What people might be waking up to is the fact that no matter what the taxpayer is going to be hurt in all of this. So, why bailout the companies that created the mess with money that can be used to better the society that our administration forgot about for the past eight years. If we don't spend the $700B and stop spending on the war that would keep $820B into our country's economy over the next year. I think a lot could be done to make this country get back on track again with some of that.
I'm sure, if there is going to be any money flowing anywhere, there could be a plan that involves the taxpayer and not the corporations. The taxpayers are those that the corporations screwed over, or those that due to the recklessness of the corporations have since lost their homes or jobs, or those that have be schemed out of their homes due to fraudulent lending practices. The corps will write down their losses as a business expense and have to deal with their own recovery. That is what running a business is about. Some will close their doors. Many already have.
But, the taxpayer has already forked out about $200B for earlier issues this year, despite what is being spent on the war. We finally found the balls to say, "Enough is enough!"
It will be difficult. It will take some time. But, we will not be getting screwed by Bush again. He can take the money that he has embezzled thus far to his offshore havens and leave. It's time for an Obamanation!
This refusal to fork over the coin will be better for the country in the long run. The people have found that their voices were heard by their congresspersons. The calls and letters have created change. The people did not see Washington, the Bush team, and the corporations get away scott free again.
Let's look at some U.S. government interventions and bailouts in the past century:
1932 — The Hoover administration creates the Reconstruction Finance Corp. to facilitate economic activity by lending money. (the President with the worst economic policies prior to Bush - Republican)
1933 — The Roosevelt administration creates the Home Owners' Loan Corp. to buy $3 billion in bad mortgages from banks and refinance them to homeowners to stem a rise in foreclosures. The government makes a small profit. (Roosevelt makes this a profitable venture! - Democrat)
1971 — Congress saves Lockheed Aircraft Corp., the nation's biggest defense contractor, from bankruptcy by guaranteeing the repayment of $250 million in bank loans. (Of course this company must be saved due to its the nations biggest defense contractor...Nixon took gold off as the standard and marked the dollar as the dominant global currency - Republican)
1979 — Congress and the Carter administration arrange for $1.2 billion in subsidized loans to bail out automaker Chrysler Corp., then the nation's 10th-largest company. There was no significant cost to the government in the end since the loans were repaid. (Good play Carter! - Democrat)
1984 — Congress effectively takes over the ailing Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust, which failed with $40 billion of assets. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. injects $4.5 billion to buy bad loans.
(Reagan fell asleep at the meeting...Republican)
1989 — Congress establishes the Resolution Trust Corp. to take over bad assets and make depositors whole. Resolving the S&L crisis takes six years and $125 billion in taxpayer money — roughly equal to $200 billion in today's dollars. (Brother Bush family fuck up - George Bush I - Republican)
1998 — The government brokers a $3.6 billion private bailout in the collapse of the Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund. Done through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. (Republicans created the Monica Lewinski scandal to take eyes away from this collapse. Clinton handled this without government money! - Democrat)
2001 — Congress authorizes $5 billion in cash after the Sept. 11 terror attacks to help shore up the airline industry and follows up with $10 billion in loan guarantees. This has failed as most of those that received any funds are either now defunct or will be shortly. (the first of numerous bailouts by Bush. Much of the following history will find its paper trail leading to large quantities of embezzled funds through numerous agencies and administration persons. George Bush II, Republican)
2008:
March 16 — The Federal Reserve agrees to guarantee $29 billion of Bear Stearns' assets in connection with the government-sponsored sale of the investment bank to JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chase was not held liable for any future debts in association to this takeover. (George Bush II, Republican)
July 11 — Federal regulators seize IndyMac Bank's assets after the mortgage lender succumbs to the pressures of tighter credit, falling home prices and rising foreclosures. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. says it will cost about $8.9 billion out of its $53 billion insurance fund. ( Costing nearly 20% of the entire FDIC balance sheet - George Bush II, Republican)
Sept. 7 — The Treasury Department seizes teetering mortgage finance institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, temporarily putting them in a government conservatorship with plans to inject up to $100 billion into each. (creating the largest socialist run real estate organization for the United States Government. Feddie Mae! George Bush II, Republican)
Sept. 16 — The government announces an $85 billion emergency loan to rescue American International Group Inc., a major insurance company, in return for a 79.9 percent stake. (creating the largest Socialist run insurance firm for the United States Government - George Bush II, Republican)
Sept. 19 — The Bush administration proposes a plan to let the government buy $700 billion of bad mortgages and other forms of toxic debt that have been weighing down U.S. financial companies. Government officials and lawmakers were still scrambling to put a deal together a week later. (Geroge Bush II, Republican)
Sept. 25 — The Federal Desposit Insurance Corp. seizes Washington Mutual Inc. — the largest bank to fail by far in the U.S. — and sells the deposits and banking assets to JPMorgan Chase & Co. for $1.9 billion. (George Bush II, Republican)
Sept. 29 — The Congress walks away from bailout due to pressure from the voice of the people. The fraudulent lending practices, the manipulation of credit and loans leaves a bad taste to the people and they speak out. The corporations will not be bailed out by taxpayer dollars! The people take back their country! (Democrat decision due to non bipartisanship)
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
There is a virus in America...
America has a virus. It has infiltrated the entire nation. It has penetrated the entire consciousness. It has affected every living person of this country.
The only solution to this sickness is for the infected to stand up and fight this illness. The people must understand that there is an antiviral to fight this illness, and it is called participation and education.
The people must begin to understand this virus that is sickening the entire nation. The virus has a tendency to put the ill and infected into a state of denial, complacency, and forgetfulness. The patients must become proactive in their fight of this disease or they will perish.
A disease is an abnormal condition of an organism that impairs bodily functions and can be deadly. It is also defined as a way of the body harming itself in an abnormal way,associated with specific symptoms and signs.
"Disease" is often used more broadly to refer to any condition that causes extreme pain, dysfunction, distress, social problems, and/or death to the person afflicted, or similar problems for those in contact with the person. In this broader sense, it sometimes includes injuries, disabilities, disorders, syndromes, infections, isolated symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts and for other purposes these may be considered distinguishable categories.
