Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Middle Class Must Not Be Forced to Bail Out Wall Street Greed
For years, as a member of the House Banking Committee and now as a member of the Senate Budget Committee, I have heard the Bush Administration tell us how "robust" our economy was and how strong the "fundamentals" were. That was until a few days ago. Now, we are being told that if Congress does not act immediately and approve the $700 billion Wall Street bailout proposal these "free marketers" have just written up, there will be an unprecedented economic meltdown in the United States and an unraveling of the global economy.
This proposal as presented is an unacceptable attempt to force middle income families (and our children) to pick up the cost of fixing the horrendous economic mess that is the product of the Bush Administration's deregulatory fever and Wall Street's insatiable greed. If the potential danger to our economy was not so dire, this blatant effort to essentially transfer $700 billion up the income ladder to those at the top would be laughable.
Let us be clear. If the economy is on the edge of collapse we need to act. But rescuing the economy does not mean we have to just give away $700 billion of taxpayer money to the banks. (In truth, it could be much more than $700 billion. The bill only says the government is limited to having $700 billion outstanding at any time. By selling the mortgage-backed assets it acquires - even at staggering losses - the government will be able to buy even more resulting is a virtually limitless financial exposure on the part of taxpayers.) Any proposal must protect middle income and working families from bearing the burden of this bailout.
I have proposed a four part plan to accomplish that goal which includes a five-year, 10% surtax on the income of individuals above $500,000 a year, and $1 million a year for couples; a requirement that the price the government pays for any mortgage assets are discounted appropriately so that government can recover the amount it paid for them; and, finally, the government should receive equity in the companies it bails out so that when the stock of these companies rises after the bailout, taxpayers also have the opportunity to share in the resulting windfall. Taken together, these measures would provide the best guarantee that at the end of five years, the government will have gotten back the money it put out.
Second, in addition to protecting the average American from being saddled with the cost, any serious proposal has to include reforms so that we end the type of behavior that led to this crisis in the first place. Much of this activity can be traced to specific legislation that broke down regulatory safety walls in the financial sector and allowed banks and others to engage in new types of risky transactions that are at the heart of this crisis. That deregulation needs to be repealed. Wall Street has shown it cannot be trusted to police itself. We need to reinstate a strong regulatory system that protects our economy.
Third, we need to address the needs of working families in this country who are today facing very difficult times. If we can bail out Wall Street, we need to respond with equal vigor to their plight. That means, for example, creating millions of jobs through major investments in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and creating a new renewable energy system. We must also make certain that the most vulnerable Americans don't freeze in the winter or die because they lack access to primary health care.
Finally, we need to protect ourselves from being at the mercy of giant companies that are "too big to fail," that is, companies who are so large that their failure would cause systemic harm to the economy. We need to assess which companies fall into this category and insist they are broken up. Otherwise, the American taxpayer will continue to be on the financial hook for the risky behavior, the mismanagement, and even the illegal conduct of these companies' executives.
These are the last days of the Bush Administration, the most dishonest and incompetent in modern American history. It is imperative that, at this important moment, Congress stand up for the middle class and for fiscal integrity. The future of our country is at stake.
68 Comments so far
Show AllThis is frustrating. Despite my complaints, many comments are still not showing up on this thread. You can see the full comment stream by going to
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/22-6
Is this an error in a SQL statement that occurred when the original article was moved? I am going to put a forbidden word in here to try to bring this to editor's attention - GENERAL STRIKE
Joe
There is some odd glitch on this thread. Most comments from after September 22 at 5:33 do not show up on my screen. But when I did an internal google on the words "buzzword robust", which I remember from a posting by Little Brother, the postings come up. If you click on that result, you can see the missing postings. The number of postings jumps from 66 to over 131.
