsewhere. But these plotters that attempt to transcend small communities to control markets on national and global scale should meet total boycott. This is best for the people, we know now for certain.
Marcy Kaptur is my new hero. Check her out talking about the bailout in this video.
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds
There is another one "Come to Mama".
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=mbD62gNi9WE&feature=related
Holy Toledo!!
Joe
Damn! She would get my vote for Pres or VP! That is one good woman paying attention. Not like the spineless California Reps. and Senators.
Marcy has made more sense and has stood her ground better than any other member of Congress except for Dennis Kucinich. Double kudos to both of the them..My only regret is that these good people are representing Ohio and not Michigan. Marcy is the gal to watch, too bad she can't debate everybody in the debates. She has class and style, but her keen intelligence is breath taking and her vision is encompassing her constituents first. She has my vote, Dennis has always had my vote, unfortunately it doesn't count.
The Kaptur video is excellent. What's interesting is not only how good her position is, but also that you'd never even hear about people like her, if you relied on the MSM. In other words, the control of the "powers that be" is such that they can easily tolerate having a few Marcy Kapturs in Congress. They understand that they can win every time, without necessarily controlling every single member of Congress.
--------------
It's also interesting to look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average, not as a financial barometer, but rather as a political one. For instance, earlier today, it was down about 200 points. But now it's gained back all those losses. Without even looking, you can be sure that this means that the evil-doers in Washington are increasingly confident that the bailout will be rammed through very soon.
Obama is a Senator right now. Why doesnt he legislate something better?
If yu wait for him to "change things" after he gets in office, you can just forget it, I can guarantee you.
RichM,
Your comments, here and in other threads, are greatly appreciated.
It's interesting to see how little the pro-Obama forces have in the way of rational arguments.
One pro-Obama supporter made the claim that if Ralph Nader didn't run for president, the Democrats would be winning elections and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.
This ignores several, rather obvious, realities.
For one thing, if Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 had represented the interests of the poor and middle classes in the United States, they would have wiped the floor with George Bush.
Those classes have within them an overwhelming number of anti-corporate votes. The elections wouldn't have even been close!
Besides, what's the Democrats' excuse for 2004, Nader wasn't even a factor in that election.
Question -- Why don't the Democrats go after those millions of votes and, in turn, win election after election?
The answer is because that's not what the Democratic/Republican duopoly is all about. Rather, it's about those two parties representing the oligarchic-few and not the democratic-many. It's about the Democratic Party preferring to *LOSE* elections rather than to betray their corporate paymasters.
Question -- Why hasn't Obama's party, the Democratic Party, done anything over the past 7 and 1/2 years to **STOP** George Bush and the Republicans?
One recalls that at the 2004 Democratic Convention, the Democratic delegates were instructed not to criticize George Bush. Why not? ... The answer is because the Democratic/Republican duopoly vies for the 1% to 2% of the voters "in the middle." This allows them to ignore "democratic positions" that if they were to take those democratic positions would result in their *winning* elections, but *losing* their ruling class support. And, clearly, that's not what they choose to do.
So, no, Gore and Kerry didn't lose because of "outside agitators." They lost because they preferred losing to turning their backs on the political duopoly they've pledged their lives to.
And, note: been handsomely rewarded for doing.
In short, it's a con game. And what's sad is when the people who are so exploited by it are so passionate in their defense of it.
And yet, with all their power, the ruling class is in constant fear that those millions of people in the poor and middle classes, if fully informed, would overwhelm them -- if only with their votes.
Thus, mainstream media have to pull out all the stops when it comes to convincing the American public that they have no choice outside the Democratic/Republican duopoly. They have to drill this idea into them day and night, 24-hours a day.
Someone in another thread, perhaps it was you, made the point that Obama-supporters are not very different from Christian fundamentalists, in that they have *faith* that all one has to do is hope -- hope Obama will make a difference and, by God, he will!
How different is this from the reality-lacking *hope* that if I buy those real estate tapes or that tube of toothpaste or the illusory image of how life is represented on teevee or in magainzes or on a billboard ... if only I buy into what Plato called "The Big Lie" ... that I, too, will walk in the sun! That my life will be "changed," changed for the better! (Hallelujah!!!)
Isn't that what virtually every advertisement, every commercial, every "show" tells us -- buy our product, or else buy our bird's eye view of the world, and it will change your life for the better!
Such conformity! Where is a movie director to remake "The Invasion of the Body Snatchers"???
Needless to say, all this "hope for change" (inconveniently) flies in the face of a.) Barack Obama's voting record, b.) the implications of the millions of dollars he's taken from Corporate America, and c.) his overall socialization into the Democratic/Republican duopoly.
How many of the people who now support Barack Obama knew anything about him before he ran for president? How many EVEN TODAY know what his voting record is?
They prefer the illusion to the reality.
How different is "The Obama Illusion" to the illusions created by Madison Avenue, the illusions dreamt up by Hollywood, the illusions drilled into people by organized religion?
Barack Obama is a media creation. A media creation created with the financial help of his oligarchic backers. Where, I wonder, would Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney be in the minds and hearts of the average American if they had the millions of dollars McCain and Obama have to run commercial after commercial stating their positions?
And how much different those commercials would be -- in tone as well as content!
Here's a dose of reality for Obama-supporters -- http://newsblaze.com/story/20080302075722tsop.nb/topstory.html
Andrew Bacevich's recent book, "The End of American Exceptionalism," makes the point that every four years the American public is told -- by mainstream media -- that this is (by far!) the most important election of their lifetime. With the average voter believing that all he has to do is get "his guy" elected, i.e., one of the two duopolistic candidates, and everything will change for the better.
And that's all they have to do!
That's not what democracy is all about and it's not what a third party movement is all about.
The only real hope is for the democratic-many to realize the power their millions represent. And not just at the ballot box but as full participants in the political process.