The primary virus has been located and is currently isolated within Washington D.C. The main initial carrier has been discovered to be President Bush and the Administration.
The virus is very powerful. It initially infected the main populace of the country through lies, deception, and falsehoods. The virus was too strong for the incumbent political party and was primarily misunderstood in its power and capacity for deception. The country immediately became infected and the power of the virus spread quickly and covered the entire nation, as well as infiltrated many foreign countries.
The virus has subsequently spread to a new host in hopes to carry on this campaign of fear, deception and untruths.
The audacity of hope is the cure for this virus. The infected people must understand the only way out of this illness is to distance and educate themselves of the causes of the infectious virus and quarantine the virus for a period of at least 16 years. Through this quarantine the country will be able to shake much of the visible scarring that has overtaken the country. The country will be able to work to repair the necessary bloodlines of the infection by creating new jobs, rebuilding infrastructure, breathing new life into the scared, dazed, confused and healing patients of this great country.
If the patients do not accept this cure, the country will continue to be eaten from within. The virus will continue to consume the consciousness of the country and its people will be extremely hard pressed to find a cure for this illness for many decades to come.
(c)Copyright 2008 Doug Boggs
The only solution to this sickness is for the infected to stand up and fight this illness. The people must understand that there is an antiviral to fight this illness, and it is called participation and education.
The people must begin to understand this virus that is sickening the entire nation. The virus has a tendency to put the ill and infected into a state of denial, complacency, and forgetfulness. The patients must become proactive in their fight of this disease or they will perish.
A disease is an abnormal condition of an organism that impairs bodily functions and can be deadly. It is also defined as a way of the body harming itself in an abnormal way,associated with specific symptoms and signs.
"Disease" is often used more broadly to refer to any condition that causes extreme pain, dysfunction, distress, social problems, and/or death to the person afflicted, or similar problems for those in contact with the person. In this broader sense, it sometimes includes injuries, disabilities, disorders, syndromes, infections, isolated symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts and for other purposes these may be considered distinguishable categories.
The primary virus has been located and is currently isolated within Washington D.C. The main initial carrier has been discovered to be President Bush and the Administration.
The virus is very powerful. It initially infected the main populace of the country through lies, deception, and falsehoods. The virus was too strong for the incumbent political party and was primarily misunderstood in its power and capacity for deception. The country immediately became infected and the power of the virus spread quickly and covered the entire nation, as well as infiltrated many foreign countries.
The virus has subsequently spread to a new host in hopes to carry on this campaign of fear, deception and untruths.
The audacity of hope is the cure for this virus. The infected people must understand the only way out of this illness is to distance and educate themselves of the causes of the infectious virus and quarantine the virus for a period of at least 16 years. Through this quarantine the country will be able to shake much of the visible scarring that has overtaken the country. The country will be able to work to repair the necessary bloodlines of the infection by creating new jobs, rebuilding infrastructure, breathing new life into the scared, dazed, confused and healing patients of this great country.
If the patients do not accept this cure, the country will continue to be eaten from within. The virus will continue to consume the consciousness of the country and its people will be extremely hard pressed to find a cure for this illness for many decades to come.
(c)Copyright 2008 Doug Boggs
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Wall Street/White House - main street, boarded house...
A letter from Wall Street to the White House...
by Thom Donlan, published in Barron's:
(excerpt)
To: Washington, D.C.
From: Wall Street
Re: Credit Crisis
Dear D.C.,
WOW, WE'VE MADE QUITE A MESS OF THINGS here on Wall Street: Fannie and Freddie in conservatorship, investment banks in the tank, AIG nationalized. Thanks for sending us your new trillion-dollar bailout.
We on Wall Street feel somewhat compelled to take at least some responsibility. We used excessive leverage, failed to maintain adequate capital, engaged in reckless speculation, created new complex derivatives. We focused on short-term profits at the expense of sustainability. We not only undermined our own firms, we destabilized the financial sector and roiled the global economy, to boot. And we got huge bonuses.
But here's a news flash for you, D.C.: We could not have done it without you. We may be drunks, but you were our enablers: Your legislative, executive, and administrative decisions made possible all that we did. Our recklessness would not have reached its soaring heights but for your governmental incompetence.
***
Feinstein on the floor;
U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein
Floor Statement on the Economic
Rescue Proposal
September 26, 2008
"Mr. President, to date I have received from Californians more than 50,000 calls and letters, the great bulk of them in opposition to any form of meeting this crisis with financial help from the Federal Government. I wanted to come to the floor to very simply state how I see this and some of the principles that I hope will be forthcoming in this draft. Before I do so, I wish to pay particular commendation to Senator Dodd, Senator Schumer, Senator Bennett, and others who have been working so hard on this issue. I have tried to keep in touch -- I am not a negotiator; I am not on the committee -- but California is the biggest State, the largest economic engine, and people are really concerned.
We face the most significant economic crisis in 75 years right now. Swift and comprehensive action is crucial to the overall health of our economy. None of us wants to be in this position, and there are no good options here. Nobody likes the idea of spending massive sums of Government money to rescue major corporations from their bad financial decisions. But no one also should be fooled into thinking this problem only belongs to the banks and that it is a good idea to let them fail. The pain felt by Wall Street one day is felt there, and then 2,3,4 weeks down the pike, it is felt on Main Street.