Joe
ji3m
hi all. Question: is there any truth to the buzz on the web about a massive public mobilization at the capitol this week to pressure congress to not consolidate the theft in progress? If so, when is it starting to happen? Anyone know who's doing the organizing or is it really just spontaneous? I have been able to confirm much but maybe someone else can. I hear it the biggest yet and definitely not partisan.
That's the first I've heard. Sounds like the perfect thing right now. Keep us informed if you find out anything else.
Thanks
question- noting I am not an economist.. so if someone could please explain:)
if the government is bailing out these banks/ financial institutions..
does this mean that the government is assuming ownership of them?
It seems to me if the gov is taking that much of a financial vested interest.. that the government should have a lien on them, be on a board, so to speak.. oversight.. and that the loaned money goes back into the taxpayer fund, including an " interest rate"... and that the government continues to hold ownership/ lein, the " note" until the debt is completely paid off. By having oversight, it assures that the debt is paid off in hard currency, not by inflated resold assets that created the mess to begin with.
this way- it protects the financial interest of the ones footing the bill- namely, the taxpayers.
Does this make sense? Is this an idea that has been promoted?
Or is the government essentially just loaning the industry money and assuming they will act responsibly? or is going to break up and sell off assets at a loss, which means someone on the buying side will actually profit?
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
To TerriD:
The government is assuming ownership of the debts of many of the banks and insurance companies, but in bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the U.S. government has just become the biggest realtor in the world and will own tens of millions of homes outright. The financial institutions will be dealt with in different ways from liquidation of their various components to propping up core remnants of some. Some of them have valuable and old brand names that can eventually recover stock value (because Amurkans have short memories and herd to known entities like cattle). There has been woefully little information about the endgame mechanics of this "bailout" process and how which institutions will be treated or the criterion for making these decisions. Paulson's plan is wreathed in secrecy like most of Emperor Bush's proclamations.
Re: Your idea of a lien: Sen. Sanders addresses tax payer equity with the portion of his plan regarding "a requirement that the price the government pays for any mortgage assets are discounted appropriately so that government can recover the amount it paid for them; and, finally, the government should receive equity in the companies it bails out so that when the stock of these companies rises after the bailout, taxpayers also have the opportunity to share in the resulting windfall."
But there are many good ideas forming out there to include ways for the taxpayers to get something for what they are being told they must sacrifice. I suggest that you all call your Congresspersons and ask them some of these questions about fairness to the taxpayers and tell them your ideas and ask them what theirs are (if any). Be persistent.
thanks for the response.. helpful info- I do so hate wading through the masses of mass-media filler to figure out what they are actually saying and doing.. reading journalism can be worse than reading legalese..:)
yeah- sanders IS my rep... not too shabby, eh? I suppose I should forward this to his email.. hell- they send me enough mail.. time to rsvp:)
anything I should add. given that in a small state and as one of his constituents I have a slightly better chance than a snowball in hell that someone actually reads it?
:)
I read a few lines about the "leaked plan" at this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21draftcnd.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin
I am not an economist either, but to me it looks like the taxpayers' money is being spent to buy into the end state of a Ponzi scheme with only vague nods toward protecting the taxpayer. I am trying to get better information about exactly who gets what and how.
Joe
Whoa---why the big rush all of the sudden. Sounds FAM--LIAR FOLKS! Maybe another Patriot Act or a financial 911. Bernie is one of the few that is not part of the crime family that is running to the taxpayers for help and like he says: The Bush administration is the most dishonest and incompetent in history; so why would you trust them to do the right thing; especially when the people like Paulson are ex Wall street executives. This crisis smells to me.
Like the patricians of late Roman Republic, their elite greed has destroyed the economic backbone of the state that guards their wealth. Their deserved fate is a clear street for so when they leap out of their cushy Wall Street office buildings, their splatter doesn't harm any innocent bystanders.
I heard Mr. Sanders on Thom Hartmann's Friday program.
A caller expressed to Mr. Sanders why he's not voting for Obama.
He listed the Iraq war/occupation and FISA as reasons.