Finally, I agree with your point (made in another post) that, if elected, Obama will quickly inform the American public that "change" will have to take a backseat to "austerity." And that the austerity will be suffered not by the oligarchic-few but rather by the democratic-many.
She and DeFazio were on, of all things, Lou Dobbs, last night.
I cant stand Dobbs, but he has given more exposure than most to Independesnts like Nader, Paul, etc.
He nearly always disagrees with them, though.
"UNBELIEVABLE!!!!"
The further allying of folks like Dobbs and folks like Nader, Kaptor, etc. is being made inevitable by the continued trampling of the Constitution and of any reasonable fiscal sense by the Administration, the Congressional Leadership, and the "two" prospective Administrations.
I'm just gonna keep spreading this meme around the Internets:
There is a MISSING PARTY in the United States!
It is alliance of social progressives and fiscal conservatives, joined by love of, and willingness to defend, the Constitution.
The Constitutional Progress Party of America!
Social "wedge" Issues must be put aside!
Former partisan arguments must be fogotten!
The Restoration and Improvement of the Republic is what matters now!
The time couldn't be riper for the formation of such an alliance.
Before or after this November 4th.
Let's start thinking CPPA!
hey you can call it what you want, bail out , rescue plan etc.. but the bottom line is IT WILL NOT WORK!
remember katrina, 4 yrs later the mess is still there despite billions of dollars spent.. why?.. because of fees and service charges from all levels and many opportunistic speculators, ate up most of that money before it left the "banks".
already there are "consulting" firms calling hasty meetings to figure out how they will get a piece of this bailout for their profit...
i hate to be the pessimist, but despite texas being gw's home state, galviston and much of the gulf coast ravaged by ike, will look the same in 4 yrs..
this is not a coincidence, this is the playbook of the neocons, and the "have mores" in action.
NOT A DIME to those crooks..bail out joe six pack and his family, get them out from under the last 50 yrs of carrying the corpulent, rotting, never satisfied with billions, money'd elite, who have gamed a trillion dollars of assets into 500 trillion dollars of worthless paper, and who now see they will lose way way more than joe six pack when the house of cards crashes.
a side note
all the bailout proponents say if this bailout fails, "small businesses may not be able to make payroll".. this is absurd to the extreme...any one i know who runs a small business, DOES NOT BORROW MONEY , to make payroll..if they need to borrow to make payroll then that business SHOULD fail.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/business/worldbusiness/23krona.html?em
This is what Sweden did, under similar circumstances.
They have on e of the highest standards of liv ing in the world.
.Very informative article, thanks for it.
There have been more than a few economists calling for such an equity position in firms requiring Treasury infusions, so far they have been ignored by our politicos. I guess they are listening to those campaign checks disappearing should they actually use common sense and good business practices....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
And, still, not a single "representative" is standing up and demanding budget cuts and shifts to off-set the $1 trillion Bank Robber Reward Act of 2008. All agree we must print more money ($8,000 per taxpayer) and are only arguing about who can spend it better.
Adults living in reality are forced to SACRIFICE when facing new expenses, and we must demand "our" government does the same. Cut the Pentagon budget, close 500 military bases and golf courses then sell/lease them, end the faux missile defense program, end the war on drugs, force oil companies to bring their royalty payments up to date, audit all billionaires and collect all the taxes we know they haven't paid, and unleash the best bean counters upon the $3 trillion budget with a mission to shave at least $500 billion.
Meanwhile, push a DeFazio type plan (or one like this http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-ressler-and-
richard-ressler/a-better-alternative_b_130655.html) and then use the above cuts and shifts for things like health care, etc...
The operative word here is to go slowly. Before Congress leaps into a bail out (or "rescue" as it is now euphemistically referred to), they need to do the homework. There should be hearings and testimony on its merits by experts who don't have a vested interest (i.e. their paychecks do not emanate from government or from Wall St.). That the stock market rebound yesterday is a clear indication that someone still thinks there's money to be made, even with no bail out. In a similar way that food stamp assistance recipients have an income ceiling to remain qualified to receive aid, I'd like to see corporate remuneration (of any kind, including stock options, deferred compensations, company cars, etc etc), be capped on any company that is granted assistance, until that company has repaid its loan/rescue/bail out off.
For me the central question is whether there is actually reason to restore confidence in the markets. If free markets are self-correcting, why are we not either (1) letting them self-correct or (2) acknowledging the failure and broadly rejecting free market capitalism and its alleged self-correcting capability. Why why why are we propping this thing up without addressing the underlying failure?
Good question. The elites spent the past eight years proving all their ideas to be lies, including the idea that US markets are free. This bailout is only the latest, most glaring example. Before this one they demonstrated their need to carefully control markets through the mechanism of central planning. There was the US vice president Darth Viper's secret energy meetings in 2001, and his active involvement in the 2001 California electricity crisis that left rolling blackouts and astronomical utility bills for most Californians (public-controlled utilities were able to protect their customers from Darth Viper). On and on it went from there. The antitrust enforcement against Microsoft was dropped.
No-competition military contracts proliferated. Generally, predatory, cartel, and monopoly behavior proliferated. The commodities speculation frenzy and these idiotic finance industry rackets. The gargantuan healthcare collusion. The fossil cartel rigging prices to election cycles. Waging wars for the economic benefit of the military industrial complex. It never ended. And much of it began way back, including the suppression of rail transport to enable energy-guzzling modes of transport and the saturation bombing with energy-guzzling food (meat). Maximizing economic activity in the USA became the grandest of all market planning schemes.