The turbulence in our financial sector has already resulted in thousands of layoffs in the banking and finance sectors, and that number will skyrocket if there is a full collapse. The shock waves of failure will extend far beyond the banking and finance sectors. A shrinking pool of credit would affect the home loans, credit card limits, auto loans, and insurance policies of average Americans. I am receiving calls from people who tell me they want to buy a house, but they can't get the credit or the mortgage to do so. Why? Because that market of credit is drying up more rapidly one day after the other. It would have a major impact on State and local governments which would lose tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
Hurricane Ike shut down refineries on the gulf coast 2 weeks ago, and now, today, people are waiting hours in lines for gasoline in the South. Similarly, the collapse of the financial sector would have severe consequences for Americans all across the economic spectrum: for the person who owns the grocery store, the laundry, the bank, the insurance company. Then, if the worst happens, layoffs. And even more than that, somebody shows up for work and finds their business has closed because the owner of that business can't get credit to buy the goods he hopes to sell that week or that month. Wages and employment rates have already fallen even as the cost of basic necessities has skyrocketed. Our Nation is facing the highest unemployment rate in 5 years, at 6.1 percent. Over 605,000 jobs have been lost nationwide this year. My own State of California, a state of 38 million people, has the third highest unemployment rate in the Nation at 7.7 percent. That is 1.4 million people out of work today. One and a half million people -- that is bigger than some States. We have 1.5 million people out of work, and one-half million have had their unemployment insurance expire and have nothing today.
Congress is faced with a situation where we have to act and we have to do two things. We have to provide some reform in the system of regulation and oversight that is supposed to protect our economy. We also have to find a permanent and effective solution to keep liquidity and credit functioning so that markets can recover and make profit. The situation, I believe, is grave, and timely, prudent action is needed.
Just last night, the sixth largest bank in America -- Washington Mutual-- was seized by government regulators and most of its assets will be sold to JPMorgan Chase. This follows on the heels of bankruptcies and takeovers of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. If nothing is done, the crisis will continue to spread and one by one the dominos will fall.
Now, this isn't just about Wall Street. Because we are this credit society, the financial troubles facing major economic institutions will ricochet throughout this Nation and affect everyone. So I believe the need for action is clear. But that doesn't mean Congress should simply be a rubberstamp for an unprecedented and unbridled program.
My constituents by the thousands have made their views clear. I believe they are responding to the original 3-page proposal by the Secretary of the Treasury. It is clear by now that that 3-page proposal is a nonstarter. It is dead on arrival and that is good. Secretary Paulson's proposal asked Congress to write a $700 billion check to an economic czar who would have been empowered to spend it without any administrative oversight, legal requirements, or legislative review. Decisions made by the Treasury Secretary would be nonreviewable by any court or agency, and the fate of our entire economy would be committed to the sole discretion of one man alone -- the man we know today, and the man whom we don't know after January.
Additionally, the lack of governance or oversight in this plan was matched by the lack of a requirement for regular reports to Congress. This proposal stipulated that the economic czar, newly created, would report to Congress after the first three months with reports once every 6 months after that. This was untenable. Six months is an eternity when you are spending billions a week. The Treasury Secretary asked Congress to approve this massive program without delay or interference. It is hard to think of any other time in our history when Congress has been asked for so much money and so much power to be concentrated in the hands of one person. It is a nonstarter.
Yesterday, shortly before we met for the Democratic Policy Committee lunch, we were told there had been a bipartisan agreement on principles of a possible solution, and many of us rejoiced. We know that our Members, both Republican and Democrat, have been working hard to try to produce something that was positive. Then, all of a sudden, it changed. One Presidential candidate parachuted into town which proved to be enormously destructive to the process. Now, negotiations are back on the table, and as I say, we have just received a draft bill of certain principles.
I would like to outline quickly those principles that I think are important. First is a phase-in. No one wants to put $700 billion immediately at the discretion of one person or even a group of a very few people, no matter how bright, how skilled, how informed they might be on banking or finance principles. The funding should come in phases and Congress should have the opportunity to make its voice heard if the program isn't working or needs to be adjusted.
The second point: Oversight, accountability, and governance. The Treasury Secretary should not and must not have unbridled authority to determine winners and losers, essentially choosing which struggling financial institution will survive and which will not. The original plan placed all authority in the hands of this one man, and this is why I say it was DOA -- dead on arrival -- at the Congress. We must assure that controls are in place to watch taxpayer dollars and make sure they are well-spent fixing the problem, and that oversight by a governance committee and the Banking Committees are strong, and that they give the best opportunity for the American people to recover their investment and, yes, even eventually make a profit from that investment. That can be done and it has been done in the past.
I believe that frequent reporting to Congress is critical. Transparency, sunlight on this, is critical. So Congress should receive regular, timely briefings, perhaps weekly for the first quarter, on a program of this magnitude. A proposal should mandate frequent reporting and the public should be ensured of transparency to the maximum extent possible.
I also believe that within the first quarter -- and this, to me, is key -- a comprehensive legislative proposal for reform must be put forward. We must reform those speculative practices that impact price function of markets. We must deal with the unregulated practices that have furthered this crisis. Look. I represent a State that was cost $40 billion in the Enron episode during 1999 and 2000 by speculation, by manipulation, and by fraud. There still is inadequate regulation of energy commodities sold on the futures market. And that is just one point in all of this. We must prevent these things from happening. The only way to do it is to improve the transparency of all markets. No hidden deals. Swaps, in my view, should be ended. The London loophole should be ended.
We have to outline rules for increasing regulation of the mortgage-backed securities market, along with comprehensive oversight of the mortgage industry and lending practices for both prime and subprime lending.
Senator Martinez of Florida and I had a part in the earlier housing bill, which included our legislation entitled the SAFE Mortgage Licensing Act. We found that the market was rife with fraud. We found there was one company that hired hairdressers and others who sold mortgages in their spare time. We found there were unscrupulous mortgage brokers out there unlicensed, preying upon people, walking off with tens of thousands of dollars of cash. This has to end. It has to be controlled. It has to be regulated.
So I believe the crisis of 2008 stems from the failure of Federal regulators to rein in this Wild West mentality of those Wall Street executives who led those firms and who thought that nothing was out of bounds. Every quick scheme was worth the time, and worth a try. Congress cannot ignore this as the root cause of the crisis. It was inherent in the subprime marketplace, and it has now spread to the prime mortgage marketplace.
It is also critical that accurate assessments of the value of these illiquid mortgage-related assets be performed to limit the taxpayers' exposure to risk and structure purchases to ensure the greatest possible return on investment.