The usually calm Mr. Sanders became heated.
Mr. Sanders became aggressive and accused the caller of wanting to put McCain in the White House.
Yet Mr. Sanders is today advocating, perhaps unknowngly, another reason not to vote for Obama.
Mr. Sanders, don't you know that Obama is in favor of the Bush/Paulson plan?
How can we vote for Obama yet not also vote to force the middle class to bail out Wall Street?
Though I am not a supporter of the campaign of Senator Obama I am a fan of the truth. To the best of my knowledge Obama has not come out in favor of Paulson's plan. If you know otherwise please link to support your contention.
Today Obama called for restraint in the adoption of said plan and asked Congress to consider this carefully before making a recommendation.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
No, I'm sure he's waiting to see which way the wind blows, what his focus groups tell him, and which way his "followers" want him to "lead". And above all, let's check with Rubin and Goldman Sachs.
The "democrats" painted themselves into a corner by buying into this hustle to begin with, Madcow. They've done it for years. Stop plucking out your own eyes.
My critique of Cynthia McKinney's 10 Point Plan:
1. enactment of a foreclosure moratorium now before the next phase of ARM interest rate increases take effect. [metal: Good sounding idea and most foreclosures should probably be halted until markets calm more, but not all of them should be halted. Just as not every financial institution that traded in bad paper should be bailed out by tax payers--not every home buyer who tried to game the pre-ARM rollover system should be bailed out either. Amurkans need to start learning the consequences of their hypermaterialistic fantasies at some point.
2. elimination of all ARM mortgages and their renegotiation into 30- or 40-year loans. [metal: Possible in some cases; others should be allowed to remain in their homes as renters and some of them who can't afford "fair market" rental prices should receive some limited rental subsidies based on an income vs. local market valuation formula.]
3. establishment of new mortgage lending practices to end predatory and discriminatory practices. [metal: The time is long overdue to restore early 1980s era laws against usury, to create federally standardized and strict laws against discriminatory home loans and to repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (aka: the Financial Services Modernization Act) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.]
4. establishment of criteria and construction goals for affordable housing
[metal: This is an interesting topic that reaches from the idea of affordable low maintenance, energy efficient housing for entire families to various co-op and communal housing models to subsidized rents to minimalistic uni-shelters for homeless individuals (some costing as little as $900 per uni-shelter). Sad to say, as long as many people of inadequate incomes are too ignorant to use birth control, or cannot gain timely access to safe early abortions, and will, therefore, have too many children there will be a need for government subsidized housing. There is a moral imperative to shelter the homeless and we can expect an unprecedented deluge of homelessness in the next year. Since the government just nationalized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, instead of relying on private capital, perhaps the government should recreate the Civilian Conservation Corps to build this new housing and shelter system. Many of them would be building their own families' homes.]
5. redefinition of credit and regulation of the credit industry so that discriminatory practices are completely eliminated. [metal: Sounds good to me, but the devil is the details regarding the "redefinition" of credit--kind of like "redefining" torture.]
6. full funding for initiatives that eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in home ownership. [metal: A good sounding generality. What are the specifics?]
7. recognition of shelter as a right according to the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights to which the U.S. is a signatory so that no one sleeps on U.S. streets. [metal: I agree with that, but people who can't afford and yet have too many children should have one set of strings attached to their government subsidized shelter, and illegal aliens on their government escorted way to being deported should have another.]
8. full funding of a fund designed to cushion the job loss and provide for retraining of those at the bottom of the income scale as the economy transitions.
[metal: We need a New Green Deal as some Brits have suggested--a combination of New Deal era programs and a federally subsidized, environmentally sustainable economic transition that is on a time frame for implementation like the NASA program to land a man on the moon. I think we need another WPA and CCC for several socially and economically beneficial reasons.]