The idea of concentrating production in fewer and fewer hands was paramount. All of this is in complete defiance of the fundamental rules and assumptions of the market theory. Note that local economies widely demonstrate functional free markets. Free markets require that producers are limited to serving market demands, not manipulating demands. Free markets also require informed and responsible market demands by the people, not by elites. The government's task is to ensure that all markets be truly free like local markets. The truth is US markets today are carefully controlled by central planners to concentrate production into elite hands.
The only part of this I disagree with is point #3. An honest assessment of what things are actually worth is essential for investors and people making deposits in banks. It is important that lying about this remains illegal, as otherwise we will see even more creative accounting of the kind that helped to create the current situation.
Now I see which #3 you refer to; it's Issacs #3, not Defazio's bill's #3. Well, my explaination of Defazio's #3 and additional info about how and why the crisis was engineered ought to be helpful.
Point #3 restores what was called the "uptick" rule, which relates to the shortselling of securities. The uptick rule provided that before a shortsale could be consummated, the stock had to have a positive movement pricewise on the ticker--an up tick (the ticker was the way stock prices were relayed at the time of the Depression when this rule was instituted to stop the ability to constantly shortsell a stock lower in value). To legally shortsell a stock--as opposed to naked shortselling--the seller must first find the number of shares s/he wishes to short and borrow them prior to making the shortsell order, which is usually done through a broker/dealer. Naked shortselling--which has always been illegal, just not enforced as has been the case with so many SEC rules and securities' laws--occurs when the shares are not borrowed but the shortsale is made anyway (there's also an exemption for the Options Marker Maker to allow it to naked shortsell, which is also illegal, but the exemption exists anyway).
Perhaps you all can now understand this bill a litle better. As I've mentioned here at CD before, the crisis was started when hedge funds and brokerages like Paulson's Goldman Sachs started naked shortselling the crap out of the ABX index--the very index that must be used to determine the mark-to-market value of the underlying securities in MBS, CDO, CDS, etc., bonds--and at the same time did the likewise to the mortgage houses like Countrywide, with the goal to drive them into bankruptcy in order to buy their assets at pennies on the dollar. In other word, massive amounts of market manipulation and illegal methods were used to CREATE this crisis. It's not the underlying mortgages that are bad, although some certainly are. It's the fact that those mortgages cannot be properly valued because the index used for that was rendered unusable for the purpose for which it was designed. And Goldman Sachs was the company that designed that index under Paulson!!
You, seemingly, are very knowledgeable on the subject. My question would be, concerning short selling, you indicate the legal, tactical need for sales and buying to match a brokers floor optioning, is this a correct direction of my thinking or am I lost? It seems there always has to be a floor match on buying and selling. There is no way to have convenient, numerically identical, buy/sell requests. The options have to be distributed, as in say, a call for 3 sells where there is a buy for five. What happens? The buyer has the option, he borrows the three, looking for the other two. He finds an additional three, borrows them, then packages five out of it to buy, with one borrowed left, which he can relinquish or hold since he has a buy for three more. Is this an accurate analogy?
Thanks for your help.
I think you're confusing the Options Market with the NYSE, AmEx, NASDAQ, etc.; it is a seperate market, although what transpires there effects the security traded on its parent market. As for normal, legal short selling, most broker/dealers hold a pool of shares that can be borrowed for the purpose of making the short sale. Some times, the pool is dry, but the broker/dealer still has 3 business days prior to settlement (expressed as T+3) to locate the needed shares. But what has occurred is often the broker/dealer just ignores/refuses or cannot find the requesit shares and still allows the transaction to settle--that is naked short selling--as the system absorbs the ficticious borrow, thus creating "air shares"--which are essentially counterfeit. A small number of air shares won't hurt when the total float is millions of shares, but millions of air shares dillutes the float to such an extent that the stock price plummets.
Understand I have outlined a simplified version of how shares can be counterfeited. For more detail, please visit this page. For even further info, this page is very good. Located at the latter link is a sidebar that allows you to navigate thesanitycheck website that contains much more info and evidence of the criminality that led to our current situation. We, the NCANS orgainization, in 2005, bought a full page ad in the WaPost detailing this threat to our economy. We also bombarded the SEC with evidence and demands that it enforce its laws, but to no avail. Also linked at thesanitycheck site are these blogs of those also deeply involved in this movement: investigatethesec, thefaulkingtruth, and another belonging to Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne deepcapture. I highly suggest going to this latter one first and clicking on the link to The Story. It's long, detailed and I attest to its veracity.
Sorry how this post suggests reading the last link first, but that's just how it came out. It goes far beyond the question you asked, but I felt since you took the time to enquire that you deserved the full picture. Getting people interested in the subject of gross illegal market manipulation here and elsewhere is very difficult, as most have no connection or clue. But with megabucks being thrown at the crooks, I think more will be receptive.
Cameiros
Putting Andy Stern's imprimatur on DeFazio's proposal does nothing for me.
In fact it makes me skeptical.
I'd like to see the fine print and wait for further ideas from Kucinich and Barbara Lee of the Progressive caucus.
Yes. It's best to wait on leadership from the only source of real leadership we currently have, i.e. Kucinich, Lee and the Progressive Caucus.
Dennis Kucinich is in favor of the DeFazio plan. He said so I think on The Rachel Maddow Show. He said he certainly would vote for it.
New McCain Campaign Slogan
"CHANGE!...I need one...I just crapped in my Depends"
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
You alreaedy posted this enough.
Thanks for the disgusting visuals.
New Obama Campaign Slogan
"CHANGE!... Buddy, Can You Spare Any?"
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Maybe we could even convince Obama to vote Third Party.
Obama votes for FISA--but he will fix it, if you elect him.
He votes for the bailout--but he wil fix it, if you elect him
Why doesnt he just "fix" it now, by not voting for it?? He IS a SENATOR!
He could enact legislation to overturn all of his own votes in the Senate!!! Thats what he says he will do if elected.
Obmam , '08! Become a walking contradiction, why wait??!!