Taxpayer money must be shielded at all costs from risk to the greatest extent possible.
Reciprocity is not a bad concept if you can carry it out. The Government must not simply act as a repository for risky investments that have gone bad. An economic rescue effort that serves taxpayers well must allow them to benefit from the potential profits of rescued entities. So a model -- and it may well be in these new principles -- must be developed to ensure the taxpayers are not only the first paid back but have an opportunity to share in future profits through warrants and/or stocks.
As to executive compensation limits, simply put, Californians are frosted by the absence of controls on executive compensation. Virtually all of the 50,000 phone calls and letters mentioned this one way or another. There must be limits. I am told that the reason the Treasury Secretary does not want limits on executive compensation is because he believes that an executive then will not bring his company in to partake in any program that is set up. Here is my response to that: We can put that executive on his boat, take that boat out in the ocean, and set it on fire. If that is how he feels, that is what should happen, or his company doesn't come in. But to say that the Federal Government is going to be responsible for tens of millions of dollars of executive salaries, golden parachutes, whether they are a matter of contract right or not, is not acceptable to the average person whose taxpayer dollars are used in this bailout. That is just fact.
The one proposal that was made by one of the Presidential candidates that I agree with is that there should be a limit of $400,000 on executive compensation. If they don't like it, too bad, don't participate in the program. As I have talked with people on Wall Street and otherwise, they don't believe it is true that an executive, if his pay is tailored down, will not bring a company in that needs help. I hope that is true. I believe there should be precise limits set on executive pay.
Finally, as to tangible benefits for Main Street in the form of mortgage relief, there have been more than 500,000 foreclosures in my home State of California so far this year. In the second quarter of this year, foreclosures were up 300 percent over the second quarter of 2007. More than 800,000 are predicted before this year is over.
I have a city in California where one out of every 25 homes is in foreclosure. This is new housing in subdivisions. As you look at it, you will see garage doors kicked in. You will see houses vandalized. You will see the grass and grounds dry. You will see the street sprinkled with "For Sale" signs, and nobody buys because the market has become so depressed.
This crisis has roots in the subprime housing boom that went bust, and it would be unconscionable for us to simply bailout Wall Street while leaving these homeowners to fend for themselves.
Everything I have been told, and I have talked to people in this business, here is what they tell me: It is more cost-effective to renegotiate a subprime loan and keep a family in a house than it is to foreclose and run the risks of what happens to that home on a depressed market as credit is drying up, as vandals loot it, as landscaping dries up, as more homes in the area become foreclosed upon; the way to go is to renegotiate these mortgages with the exiting homeowner wherever possible. I feel very strongly that should be the case.
I don't know what I or any of us will do if we authorize this kind of expenditure and we find down the pike in my State that the rest of the year, 800,000 to 1 million Americans are being thrown out of their homes despite this form of rescue effort. Think of what it means, Mr. President, in your State. You vote for this, any other Senator votes for it, and these foreclosures continue to take place and individual families continue to be thrown out of their homes. It is not a tenable situation.
I hope, if anybody is listening at all, that in the negotiating team, they will make a real effort to mandate in some way that subprime foreclosures be renegotiated, that families, wherever possible, who have an ability to pay, have that ability to pay met with a renegotiated loan. I have done this now in cases with families who were taken advantage of. We called the CEO of the bank, and the bank has seen that the loan was renegotiated, in one case in Los Angeles down to 2 percent. That is better than foreclosing and running the uncertainty of the sale of the asset in a very depressed housing market.
These are my thoughts. Again, it is easy to come to the floor and give your thoughts. It is much more difficult to sit at that negotiating table.
I once again thank those Senators on both sides of the aisle who really understand the nature of this crisis -- that it isn't only Wall Street, that it does involve Main Street, and if there is a serious crash, it will hurt tens of millions of Americans, many of them in irreparable ways. So we must do what we must do, and we must do it prudently and carefully.
I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of quorum."
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
***
by Thom Donlan, published in Barron's:
(excerpt)
To: Washington, D.C.
From: Wall Street
Re: Credit Crisis
Dear D.C.,
WOW, WE'VE MADE QUITE A MESS OF THINGS here on Wall Street: Fannie and Freddie in conservatorship, investment banks in the tank, AIG nationalized. Thanks for sending us your new trillion-dollar bailout.
We on Wall Street feel somewhat compelled to take at least some responsibility. We used excessive leverage, failed to maintain adequate capital, engaged in reckless speculation, created new complex derivatives. We focused on short-term profits at the expense of sustainability. We not only undermined our own firms, we destabilized the financial sector and roiled the global economy, to boot. And we got huge bonuses.
But here's a news flash for you, D.C.: We could not have done it without you. We may be drunks, but you were our enablers: Your legislative, executive, and administrative decisions made possible all that we did. Our recklessness would not have reached its soaring heights but for your governmental incompetence.
***
Feinstein on the floor;
U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein
Floor Statement on the Economic
Rescue Proposal
September 26, 2008
"Mr. President, to date I have received from Californians more than 50,000 calls and letters, the great bulk of them in opposition to any form of meeting this crisis with financial help from the Federal Government. I wanted to come to the floor to very simply state how I see this and some of the principles that I hope will be forthcoming in this draft. Before I do so, I wish to pay particular commendation to Senator Dodd, Senator Schumer, Senator Bennett, and others who have been working so hard on this issue. I have tried to keep in touch -- I am not a negotiator; I am not on the committee -- but California is the biggest State, the largest economic engine, and people are really concerned.
We face the most significant economic crisis in 75 years right now. Swift and comprehensive action is crucial to the overall health of our economy. None of us wants to be in this position, and there are no good options here. Nobody likes the idea of spending massive sums of Government money to rescue major corporations from their bad financial decisions. But no one also should be fooled into thinking this problem only belongs to the banks and that it is a good idea to let them fail. The pain felt by Wall Street one day is felt there, and then 2,3,4 weeks down the pike, it is felt on Main Street.