9. close all tax loopholes and repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the top 1% of income earners. [metal: I agree 100% and would add the need to return corporations to their pre-1880s status as legal entities that do not have equal protection rights the same as flesh and blood human beings and must have their business licenses annually reviewed by representative committees in the localities in which they are headquartered, and States and foreign governments in which they operate, to determine if they are behaving in socially responsible ways--subject to having their licenses summarily yanked if they are not. This goes along with shareholder rights reform and board/CEO salary reform.]
10. fairly tax corporations, denying federal subsidies to those who relocate jobs overseas; repeal NAFTA. [metal: I agree with all of this and would add the need for a slowly phased-in, sector-by-sector moratorium on WTO and "free trade" treaty rules and regulations until an industrial sector-by-sector economic analysis can be done in the U.S. to determine the adverse effects on the U.S. economy--including middle-class jobs--since 1994 because of the "free trade" regime. The full impact of these treaties in terms of middle-class job loss has been deliberately kept secret by Clinton and Bush II and it's time for a reckoning.]
Good critiques. I sure am not able to comprehend this financial stuff on my own.
The only thing I would change re Sander's 4 Point Plan is that I would set the 10% surtax lower to include individuals with incomes of $300,000 or more.
My critique of Nader's 10 Point Plan:
1. No bailouts without conditions and reciprocity in the form of stock warrants.
[metal: What are stock warrants, who writes them and who would issue and enforce them?]
2. No more lobbying for any company that is bailed out. [metal: Could be fought in the courts and even if it wasn't such lobbying would take place on the sly, via middle-men or offshore.]
3. No golden parachutes and get out of jail free cards for guilty executives.
[metal: Cutting the parachute cords would be easy. Getting rid of plea-bargains--not so easy.]
4. No bailouts without public hearings. [metal: Good general idea except that much of the bailout looks to be massively consolidated under a Resolution Trust Corporation and the sheer number of institutions and individual executives involved would make hearings go on for months and months and months. I think the overall situation calls for preventative legislation and strict enforcement of the new rules to prevent this from recurring, not post-mortem hearings that are too little, too late. Personally, I think We the People should convene a Continental Congress with newly elected representatives (no Senators or current Congressmembers allowed) with inherent contempt trial powers, new sentencing guidelines and rendition powers. They should put on trial ASAP not only the execs of the firms who pushed this mess and profited from it but the politicians who pushed it in the GOP and DLC--along with the long list of Team Bush/DLC war criminals who deserve their day in the Hague and their time in prison or in the noose. Consider the scale of the domestic and foreign suffering these self-aggrandizing hacks have inflicted on the U.S. and so many other millions around the world. We haven't even dipped our toes in the level of economic suffering we are about to experience because of these crooked fat cats. We don't need hearings: We need speedy trials with limited appeals and guillotines.]
5. Reduce the moral hazard in U.S. mortgage markets by introducing covered bonds for the majority of mortgage products as they do in Western Europe. That gives institutions that finance mortgages an incentive to be prudent, because they cannot just unload them and wipe their hands clean of the liability, but are instead on the hook if the homeowner defaults. [metal: Sounds good to me.]
6. Maintain neighborhood stability and housing security by passing a law with a sunset clause allowing below median-value homeowners facing foreclosure the right to rent-to-own their homes at fair market value rates. [metal: Fair market rents affordable in one area are outrageous in another. This is income vs. location discriminatory but better than nothing. I support limited progressive rental subsidies based on an income vs. local market valuation formula.]
7. Avoid future housing bubbles by removing implicit government guarantees for new mortgages that exceed thresholds of greater than 15-20 times the annual fair market rent value of the home. [metal: Sounds good but market creep would eventually erode it with the help of more Phil Gramm's down the line without strict enforcement.]