Being as I am not economist, I do not quite understand how this plan would truly work to fix the problems at hand. Can anyone explain in layman's terms what each provision of this bill entails?
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts."
-- John Keats
My sister teaches Economics at SUNY/Purchase, and she is confused as hell.
Have you ever seem one of these mortgage contracts? I could post a friends of mine's , if I take her name out. You just wont belive what they put in there, in fine print. It's like a credit card agtreement--they can change anything they watn to at any time for any reason, but you have to "uphold your contract".
What happy horse-sh*t!
Since you are using my tagline, its the least I can do.
1) Require the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to require an economic value standard to measure the capital of financial institutions.
This is where the politicians and wall streeters figure out how much money you have left to steal, by measuring your capital
2) Require the Securities and Exchange Commission to restricting naked short sells permanently
This is where they take your clothes too, so you are left naked
3) Require the Securities and Exchange Commission to restore the up-tick rule permanently.
uptick rule...you get "upitty", you tick them off
4) “Net Worth Certificate Program”
this is where you declare bankrupcy i.e. zero net worth
5) Increase the FDIC Insurance limit from $100,000 to $250,000.
so those who actually have $250,000 in the bank are protected by giving them your money
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
So is this plan any better than the $700 billion Paulson plan?
“God had given him a tail to keep the flies off, but that he would sooner
have had no tail and no flies”
--George Orwell
Much better.
But still not quite there.
I suggest it needs to be tinkered with to appeal to the fiscal conservative Republicans who joined these progressive Dems in defeating the first "bailout plan"
The missing Party in this country is not the Greens or the Libertarians, it is an alliance between social progressives and fiscal conservatives, united by a real commitment to adhering to the Constitution, but adapting it for the current needs of the People.
I suggest that the opposition to this current "bailout" atrocity COULD act as a catalyst for the formation of such an alliance and such a Party.
I will go further and suggest that the name -and raison d'etre- of this Party should be:
The Constitutional Progress Party of the United States of America (or CPPA for short).
How 'bout a Paul/Kuncinich or a Kucinich/Paul ticket for the CPPA in '12?
A fella can dream can't he?
Don't Panic,
-matti.
Youre right--it still doesnt get to the root of the problem.
Capitalism kills.
They'll fix it later.
Pelosi must must must be removed from office, she's beyond pathetic. I'm sending Cindy Sheehan more money. How ridiculous is it that Pelosi supports the Paulson and Bush bailout while dissenting republicans say no! BE Gone OH Botox Princess! You're banished from the realm.
raydelcamino October 1st, 2008 11:49 am
Obama, the House and Senate Democrats, are setting themselves up for big losses in November by approving a bailout. Perhaps their strategy is to to be the eternal minority party.
I agree wholeheartedly. Why bother with the hassle of actually governing, stating out being liked, giving people "hope", and then end up face down in an unflushed toilet? It's so much easier, and just as profitable, being the perpetual minority party. You want 700 Rolex watches and the biggest mansion on The Mainline? . . . you can steal the money just as easily being the drunk as being the bouncer.
What seems really important is that a transaction tax of .1 or .2 of 1% needs to be added to each stock transaction. This discourages the gambling aspect of Wall Street and encourages long term investment. The revenue from this tax then goes into a fund to help pay off whatever bailout might be required. Other European countries have done this, and it works! How can we bring this to the attention of at least a few key people in Washington? Any suggestions?
The FDIC is already underfunded at the $100,000.00 protection level. It makes no sense to raise the level to $250.000.00, this is just more of the same protecting the rich while handing off the responsibility to the taxpayers to bail them out if the plan fails.
The new tax credits in the Senate plan are aimed at the Upper Middle Class, not those in the Middle middle or the Lower middle.
Washington still doesn't get it. They still believe that the Middle class can bail out the economy with consumer spending. It cannot. The Middle class is underfunded and the problem is structural. The Senate and House plans both rely on the belief that the Middle class can spend us out of this recession. Therefore any bail out money to Wall Street is wasted money because the economic wealth is concentrated in the hands of the wealthy. Wall Street and Washington are simply in denial and discounting the rising voices of the people. So, nothing will get better, the pain will just be made worse and be put off for a short time longer.
We were demoted from citizen to consumer. Now that we are not consumers what are we?
"...We were demoted from citizen to consumer. Now that we are not consumers what are we?"
- Peons? Serfs? Indentured servants?
Wage-Slaves.
A herd waiting to be culled.
The DeFazio proposal is by far, the best one out there so far. It is missing a vital element though: allowing individual homeowners the right to re-negotiate their mortgage with their lender, or under the aegis of a bankruptcy judge. This was probably left out as this the biggest anathema to the corporate clowns who created this mess, and would therefore fight tooth, nail, and brass knuckle to keep this out. The SA wing of the Repugs (whom are calling for even more deregulation and letting the businesses fail at the price of a depression), and the Country Clubbers (who the Repug Brown Shirt wing royally screwed earlier this week) are "united" on the aforementioned provision not making it into any rescue package as it would aid their mortal enemies.
Although I would like to see this debated to flesh it out, it appears to be a step in the right direction (at least on the surface). I especially am hopeful of the intent to require some regulation and instill accountability.
Good post. thanks
Meanwhile, Sen. Reid and the Democratic leadership are going in the other direction. They are making deals with the Republicans to add more business tax breaks and other goodies for corporate America. Sen. Reid's big plan is to pass this bill today, then adjurn the Senate to hold the House hostage to passing their plan.
This is what you got when you elected the Dems the majority party in Congress in 2006.
Throw all the bums out. Don't vote for either Dem or Repub in this election.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
the "No BAILOUTS Act" (Bringing Accountability, Increased Liquidity, Oversight, and Upholding Taxpayer Security).