The turbulence in our financial sector has already resulted in thousands of layoffs in the banking and finance sectors, and that number will skyrocket if there is a full collapse. The shock waves of failure will extend far beyond the banking and finance sectors. A shrinking pool of credit would affect the home loans, credit card limits, auto loans, and insurance policies of average Americans. I am receiving calls from people who tell me they want to buy a house, but they can't get the credit or the mortgage to do so. Why? Because that market of credit is drying up more rapidly one day after the other. It would have a major impact on State and local governments which would lose tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
Hurricane Ike shut down refineries on the gulf coast 2 weeks ago, and now, today, people are waiting hours in lines for gasoline in the South. Similarly, the collapse of the financial sector would have severe consequences for Americans all across the economic spectrum: for the person who owns the grocery store, the laundry, the bank, the insurance company. Then, if the worst happens, layoffs. And even more than that, somebody shows up for work and finds their business has closed because the owner of that business can't get credit to buy the goods he hopes to sell that week or that month. Wages and employment rates have already fallen even as the cost of basic necessities has skyrocketed. Our Nation is facing the highest unemployment rate in 5 years, at 6.1 percent. Over 605,000 jobs have been lost nationwide this year. My own State of California, a state of 38 million people, has the third highest unemployment rate in the Nation at 7.7 percent. That is 1.4 million people out of work today. One and a half million people -- that is bigger than some States. We have 1.5 million people out of work, and one-half million have had their unemployment insurance expire and have nothing today.
Congress is faced with a situation where we have to act and we have to do two things. We have to provide some reform in the system of regulation and oversight that is supposed to protect our economy. We also have to find a permanent and effective solution to keep liquidity and credit functioning so that markets can recover and make profit. The situation, I believe, is grave, and timely, prudent action is needed.
Just last night, the sixth largest bank in America -- Washington Mutual-- was seized by government regulators and most of its assets will be sold to JPMorgan Chase. This follows on the heels of bankruptcies and takeovers of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. If nothing is done, the crisis will continue to spread and one by one the dominos will fall.
Now, this isn't just about Wall Street. Because we are this credit society, the financial troubles facing major economic institutions will ricochet throughout this Nation and affect everyone. So I believe the need for action is clear. But that doesn't mean Congress should simply be a rubberstamp for an unprecedented and unbridled program.
My constituents by the thousands have made their views clear. I believe they are responding to the original 3-page proposal by the Secretary of the Treasury. It is clear by now that that 3-page proposal is a nonstarter. It is dead on arrival and that is good. Secretary Paulson's proposal asked Congress to write a $700 billion check to an economic czar who would have been empowered to spend it without any administrative oversight, legal requirements, or legislative review. Decisions made by the Treasury Secretary would be nonreviewable by any court or agency, and the fate of our entire economy would be committed to the sole discretion of one man alone -- the man we know today, and the man whom we don't know after January.
Additionally, the lack of governance or oversight in this plan was matched by the lack of a requirement for regular reports to Congress. This proposal stipulated that the economic czar, newly created, would report to Congress after the first three months with reports once every 6 months after that. This was untenable. Six months is an eternity when you are spending billions a week. The Treasury Secretary asked Congress to approve this massive program without delay or interference. It is hard to think of any other time in our history when Congress has been asked for so much money and so much power to be concentrated in the hands of one person. It is a nonstarter.
Yesterday, shortly before we met for the Democratic Policy Committee lunch, we were told there had been a bipartisan agreement on principles of a possible solution, and many of us rejoiced. We know that our Members, both Republican and Democrat, have been working hard to try to produce something that was positive. Then, all of a sudden, it changed. One Presidential candidate parachuted into town which proved to be enormously destructive to the process. Now, negotiations are back on the table, and as I say, we have just received a draft bill of certain principles.
I would like to outline quickly those principles that I think are important. First is a phase-in. No one wants to put $700 billion immediately at the discretion of one person or even a group of a very few people, no matter how bright, how skilled, how informed they might be on banking or finance principles. The funding should come in phases and Congress should have the opportunity to make its voice heard if the program isn't working or needs to be adjusted.
The second point: Oversight, accountability, and governance. The Treasury Secretary should not and must not have unbridled authority to determine winners and losers, essentially choosing which struggling financial institution will survive and which will not. The original plan placed all authority in the hands of this one man, and this is why I say it was DOA -- dead on arrival -- at the Congress. We must assure that controls are in place to watch taxpayer dollars and make sure they are well-spent fixing the problem, and that oversight by a governance committee and the Banking Committees are strong, and that they give the best opportunity for the American people to recover their investment and, yes, even eventually make a profit from that investment. That can be done and it has been done in the past.
I believe that frequent reporting to Congress is critical. Transparency, sunlight on this, is critical. So Congress should receive regular, timely briefings, perhaps weekly for the first quarter, on a program of this magnitude. A proposal should mandate frequent reporting and the public should be ensured of transparency to the maximum extent possible.
I also believe that within the first quarter -- and this, to me, is key -- a comprehensive legislative proposal for reform must be put forward. We must reform those speculative practices that impact price function of markets. We must deal with the unregulated practices that have furthered this crisis. Look. I represent a State that was cost $40 billion in the Enron episode during 1999 and 2000 by speculation, by manipulation, and by fraud. There still is inadequate regulation of energy commodities sold on the futures market. And that is just one point in all of this. We must prevent these things from happening. The only way to do it is to improve the transparency of all markets. No hidden deals. Swaps, in my view, should be ended. The London loophole should be ended.
We have to outline rules for increasing regulation of the mortgage-backed securities market, along with comprehensive oversight of the mortgage industry and lending practices for both prime and subprime lending.
Senator Martinez of Florida and I had a part in the earlier housing bill, which included our legislation entitled the SAFE Mortgage Licensing Act. We found that the market was rife with fraud. We found there was one company that hired hairdressers and others who sold mortgages in their spare time. We found there were unscrupulous mortgage brokers out there unlicensed, preying upon people, walking off with tens of thousands of dollars of cash. This has to end. It has to be controlled. It has to be regulated.