8. Make the Federal Reserve a Cabinet Position, so it is accountable to Congress, as well as making sure all Federal Reserve Bank presidents are appointed by the President and answerable to congress. [metal: I agree with making the Fed Chairmanship a Cabinet Position, but letting presidents appoint all Fed Bank presidents? No thanks. Picture every Fed Bank president being a neo-con Bush II appointee. A better idea would be to nationalize the Fed itself as a Departmental Agency and make all its top committee functions publicly transparent with mandatory operational reports and hearings before select Congressional committees three times a year.]
9. Reduce conflicts of interest by taking away power for auditor and rating agency selection from companies and placing it in the hands of the SEC to be administered on random assignment. [metal: Sounds better than what we have and the SEC is due for a serious structural overhaul.]
10. Implement a securities speculation tax, starting with derivatives to deter casino-style capitalism. [metal: A good beginning but other "securitization" and traded "debt instruments" need to be either taxed or outlawed. We also need to repeal of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (aka: the Financial Services Modernization Act) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.
Ronnie's Kids (the "government is bad" crowd) have been pulling the regulatory pillars out from under our society for most of thirty years now and finally the sky is falling. I was just thinking that at least they didn't get their fingers on Social Security but that of course is exactly where this trillion dollars(a trillion here a trillion there...) is going to come from. There ain't no right no where.
Back when Saint Ronnie was talking about his vision of "a service oriented economy" I remember my dad asking, "Who is going to be serving who?" I think we can see that now. The point is that all of this was plain to see even back then even to a man who started out as a bootleg coal miner in the depression. That of course was the one in the 1930s. This one will probably make that one pale by comparison.
What I can't figure out is, why did my generation fall for it all these years? They say the rube always cons himself and I suppose that's as close to an answer as I can find.
Well, it's getting chilly here in the north country and I've got to bring in some fire wood.
Sanders is one of the few decent lawmakers in congress, but it's disappointing that he shows so little interest bolstering a progressive 3rd party like the Greens.
He certainly sees the hopeless corruption of the duopoly. And as a nationally known and respected senator who is nearing the end of his political career due to advanced age, he could give legitimacy and visibility to an alternate party --by joining one, and leading it in his last public days.
His proposed amendments to the legislative bailout may address the present economic meltdown dilemma with some limited cash accountability, but they don't sufficiently address the structural causes of the predicament. It's not phoney insider 're-regulation' that's needed: it's sweeping, democratically-determined structural regulation of financial markets plus public financing of federal elections that's needed, for starters.
On the long shot they are even adopted, Sanders' provisos are not much more than slaps to the wrists of robber barons and corrupt lawmakers who will in consequence remain free to continue abusing their political and financial power and blackmailing the rest of us to accept it all as 'inevitable.'
The republican fascists have crashed the economy with their free-market deregulation bonanza, and they see the writing on the wall. So what do they do? They paint the democrats into a corner. Either they sign on to the bailout---which, to those with an ability to think critically, is theft---and they get tossed over the coals for capitulating once again. Or they don't sign on to the bailout, and get blamed for not acting to save the economy when they could---it's all their fault. They will take the blame either way. You got to give it to those fascists, they really know how to play the game...
"fascists?" Maybe.
"corporatists?" Definitely:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
Dear Madcow--
The Democrats have been complicit in the deregulation of the economy since Clinton's administration. We are now reaping the effects of a one-party system that is controlled by the big corporations. Even Obama says he is for Paulson's and Bush's bailout. Who is going to look after those of us who have to work for a living?
Have you ever seen the ads about dealing with "Gambling addiction?" They run them on late night programs, and you'll find some in the casinos.
The greatest gambling addicts are the speculators that infest Wall Street! Day after day, they place their bets on what will rise and fall. They figure out schemes to beat the wheel. The bets go higher and they borrow to hedge their bets.
Then, one day, they lose. Do they walk out of the Wall Street Casino wearing a barrel? No, they go to Big Daddy Sam, who goes out at gunpoint and takes the money from the non-gambling workers and gives it to the addicts so they can go feed their habit some more.