In
Creating
Ridiculous
Aconyms
Politicians
Potentially
Earn
Dollars
Misusing
Your
Slowly
Earned
Lifetime
Finances
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Bravo! I think the substance of the "No BAILOUTS Act" is better than the refried crap they're planning to pass tonight, but I wondered myself who the hell took the time to devise that acronym.
It's just a touch too clever, especially considering the necessity of prefacing it with a "No", which gives it an ironic self-negating quality that may prove closer to the truth.
Ah, predicting the future raydelcamino. Don't we wish.
Here is DeFazio's letter introducing the legislation.
As The Oregonian notes, news of The No Bailouts Act is being given the blackout treatment by the usual culprits. It's just this sort of behavior by the Propaganda System that proves how deep the fix is in. I think most of the Reps who voited against the Bush/Paulson extortion bill will back the No Bailouts Act provided it gets support from constituents; but of course, the constituents must know about this alternative, but that information is deliberately being withheld from them.
A "Free Market" is supposed to enjoy a free flow of information so the best decisions are made. It's quite clear that such a market is a chimera.
RichM--As for enforcement of current SEC rules and laws, there isn't any need to write the laws again. However, political pressure must be exerted on the SEC to get it to investigate and arrest some of those responsible for this mess, starting with Paulson. Unfortunately, as I posted on another thread, we have been beating the SEC for YEARS to get it to do its job. Obviously, it's been told not to do its job on orders from on high--yet another impeachable offense. None of the DLC "leaders" have put pressure on the SEC, so we get the outcome we've seen to this point.
Here is the text of the WHOLE bill:
No BAILOUTS Act
Bringing Accounting, Increased Liquidity, Oversight and Upholding Taxpayer Security
1) Require the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to require an economic value standard to measure the capital of financial institutions.
This bill will require SEC to implement a rule to suspend the application of fair value accounting standards to financial institutions, which marks assets to the market value, no matter the conditions of the market. When no meaningful market exists, as is the current market for mortgage backed securities, this standard requires institutions to value assets at fire-sale prices. This creates a capital shortfall on paper. Using the economic value standard as bank examines have traditionally done will immediately correct the capital shortfalls experienced by many institutions.
2) Require the Securities and Exchange Commission to restricting naked short sells permanently
This bill will require SEC to implement a rule that blocks naked selling, selling a stock short without first borrowing the shares or ensuring the shares can be borrowed. Such practices many times harm the companies represented in the sales and hurt their efforts to raise capital. There is no economic value produced by naked short sales, but significant negative effects.
3) Require the Securities and Exchange Commission to restore the up-tick rule permanently.
This bill will require SEC to implement a rule that blocks short sales without an up-tick in the market. On September 19, 2008, the SEC approved a temporary pause of short selling in financial companies “to protect the integrity and quality of the securities market and strengthen investor confidence.” This rule prevents market crashes brought on by irrational short term market behavior.
4) “Net Worth Certificate Program”
This bill will require FDIC to implement a net worth certificate program. The FDIC would determine banks with short-term capital needs and the ability to financially recover in the foreseeable future. For those entities that qualify, the FDIC should purchase net worth certificates in these institutions. In exchange, these institutions issue promissory notes to repay the FDIC, counting the amount “borrowed” as capital on their balance sheets. This exchange provides short term capital, with not cash outlay. Interest rates on the certificates and the FDIC notes should be identical so no subsidy is necessary.
Participating banks must be subject to strict oversight by the FDIC including oversight of top executive compensation and if necessary the removal of poor management. Financial records and business plans should be subject to scrutiny while participating in the program.
In 1982, Congress approved a program, known as the Net Worth Certificate Program, that allowed banks and thrifts to apply for immediate capital assistance. From 1982 to 1993, banks with total assets of $40 billion participated in the program. The majority of these banks, 75%, required no further assistance beyond the certificate program.
5) Increase the FDIC Insurance limit from $100,000 to $250,000.
The bill will require the FDIC raise its limit to provide depositors confidence that their money is safe and help eliminate runs on banks which are destabilizing to the industry
FDIC currently has 45 billion as coverage for 4.4 trillion in deposits limited to 100,000. And he wants to raise this to 250,000? This means the banks have to come up with another 60 billion to give FDIC. Those banks most at risk of failing would have to pay more per insured deposits than the too big to fail banks. This increases the risk of small bank failures to insure those who have the most money, usually kept in the big banks. The middle class for the most part does not have 100,000 per account (200,000 per joint account), let alone 250,000 per account (500,000 per joint account). No matter what amount is insured, FDIC will only have 1.15 cents on the dollar.
The only ones who benefit from this are corporations who deposit their money in banks and the well off. It does nothing for main street living from pay check to pay check.
The bill does not even come close to identifying the real issues, which are the unregulated OTC Derivatives Market, foreclosures, the toxic waste held by Fannie and Freddie, the mushrooming public debt (increased 880 billion this past year) and the credit crunch/declining real incomes on main street. It seems more focused on propping up the DOW which is an illusive measure of the economies health.
Turn the billionaires into millionaires.
Fantastic! Catchy AND reasonable.
Do you suggest taxes or direct seizure of property?
Remember that much of these "billionaires'" billions are in pure paper and other abstract assets, they could therefore be seized just as easily as the Bastards want to buy the toxic "assets" in this "bailout".
Obama, the House and Senate Democrats are setting themselves up for big losses in November by approving a bailout. Perhaps their strategy is to to be the eternal minority party.
The film clip I saw of Obama this morning was striking.
Obama, standing behind a podium labeled "Change we need", giving the reasons why we have to continue the Bush policies of bailing out the rich with the money from the poor and middle class.
Notice that Obama is not for instance backing this no bailout plan.
The funny part is Obama's campaign has been floundering for the last month. The Republicans and the media have put the campaign where they want it. Slams and smears and negative ads and talking about Palin. Obama has been trouble getting any traction.