So I believe the crisis of 2008 stems from the failure of Federal regulators to rein in this Wild West mentality of those Wall Street executives who led those firms and who thought that nothing was out of bounds. Every quick scheme was worth the time, and worth a try. Congress cannot ignore this as the root cause of the crisis. It was inherent in the subprime marketplace, and it has now spread to the prime mortgage marketplace.
It is also critical that accurate assessments of the value of these illiquid mortgage-related assets be performed to limit the taxpayers' exposure to risk and structure purchases to ensure the greatest possible return on investment.
Taxpayer money must be shielded at all costs from risk to the greatest extent possible.
Reciprocity is not a bad concept if you can carry it out. The Government must not simply act as a repository for risky investments that have gone bad. An economic rescue effort that serves taxpayers well must allow them to benefit from the potential profits of rescued entities. So a model -- and it may well be in these new principles -- must be developed to ensure the taxpayers are not only the first paid back but have an opportunity to share in future profits through warrants and/or stocks.
As to executive compensation limits, simply put, Californians are frosted by the absence of controls on executive compensation. Virtually all of the 50,000 phone calls and letters mentioned this one way or another. There must be limits. I am told that the reason the Treasury Secretary does not want limits on executive compensation is because he believes that an executive then will not bring his company in to partake in any program that is set up. Here is my response to that: We can put that executive on his boat, take that boat out in the ocean, and set it on fire. If that is how he feels, that is what should happen, or his company doesn't come in. But to say that the Federal Government is going to be responsible for tens of millions of dollars of executive salaries, golden parachutes, whether they are a matter of contract right or not, is not acceptable to the average person whose taxpayer dollars are used in this bailout. That is just fact.
The one proposal that was made by one of the Presidential candidates that I agree with is that there should be a limit of $400,000 on executive compensation. If they don't like it, too bad, don't participate in the program. As I have talked with people on Wall Street and otherwise, they don't believe it is true that an executive, if his pay is tailored down, will not bring a company in that needs help. I hope that is true. I believe there should be precise limits set on executive pay.
Finally, as to tangible benefits for Main Street in the form of mortgage relief, there have been more than 500,000 foreclosures in my home State of California so far this year. In the second quarter of this year, foreclosures were up 300 percent over the second quarter of 2007. More than 800,000 are predicted before this year is over.
I have a city in California where one out of every 25 homes is in foreclosure. This is new housing in subdivisions. As you look at it, you will see garage doors kicked in. You will see houses vandalized. You will see the grass and grounds dry. You will see the street sprinkled with "For Sale" signs, and nobody buys because the market has become so depressed.
This crisis has roots in the subprime housing boom that went bust, and it would be unconscionable for us to simply bailout Wall Street while leaving these homeowners to fend for themselves.
Everything I have been told, and I have talked to people in this business, here is what they tell me: It is more cost-effective to renegotiate a subprime loan and keep a family in a house than it is to foreclose and run the risks of what happens to that home on a depressed market as credit is drying up, as vandals loot it, as landscaping dries up, as more homes in the area become foreclosed upon; the way to go is to renegotiate these mortgages with the exiting homeowner wherever possible. I feel very strongly that should be the case.
I don't know what I or any of us will do if we authorize this kind of expenditure and we find down the pike in my State that the rest of the year, 800,000 to 1 million Americans are being thrown out of their homes despite this form of rescue effort. Think of what it means, Mr. President, in your State. You vote for this, any other Senator votes for it, and these foreclosures continue to take place and individual families continue to be thrown out of their homes. It is not a tenable situation.
I hope, if anybody is listening at all, that in the negotiating team, they will make a real effort to mandate in some way that subprime foreclosures be renegotiated, that families, wherever possible, who have an ability to pay, have that ability to pay met with a renegotiated loan. I have done this now in cases with families who were taken advantage of. We called the CEO of the bank, and the bank has seen that the loan was renegotiated, in one case in Los Angeles down to 2 percent. That is better than foreclosing and running the uncertainty of the sale of the asset in a very depressed housing market.
These are my thoughts. Again, it is easy to come to the floor and give your thoughts. It is much more difficult to sit at that negotiating table.
I once again thank those Senators on both sides of the aisle who really understand the nature of this crisis -- that it isn't only Wall Street, that it does involve Main Street, and if there is a serious crash, it will hurt tens of millions of Americans, many of them in irreparable ways. So we must do what we must do, and we must do it prudently and carefully.
I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of quorum."
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
***
Saturday, September 27, 2008
A poem for the day...
* * * * *
From Will.i.am:
people say Obama’s words are just words...
but...
when was the last time "words" weren’t important...???...
when was the last time a great leader didn’t use words to lead...??...
when was the last time a person didn’t use words to describe how they felt...?...
when was the last time "words" weren’t empowering...?...
and we can all recall the last time "words" were used to divide us and install fear...
Bush used words to fear us into voting for him the second time around...
terror this...
terror that...
nuclear here...
weapons of mass destruction there...
and those words effected a lot of people’s choices...
"enough is enough"...
let’s rebuild...
let’s change ourselves...
let’s allow positivity to guide us...
let's take action....
let’s activate our passion...
we are Americans....
and this is the first time in forever that someone running for president represents "US"...
some say this is all excitement...
I call it “proud to be an American”...
some say this whole Obama movement is "cult like"...
well...
if it comes across cult like...
then...
the cult is called America...
the Obama movement is connecting America.
and it has made "US" realize our importance...
the youth is excited and activated...
adults are passionate and motivated...
the elderly are proud to know the country they built is in safe hands...
we are one...
for too long politics has been corrupt...
separate from the American people...
with agendas that go against what the American people "need"...
education...
health...
safety...
jobs
etc...
politicians have spoken a different language...
making it so the youth and poor people feel as if voting was only for the wealthy and old people...
making "US" feel as if "we" had no voice...
making "US" feel powerless...
making it feel like if "we" did vote it wouldn’t change anything...
but wait...
that did happen...
some of us voted, and it didn’t change anything...
we were in the dark...
we had no voice...
we were powerless...
because America was not a united America...
and "they" spoke a different language...
and they had an agenda different from our well being...
correct me if I’m wrong... or speak up if I’m missing something...
we want education, health, safety, and good jobs...right???...
oh yeah...
and "a healthy planet to live on"...
but here we are...
in a war... poor education... poor health programs... the dollar is down... the planet, polluted...
the rich, richer... and the poor, struggling...
with sky high gas prices to top it all off...
and now even the rich aren't really rich internationally because our dollar is has fallen so far down...
in our slumber... a very small few got really rich...
because when you’re sleeping...