This has happened so many times it has become routine. Big company in trouble through mismanagement and theft? Sam will make it good, he's got plenty of serfs to tax.
As we slowly go down the tubes, there are fewer and fewer working serfs to pay the bills. One of these days, our currency will be the Yuan, and we will all have to learn Mandarin. By then, those protected addicts will be gambling in Zurich or Dubai with the bail out money supplied by We the People.
Sioux Rose
At least Sanders is paying attention and not as bamboozled as the insider DC crowd, but... why is this article not published in a large newspaper, only by CD? That implies many are not hearing what he has to say, just buying the PR that the bailout MUST be done NOW! Brought to us by the same team that ruined New Orleans (cleanu-up, etc), lied about air quality in NY, tells us things are going just wonderfully in Iraq, can't account for a missing several trillion, did its no-bid contracts, sees no problem in paying the private army (Blackwater) many times the salaries of average military troops, has weakened the EPA, and tried to narrow the airwaves even more... these people have a blatant track record of all the reasons NOT to trust them (as for Bush, would you buy a used car from this man? style) and now they want the keys to what's left of our treasury? It IS absurd..................
"the horrendous economic mess that is the product of the Bush Administration's deregulatory fever and Wall Street's insatiable greed."
I agree with the bit about Wall Steet, but I don't think the rest of it can be blamed entirely on Bush (much as I would like to). Deregulation has been a steady process over a number of years -- much in the same way as a cattle stampede is a steady process.
Go Bernie!
All of the above, plus: one per cent tax on all stock transactions, tax unearned income the same rate as earned income, limit pensions of all government employees to $200,00 a year, limit ALL government employee annual pay increases to the same schedule as social security, dock the pay of congressional people for days not doing the work they were hired to do, charge the administration for expenses incurred during their political travels and speeches.
I think we should tax unearned income at a HIGHER rate than earned income - after all, it is unearned.
Good ideas. Skip the bailout.
I agree with ZachP, "let economy crash so we can start over with one based on sustainability--not capital accumulation". Take a look at our Declaration of Independence, "Whenever any Form Of Government becomes destuctive to these ends (to secure our rights to Life, Libery and the Pursuit of Happiness)It is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new governmnent laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
My safety and happiness requires the impeachment of our 'leaders' and the formation of a new government. This new government shall be a democracy and act in the interests of the living people of the nation. There shall be no concept of 'corporate personhood', and our national interests shall end at the border.
Our present government must not be allowed to pay off the theives with the hard earned money of the working citizens or by our children and grandchildren in the future. Those that gambeled and lost shall weep at their loss but not be repaid by me or mine.
Perhaps you fail to understand the calamity you support with this 'let it crash' concept. It is not those who caused this mess who will suffer but millions upon millions of innocents. Those who bought and sold bundled and worthless paper will live on the many millions they have accumulated while we sell apples in the streets.
Sanders is correct in that those who profited must bear the burden. I doubt he will make any headway however.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Before the democrates agree to this proposal they should insist on strict limits on the executive compensation for every firm that uses the federal (MY) loan!
Thank you Sen. Sanders
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=303279
He has some other good ideas. He supports single payer health care.
So does Senator Brown. Brown says that they are waiting for the House to pass HR 676 (Conyers Medicare for all), because the Senate would just fillibuster it to death. Maybe its an excuse to wait unti after the elections.
Besides, Sanders is a socialist and "Merka hates socialism." No, wait., ummm..never mind..
Tell Sen. Brown "Baloney!", there's nothing to keep any Sen from introducing a companion Senate bill - passing it in the House does nothing to make it filibuster proof. I like Brown, I think, overall, but with regard to this issue, he's blowing smoke. Call his bluff.
Bernie, let the class war aggressors gouge the taxslaves very very deeply, so that the taxslaves may feel the pain, so that they may gain the necessary motivation to join the progressive revolution that will bury forever Friedmanite "laissez-faire" capitalism next to its daddy.