In some respects, this is a golden opportunity for Obama to win the election right now. Side with the vast majority of Americans who oppose this, and then watch the momentum and energy that would swing to his campaign. Get out with the people protesting outside Wall Street. Go stand with the bank-benchers who blocked the first vote.
If Obama would really stand up for change, he could win the election this week.
But, Obama instead choose to stand with the fat cats who put millions into his campaign. That says all you need to know about Obama and the Democrats. And the clear message is ...
Vote Nader!
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
ding!
During yesterday's appearance on "Democracy Now", Robert Johnson, former chief economist of the Senate Banking Committee, was noticeably rueful regarding Obama's position when asked about the candidates' response to the bailout.
He surmised that Obama's support for the Bush/Paulson bailout was predicated on the premise that once Obama gets into office, he will work to "fix" it. I believe that this was only Johnson's educated guess, but it's certainly a stock rationalization to explain away the unimpressiveness of Obama's positions in many areas.
Gee, he'll have an awful lot of fixin' to do, what with fixin' FISA and fixin' up funding for the Good War in Afghanistan and such!
I guess President Unitard and his roomies have indeed reduced the White House to the status of a delapidated Victorian beachfront home rented by college kids for nearly a decade-- a real promising fixer-upper.
I agree. I would hate to quote McCain (who has, sadly become a caricature of his former self), but, I have to think that Obama dosent understand. His
"handlers" (mostly former DLC, who Obama supporters love to rail when it comes to Clinton--they just have a different acronym now) must be advising him the same way they did Kerry and Gore.
He will still win, I believe. But, there will, I predict, be an outcry of disappointment.You certainly dont hear neo-cons rqanting about his financial poliicies, especially his glorifying of the free mkt.
Until we take the money out of politics (NO lobbying--it is NOT "constitutionally protected speech";campaign finance paid for by the taxpayers, and everyone gets the same;no bundling and no corporate donations, of any kind), we will continue down the slope to Third World status.
Obama understands perfectly. He understands who the kingmakers are that took an unknown State Senator and quickly promoted him to would-be-President. Obama understands very well who's funded his campaign. Obama knows exactly what's going on.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
Yeah. I guess I meant, that, he doesnt seem to understand (along withe the entire Dem Party) how to fricking get elected by a solid majority. This duopoly has to stop! No other so-called democracies (soon to become a curse word around the world) have this two-party crap.
It leaves about 30% of hte voters "happy" at any one time.
We need proporational representation, a Parliament (yes, I'm serious--teh UK took control of its major bank yesterday, with no charge to taxpayers), and, we need to stop thinking thaat a presidential election can rescue us.
We need much more profound change than either paerty can give us now.
DC is ignoring the housing crisis, the medcial coverage crisis ( not everybody bought McMansions--hell, even those who did, if its not your primary residence, you can re-finance!!) , and living wage, and free state universities.
There's nothing here about prosecuting the Wall Street gangsters who were responsible for the "mortage-backed securities" scam, & seizing their hundreds of billions in ill-gotten gains. Therefore, the plan is grossly inadequate.
The virtue of the plan is that it seeks to pay for the damage by taking the money out of Wall Street's future income stream, rather than by shifting the entire burden to taxpayers. (The Thom Hartmann article a few days ago was essentially suggesting this same idea.) // OK, that's good, as far as it goes, & certainly a great improvement over the Paulson plan -- but without the element of justice mentioned above, it's still an outrage. It permits the gangsters to keep the loot, stay in business, & go unpunished.
(And needless to say, Congress will wind up supporting the Paulson plan, with minor cosmetic changes. Probably, the Senate will pass that tonight -- so discussion of the security tax idea is academic.)
When Nichols details the comments by former FDIC chair Wm Isaac, he mentions:
(2) keep tight restrictions on short sellers of financial stocks;
(3) suspend fair-value accounting (which has contributed mightily to our problems by marking assets to unrealistic fire-sale prices
Both of these things are deeply objectionable. On the first count, there is NOTHING wrong with "short-selling." It's no less "virtuous" than taking "long positions." It has already become fashionable to blame the nefarious "short-sellers" for the recent mayhem. (The media did this in 1929, too.) This mentality is nothing more than "shooting the messenger." The problem is not short-sellers. The whole structure of the casino is the problem. Blaming short sellers is laughable -- like cursing odd numbers when you play roulette and lose money by betting on "odd." It's not "odd's" fault, & the situation would hardly be "remedied" by banning odd numbers.
Re suspending fair-value accounting -- that amounts to using the Enron approach to balance sheets. Its great "virtue" would be that you could have billions of toxic worthless securities on your balance sheet, but wouldn't have to 'fess up to it. So you could hide your losses, pretending they weren't there, because there'd be no accounting requirement to make you acknowledge the fact that you actually have insufficient capital. // This is the standard approach of American capitalism: when something is rotten, you don't change it, but merely change the way the number is calculated. The whole idea is to make the number look nicer.
DeFazio plan is a vast improvement. Can't the "gangsters" can be prosecuted in the usual way? Using the Justice Dept., once the fools are voted out.
P.S. See that long Sat. thread for my belated response.
- I acknowledged that the DeFazio plan is an improvement. ("...certainly a great improvement over the Paulson plan.")
- No, the gangsters can't really be prosecuted by the Justice Dept.
In theory, of course, such a thing is "possible." But that's only in the abstract sense that in theory, it is "possible" that Bush could have been impeached for any of dozens of reasons. It is similarly "possible" that the US would entirely withdraw from Iraq, cut military spending, & stop the War on Terror. It is "possible" that the federal government could impose tough new regulation on Wall Street.