"it’s hard to change agendas"...
we know what happened in 2000 and 2004...
but in 2008...
it’s different...
we are awake...
and there is a movement...
and "it’s hard to change a movement"...
last time "we" didn’t have a movement...
America wasn’t united...
and now "United and "Standing"...for something...
we know the power of "US"...
and we have a person who represents the "U.S."...
"US"…
"we are the ones we’ve been waiting for"...
I’m proud to be an American...
will.i.am
WATCH THIS
...
From Will.i.am:
people say Obama’s words are just words...
but...
when was the last time "words" weren’t important...???...
when was the last time a great leader didn’t use words to lead...??...
when was the last time a person didn’t use words to describe how they felt...?...
when was the last time "words" weren’t empowering...?...
and we can all recall the last time "words" were used to divide us and install fear...
Bush used words to fear us into voting for him the second time around...
terror this...
terror that...
nuclear here...
weapons of mass destruction there...
and those words effected a lot of people’s choices...
"enough is enough"...
let’s rebuild...
let’s change ourselves...
let’s allow positivity to guide us...
let's take action....
let’s activate our passion...
we are Americans....
and this is the first time in forever that someone running for president represents "US"...
some say this is all excitement...
I call it “proud to be an American”...
some say this whole Obama movement is "cult like"...
well...
if it comes across cult like...
then...
the cult is called America...
the Obama movement is connecting America.
and it has made "US" realize our importance...
the youth is excited and activated...
adults are passionate and motivated...
the elderly are proud to know the country they built is in safe hands...
we are one...
for too long politics has been corrupt...
separate from the American people...
with agendas that go against what the American people "need"...
education...
health...
safety...
jobs
etc...
politicians have spoken a different language...
making it so the youth and poor people feel as if voting was only for the wealthy and old people...
making "US" feel as if "we" had no voice...
making "US" feel powerless...
making it feel like if "we" did vote it wouldn’t change anything...
but wait...
that did happen...
some of us voted, and it didn’t change anything...
we were in the dark...
we had no voice...
we were powerless...
because America was not a united America...
and "they" spoke a different language...
and they had an agenda different from our well being...
correct me if I’m wrong... or speak up if I’m missing something...
we want education, health, safety, and good jobs...right???...
oh yeah...
and "a healthy planet to live on"...
but here we are...
in a war... poor education... poor health programs... the dollar is down... the planet, polluted...
the rich, richer... and the poor, struggling...
with sky high gas prices to top it all off...
and now even the rich aren't really rich internationally because our dollar is has fallen so far down...
in our slumber... a very small few got really rich...
because when you’re sleeping...
"it’s hard to change agendas"...
we know what happened in 2000 and 2004...
but in 2008...
it’s different...
we are awake...
and there is a movement...
and "it’s hard to change a movement"...
last time "we" didn’t have a movement...
America wasn’t united...
and now "United and "Standing"...for something...
we know the power of "US"...
and we have a person who represents the "U.S."...
"US"…
"we are the ones we’ve been waiting for"...
I’m proud to be an American...
will.i.am
WATCH THIS
...
Friday, September 26, 2008
The poetic prose of Sarah Palin and e.e. cummings!
The right winged network, Fox News reporter Sean Hannity in the exclusive interview with Sarah Palin, done on Sept. 21, 2008 is being labeled as “100 percent pure infomercial”. But it may need a bit more attention as it begins to defy human reality?!...After reading the transcript of this interview I just cannot believe my ears of what words are being employed by her as she manouvers through the questions.
Hmmmm.... Palin, e.e.cummings,, Palin, e.e.cummings...
...Palin's response: "Yes. That's a great question, and being an optimist I see our role in the world as one of being a force for good, and one of being the leader of the world when it comes to the values that -- it seems that just human kind embraces the values that -- encompass life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that's just -- not just in America, that is in our world."
(she got her first passport a few months ago...)
e.e. cummings' poem:
"next to of course god america i
love you land of the pilgrims' and so forth oh
say can you see by the dawn's early my
country 'tis of centuries come and go
and are no more what of it we should worry
in every language even deafanddumb
thy sons acclaim your glorious name by gorry
by jingo by gee by gosh by gum
why talk of beauty what could be more beaut-
iful than these heroic happy dead
who rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter
they did not stop to think they died instead
then shall the voice of liberty be mute?"
He spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water"
If only e.e. had a line about "not blinking," the poem would have been frighteningly filled with foresight...
WATCH THIS
...
Hmmmm.... Palin, e.e.cummings,, Palin, e.e.cummings...
...Palin's response: "Yes. That's a great question, and being an optimist I see our role in the world as one of being a force for good, and one of being the leader of the world when it comes to the values that -- it seems that just human kind embraces the values that -- encompass life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that's just -- not just in America, that is in our world."
(she got her first passport a few months ago...)
e.e. cummings' poem:
"next to of course god america i
love you land of the pilgrims' and so forth oh
say can you see by the dawn's early my
country 'tis of centuries come and go
and are no more what of it we should worry
in every language even deafanddumb
thy sons acclaim your glorious name by gorry
by jingo by gee by gosh by gum
why talk of beauty what could be more beaut-
iful than these heroic happy dead
who rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter
they did not stop to think they died instead
then shall the voice of liberty be mute?"
He spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water"
If only e.e. had a line about "not blinking," the poem would have been frighteningly filled with foresight...
WATCH THIS
...