Okay Bernie you had a chance to bang on your champion of the little people tom-tom, now how about getting serious by introducing a companion Senate bill for HR 476, Single payer healthcare--get some good progressives like Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Sherrod Brown, and Barbara Boxer to co-sponser it with you.
We could pay for it by reducing the Pentragon budget 10%, withdrawing our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, and taxing corporations at the same rate as real persons. Hello, Bernie! Bernie are you listening? Yo Bernieeeeee!!!
Poet
AMEN! BRAVO! It's time to take up poetry again!
Bringing home the troops to live in poverty with most of the rest of us may cause a little problem in the streets.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/files/access-for-all-7-31-08.pdf
Sanders, Brown, Obama, Clinton et al are all co-sponsors on this one.
Ir is a step in the right direction. But, it could just prolonge the agony of 15 million uninsured.
We simply have to have single payer.
&YYY&
Ha! Ha! The best ploy for the Vampire States would be to ask for debt forgiveness from the World Bank, China, India and third world countries, since the debts are so obviously unpayable, and are going to be crippling the VS economy and public for generations to come, hindering the development and arising from the conditions of poverty, joblessness and soon to be starvation that the average VS person finds themselves in. He! He! He! And would the VS ever forgive third world debt.
Some broke states could do like Hemingway and Capt Tony---in Key West.
Secede from the uS, declare war on the US, surrender, and apply for financial reconstruction aid.
Or jsut spend like youre rich, and DC loves you.
I agree. If our country has to go through an IMF structural adjustment like so many developing countries have been subjected to, we will never be irresponsible with our money again.
Thank you, Senator Sanders, a voice of reason and common sense who serves all Americans!
Bill in Dubuque
Senator Sanders. Although I have applauded your efforts on a number of issues that matter deeply to me, I'm afraid that I have to point out something that I see as a basic truth.
You have bought into the bailout... your proposals just tweak it a bit... and your "safeguards and fair play" amendments can easily be circumvented with just a little inventiveness.
The contradiction of your "solution" just calls for cooking the books and creative accounting... a practice in which everyone belonging to "The Party" is fully trained to accomplish... when it serves their political purposes.
Meanwhile, not only do non-corporate entities (raise your hanup humans) get royally screwed, but under your guidance, are led to believe that it should make us feel good.
The answer is NO! Don't be fooled Bernie.
Honestly, fuck it all, let the economy collapse so we can start over with one based on sustainability, not capital accumulation.
AMEN!
Agreed!
Thank you Bernie Sanders-
This idiot government wants us to fear Islamic terrorists and support the so-called "war on terror" [still not sure what that is] when the real threat is right here inside the beltway. I fear for the future of this country.
Thank you Senator Sanders for being rational and looking out for the interests of the citizens.
One question - when you have a chance, would you mind ordering the arrest of President Bush and VP Cheney for treason, theft of public funds, violating the constition, and mass murder?
Thanks a bunch, and have a great day.
There is an AG running in Vermont that wantrs to do just that.
I wish Vermont woudl secede--theyve talked of it. It's cold up therre, but at least I wont die inthe house with my heat turned off.
They are not proposing just baling out wallstreet.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Sunday "that foreign banks will be able to unload bad financial assets under a $700 billion U.S. proposal aimed at restoring order during a devastating financial crisis."
So, now the American taxpayer is also on the hook for foreign banks!
Bravo Bernie Sanders! A Voice of Sanity in our insane broken political system! I agree with the comments made here, and I also agree that instead of $500,000 it should be $250,000.
But why are the Democrats so spineless? What has happened to what is left of their brains? As others have said, WHY isn't SENATOR Obama offering something concrete RIGHT NOW??
"But why are the Democrats so spineless? What has happened to what is left of their brains? As others have said, WHY isn't SENATOR Obama offering something concrete RIGHT NOW??"