But in practice, not only can such things not happen, they can't even be "on the table" as part of the public dialogue. The basic rule is that in the modern corporate state, the state apparatus is no more than an instrument of the ruling class. It will never take action against the interests of that class. So the idea of holding important ruling class elements "accountable" for their crimes is something that exists purely in theory. In practice, we'll continue to have one standard of justice for them; another (much harsher) standard for everyone else.
Re "...Using the Justice Dept., once the fools are voted out"
- The functioning of the system has nothing to do with D's & R's. Both parties defend the same class interests. // If you doubt it, just watch how this bailout bill plays out, in the next 48 hrs.
(I'll try to go back & find that Sat. thread.)
"In practice, we'll continue to have one standard of justice for them; another (much harsher) standard for everyone else."
You must be joking! Not even the O'Bama construct can stop the elites from completing their self-destruction. All of their ideas are broken. They don't work. Everybody knows it. Economic growth without end doesn't work. Fossil gluttony doesn't work. The military approach doesn't work. Wall St doesn't work. Madison Av. doesn't work. K St. doesn't work. Really there aren't many ideas proliferating in the USA today that work any more. The American Way as defined by the elites is over the cliff. And it's no surprise - none of them were conceived as sustainable. So their just demise was fully anticipated. Let it happen and make way for real progress.
Which fools do you want to vote out?
Obama has $22 million in contributions from the financial sector in his accounts. And he's been fully on board with the Bush bailout plan.
Do you think an Obama Justice Dept is going to prosecute the people who've paid Obama $22 million primarily to make sure that they don't get prosecuted.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
Sadly, absolutely correct.
Sen Obama is a SENATOR! He could put forth legislation right now, to fix the things he's voting FOR (wha??? did I just say?? LOL)
BEWARE BAILOUT RD 11, NEW SHADE OF LIPSTICK
By David Swanson
SNIP:
I want a bill immediately to ban predatory mortgage lending, ban states
from preventing cities from restricting predatory lending, and commit
the federal government to allowing states full freedom to restrict
predatory lending.
I want a bill establishing a maximum wage at 10 times the minimum wage,
and including all forms of income in that calculation (and raising the
minimum wage how ever much required to pass the bill). I want the tax
system created by that bill to pay for any necessary bailouts, and want
such bailouts enacted and overseen by Congress.
I also want a Tobin tax on all transactions in finance, insurance, and
real estate, including currency transactions.
I want Congress to haul fraudulent bankers into Washington and force
them to testify, fire them without compensation as part of any bailouts,
and refer them to the Justice Department for prosecution.
I want serious regulation of Wall Street.
I want a five-year moratorium on foreclosures, and a bailout of
homeowners equal to any bailout of bankers.
And, finally, I want $700 billion invested in green energy jobs
immediately, to be paid for by a tax on carbon emissions.
In fact, I would like to see all of these steps included in a single
bill called the "Honest Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008."
Somebody explain to me why that wouldn't be a good move for our economy
and a smart political step for those who propose it.
Of course, we are banning EVERYTHING predatory, forever.
A maximum wage at 10 times minimum is excellent. It's well understood as necessary. Just compare the US society with other societies and you'll see why. We're having that along with limiting asset ownership and enterprise size to ten man-powers.
Tobin tax deters currency speculation. We demand the same STRONG deterrent against ALL speculation, BUT it doesn't make sense in non-speculative or non-vice industries. While finance/insurance are vices, they are at a different level than the speculation vice. Finance/insurance serve as a convenience. Unnecessary but not destructive on a fundamnetal level like speculation. The deterrent should be against ABUSE of these instruments.
Which laws can the banking crooks be prosecuted under? Since we lack the laws currently we will exploit this opportunity to pass the laws which will deter future skulduggery.
We won't bail out the homeowners. Taxpayers do not owe them a stay in a house they could not really afford. Let them pay the real price for the stay.
Fantastic idea to invest the same amount in carbon tax to green jobs. There are several related concession we will extract from the elites. We will REVERSE all of the legislation and spending from the past eight years, including all the war profiteering enterprises. It's all garbage isn't it? To the compose heap with all of it!
."A man's reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what's a heaven for?" Robert Browning (1855)
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Mr. Swanson,
It is completely unrealistic to think Congress would pass any bill for any purpose which created a "maximum wage". Especially one only ten times that of the minimum wage.
You know that, so why do you advocate it? It is the blogging equivalent of King Canute shouting at the tide.
And how do you define "predatory mortgage lending?" In the first place, the horse has left the barn and isn't coming back until a cold day in Hell. No one, predator or not, wants to lend mortgage money to anyone these days, even "prime" borrowers. In the second case, how would you discriminate (word chosen deliberately) between a "predatory" mortgage issued to a sub-prime minority homeowner by a nefarious broker and an opportunity for a struggling low-income individual to own her or his own home?
To avoid re-establishing red lining, you would have to rely on such arbitrary measures as outlawing "cold calling" and banning advertising for mortgage brokerage in low-income neighborhoods. Nearly any Supreme Court would knock down such restrictions on commercial speech.
Your proposal for a "five-year moratorium on foreclosures" would reward flippers as well as struggling homeowners and punishingly raise domestic interest rates. Remember that many of the purchasers of the various flavors of mortgage backed securities are foreign banks. It is they who have subsidized US profligacy through their willingness to buy this junk at low "prices" (e.g. low interest rates). If they go on a buyers strike against all debt American the interest payments 9+ trillion dollars the government owes could balloon to a $trillion per YEAR. In that way goes national bankruptcy and a huge crowding out of optional domestic spending. And soon enough a complete debasement of the dollar.
Those horrors may occur anyway, but by banning foreclosures you will speed not delay them.
Finally, if you do all these things you advocate, there will be little enough of Wall Street left that you won't need to regulate it.