Simple, because Obama is in it up to his ears - http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contriball.php?cycle=2008
ala Obama=Rubin=Goldman Sachs
See http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080922/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown
"The fast-moving negotiations between the administration and Congress unfolded a day after the government approved a request by investment houses Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley to change their status to bank holding companies.
That change will allow the two venerable institutions to set up commercial banks that will be able to take deposits, significantly bolstering the resources of both institutions. It will also grant them permanent access to emergency loans supplied by the Fed rather than the temporary loan status they have had since last March when the Fed moved to prop up investment banks following the forced sale of Bear Stearns."
The blurb on a Reuter's video clip from today says "Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs gave up their status as investment banks TO PROTECT THEM from the storm that has seen THEIR RIVALS DESTROYED" (caps added) Strange that their rivals were not given that same option,now isn't it?
Until the Dems publicly and openly dump Rubin and Rubinomics, which is what Sanders suggested on DN today, don't believe a word Obama says on this subject. Even if they do, I think it is too late to prevent the stink of this whole thing from sticking to him. Obama now has his own, but much bigger, version of McCain's S&L Keating 5 mess. A pox on both their parties.
I really do think that when all this shakes out, Teapot-Dome will look like a teapot party.
If our Congress had more folks the likes of Sanders, Ralph Nader would be winning big time and he would be more relevant today.
Don't forget, Sanders is an Independent. Wouldn't it be nice to put an Independent in the WH who might actually sign legislation such as Sanders proposes? Let's see now, who's running as an independent who might do that? Hmmm, what's that feller's name again? Oh yeah, some guy named Nader.
Who would ever make a home loan to a middle class American tax payer? With this government imposed debt load no man is credit worthy. And so it goes, the American Dream and the usurious mortgage lenders all go together...
Sorry for being off topic but if you are inclined, please go to this PBS link and vote whether you believe Palin is qualified to run for VP. The right is storming the website:
http://www.pbs.org/now/polls/poll-435.html
I get damned tired of hearing about the "middle class" disappearing! Doesn't anyone with a mouth called a "pundit" realize that below the middle is a freaking "BOTTOM" and that the bottom may COMPLETELY fall out from under them/us?!
"Crack open a cynic and you will find an angry idealist!"
The middle class, such as it is, is not the bottom. Talk to homeless people. Listen to homeless people.
You don't read very well: THAT was my point!
"Crack open a cynic and you will find an angry idealist!"
In Dayton , they have actually passed a law, that , if you want to ask for money (that includes playing music and leaving a guitar case oopen) , you have to apply for a "license" with a pic on it (!!), and pay $5--every day.
Please enlighten me here:
Is SENATOR Obama calling for massive re-regulation of the financial "industry" (some "industry": produces nothing but trouble.)? He and Biden could be introducing bills for this purpose. Are they? Or are they just going along with the "rich man's dream"?
What do you think you could do about that?
Oregoncharles
Smokey H
Yes I agree with Sanders.
But how do we citizens get the Congress to stop and listen to this voice of reason when they seem so hell-bent on giving Bush, The Fed and all these fat CEO's a blank check at everyone else's expense?
STOP putting your money (tax $$$) in their account. That's one way.
If enough people would show up at the "hearing" ofr'debate" (enough that they couldnt throw out), then, at least most uS citizerns would be informed about why theyre so sore--from gettin g screwed
Sanders is , as (almost) always, correct. I think he sets the income levels too high.
It would certainly be in the "capitalism lovers" best interests to accept these modest proposals, or get the hell out of the country (deport them) and revoke their US citizenship, for treason , during time of war . (But, hell we're always at war)
The entire world is sick to death (literally) of it.
Listen to Sen. Sanders, he is one of the handful of national politicians you can trust to not speak out of the side of his mouth.
(Among other things) this "bailout" is a scam to keep the house of cards from fallíng until after the (s)election.
___________
There's a glory in the morning because the earth turns 'round and a promise in the evening when the sun goes down