The "unrealistic" argument doesn't cut it any more. It hasn't cut it for a few years now. So now, real is what the people demand, do, think, say. Unreal is what elites demand, do, think, say. So now, the tables are turned.
Realism is now localism. Localism means detaching one's self from the power centers. Shifting one's exchange/association to the local independent economy, away from the global garbage economy. In this New Earth Century, real is local, unreal is global. We progressives have been saying for years now that it's a New Earth Century, NOT a New American Century.
As it currently stands, you can re-finanace a mortgage on a SECOND (or third or fourth ) house, yacht, etc, but NOT on your primary residence.
It would not be as difficult as you claim. It would take moreal courage. And, unfortunately the Senate lacks taht these days.
Lock in the interest rates of ARMs. (To 3%--that what we're gonna end up giving Wall St.)OR give Wall St. a "subprime loan" (for those subprime people), and let it adjust to 30% in 6 mos.
If there is no accounting for this rape of equity from the middle and working classes, things wil get worse, trust in the govt will get worse, (if thats possible), and, hopefully, there would be a general tax/work revolt. Of we had decent unions, and, a little "community", people could take care of each other, while working for change. It might be difficult, but no more difficult than this fricking roller-coaster and millions of boarded up houses.
I'm not confident enough that anything will change. There are some only "half-crappy" ideas out there. If they are ignored, I'm afraid Congress will go with the original. If the Mkt tanks anyway, they will say that they didnt pass it soon enough. If they dont pass it, they wil say viola! If they pass it changed, they will blame failure on the changes.
I dont know what to do.I dont think anybody really does. But, we know what has worked before. FDR wasnt called a class traitor for nothing. The GOP has been steadily erroding the New Deal, since before Reagan. We need to get it back,.
"...give Wall St. a "subprime loan" (for those subprime people), and let it adjust to 30% in 6 mos."
Now you're talkin'!
But you never hear about any dissenting Democrats, it is always about what incentives they can dangle in front of the Republican holdouts. They are treated with the same indifference that the citizens--who oppose this bill 99 to 1, are dismissed with.
Obama is, by the hour, increasingly a disappointment. So much for the hollow platitudes of change. He, by even a small measure, is no Roosevelt, but rather a smooth performer of bipartisan rhetoric (the great compromiser)on a playing field skewed to the Right, play-acting a role, stumbling and feeble when challenged- and not especially driven by high-minded or honorable motives. HClinton was already compromised, but I have to say, she emerged as an increasingly steely brawler. There is something to be said for that with the emerging struggle of class: us sacrificing everything for the elites. She is convincing as any women even when she is not authentic. The same can not be said of Obama, he just does not connect.
Too bad Hilary said she would "obliterate Iran," on foreign policy she is very much a neo-con. And remember 1992 when she caved very quickly on single payer healthcare and now is the biggest recipient of campaign funds from the HMOs. Sorry but I just don't believe ANYTHING Hilary says.
I'll probably vote for Obama to keep Palin from being near the nuclear trigger and Greens for everything else.
Well, yes, but it was just a very small part of the larger picture I was musing over. But, with each passing day, I am not so sure I will vote for Obama under any circumstances. Why prolong the inevitable--that is all the Dems ever do. They just throw a bone to keep the pack quiet and maybe shaking the status quo is the only formula to really break out of the deepening rut.
Hillary is an incredible street brawler for Hillary. For the people, not so much.
Hillary and Obama are both 100 percent political opportunists. The only difference may be that Hillary has been in Washington so long that she has more entanglements with entrenched interests and it could be more difficult or even impossible for her to ditch those if the political winds blow another way. It may even be that it will always remain impossible for her to move left regardless of how clearly that becomes the politically opportunistic move.
I have made my phone calls and e-mails this morning to both my U.S. Senators, urging them to vote NO on the WORSE Senate bill and to wait and support the DeFazio plan (Kucinich, Katur, etc.). This whole debacle is more proof why we can't trust nor support Democrats in general.
so did i. but i have a bad feeling regarding the senaters in my state.... the reps all voted for the bush bailout monday.
down with the 2 party system. no more excuses.
How about this for an incentive: All CEO's, their friends, relatives, congressmen and executive branch people who have made out so handsomly on the last ten years economic scam give back every penny they got from that scam and go to jail for, say, ten years. That should produce enough capital to put Wall Street back in business and restore the faith of the American people at least enough to get us started in the right direction for a change.
Hey! that's what I've been sayin'. Supposedly 39 billion last year alone.
Obama needs to tell the truth.
Ha! I no longer believe that man even when he says "and" and "the"!
They want to give the crooks tax breaks now too. Democrats give in to Republicans again. When will they ever learn? The local university (UCSC) mascot is a Banana Slug, and it has more spine than our current politicians. Well, most of them are going to be out of a job next year, so they'll have some time to reflect.
Vote Green locally, Nader globally
I'd like to see all Democrats unite behind Fazio's plan. If this cannot happen, there's no point in begging the Republicans. The Democrats are supposed to be the "people's party" right? This is why both parties are not worthy of being trusted. Any Democrat that votes against Defazio's plan deserves to be EXECUTED IMMEDIATELY !! NO FUCKING EXCUSES !!
Call your representatives and yes call Republicans. And be nice.
Have. Did. I have to admit, Turner is alot "nicer" now that his re-election is coming up--lol. He has probably totally forgotten the screaming match we got into (I'm not kidding! He was cussing!) about 18 mos. ago. Once he started cussing, I just let it rip!! (It was about whether the laws should be followed, whether they are moral or not--he, in this one case, said that they shouldnt--I suggested that many people might think it was moral to kill Dubya, but, that you should NOT do it, because it would be against the law. He called me everything but a constituent!)
Apparently , he uses those words all the time or he would remember. And, a Cathlic! LOL!!
I got a "neutral " response this time, but, no matter waht he does, I'd never vote for him.