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Colbert sums up the breakdown!...Will.I.am speaks
This pretty much sums up the financial situation at hand with our economic fallout. In a profound and precise show of words Stephen Colbert, on his Emmy award winning show "Colbert Nation", gives us a true explanation and breakdown of how delicate the situation is at hand.
Is there anything else?!
YES! Wil.I.Am speaks out with this amazing video!
VOTE FOR Obama!
Is there anything else?!
YES! Wil.I.Am speaks out with this amazing video!
VOTE FOR Obama!
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Just a gigilo in a flat world...
When I read the book "The World Is Flat", by Thomas Friedman, I found some very interesting ideas that I tend to agree with. I have touted various ideas from that book here and other blogs over the past few years. One thing that we all must become more aware of is the implications to which a writer is giving and where the writer's thoughts are based from. Perhaps, within a byline of an institution such as the NY Times, it should be made aware that someone, such as Thomas Friedman, is an heir to one of the wealthiest families in the world. This may just change how the readers will view the information that he is delivering.
The July edition of the Washingtonian Magazine of 2006 discusses how Friedman lives in "a palatial 11,400-square-foot house, now valued at $9.3 million, on a 7½-acre parcel just blocks from I-495 and Bethesda Country Club." He "married into one of the 100 richest families in the country" - the Bucksbaums, whose real-estate Empire is valued at $2.7 billion. That was then, it may be sold now, I don't know this answer. Neither here nor there...right?
It is our responsibility as enlightened and informed people of our time to educate ourselves more with the information and technology that we have available at our fingertips today. So, when someone like Thomas Friedman, the prolific writer for the NY Times, and international best selling author, gives his "two cents" people will be able to sit with the information that he is delivering and begin to see just why he might be positing some of his ideas in the way he is.
I agree that the world has become a very small place with the advent of the Internet, global business and financial institutions, international corporate laws, various tax implications by locale, all help create a smaller global playing field. As a global traveler, I am still amazed with the fact that people can get on a plane and in less than 12 hours be on the other side of the world participating in a drastically different society and set of rules than where they originally live and participate. This kind of travel gave personal and business opportunities to the planet's wealthier crowd that didn't exist only a handful of decades ago. Today, the playing field has become even smaller due to the advent of the Internet, and much of the developing world, like India, China and others are able to outsource their labor force, ideas and technological prowess without the need to spend the money to travel allowing to become more strategic in their business.
None of this personal information I know about Friedman changes the fact that some of the ideas that I took away from his book are not valid or that I no longer agree or disagree with them. But, it does shed new light on the way that I might reflect over his ideas that I read. Knowing a bit about the writer allows the reader a bit more room to see where the writer is getting their viewpoints and/or why they may be stating a position one way or the other. So, when he touts the good that comes out of international business practices of outsourcing jobs that will help create global economic expansion, I can look at that statement from various angles now that I know with who and what is being discussed over his dinner table.
I originally pictured a flat in NY, a type of Woody Allen existence that Friedman had. Or even perhaps lazying around the summer home in Cuba or the Keys like Hemmingway, continually trying to analyze the world through his own books, sources and friends. I am sure I am still correct in much of this, it is just that the world I now know is much different than the more normal world I was envisioning to which his information was coming from.
Friedman leads not what most people who reflect the life as a writer would lead. His normal crowd is the world elite and not the Harvard literary professor. I am not against people making money. This is what makes this world go around. I don't think that will change, and certainly not in my lifetime. As altruistic or nirvana-esque I might want the world to be more like, it is what it is. I feel it is just responsible journalism to let the reader know a bit about where one's ideas are coming from. In the back of a book, on the fold, it will discuss a writer's education, other books written, how many kids or a marriage or partner...not politics, not wealth, not religion, much of what will enlighten the reader to where the views so powerfully generate from.
When Friedman is someone who generally writes about economic and political topics perhaps it should be known to the readers that his viewpoints are coming from an elite side of global society. Although, he married into his wealth, he lives a very different writer's life. He is surrounded by the world's elite, always. Therefore, when he posits his views as if he is a normal kind of citizen, one must understand that he is delivering the message of the global elite in a pill that is to be swallowed by the average of society in order to allow the world elite their way while we all smile along.
I will close with some relevant lyrics:
Just a gigolo
everywhere I go
people know the part
I'm playing
Paid for every dance
selling each romance
every night some heart
betraying
There will come a day
youth will pass away
then what will they say
about me
When the end comes I know
they'll say just a gigolo
as life goes on
without me
'Cause I aint got nobody
nobody nobody cares for me
I'm so sad and lonely
sad and lonely sad and lonely
Won't some sweet mama
come and take a chance with me
cause I aint so bad
The July edition of the Washingtonian Magazine of 2006 discusses how Friedman lives in "a palatial 11,400-square-foot house, now valued at $9.3 million, on a 7½-acre parcel just blocks from I-495 and Bethesda Country Club." He "married into one of the 100 richest families in the country" - the Bucksbaums, whose real-estate Empire is valued at $2.7 billion. That was then, it may be sold now, I don't know this answer. Neither here nor there...right?
It is our responsibility as enlightened and informed people of our time to educate ourselves more with the information and technology that we have available at our fingertips today. So, when someone like Thomas Friedman, the prolific writer for the NY Times, and international best selling author, gives his "two cents" people will be able to sit with the information that he is delivering and begin to see just why he might be positing some of his ideas in the way he is.
I agree that the world has become a very small place with the advent of the Internet, global business and financial institutions, international corporate laws, various tax implications by locale, all help create a smaller global playing field. As a global traveler, I am still amazed with the fact that people can get on a plane and in less than 12 hours be on the other side of the world participating in a drastically different society and set of rules than where they originally live and participate. This kind of travel gave personal and business opportunities to the planet's wealthier crowd that didn't exist only a handful of decades ago. Today, the playing field has become even smaller due to the advent of the Internet, and much of the developing world, like India, China and others are able to outsource their labor force, ideas and technological prowess without the need to spend the money to travel allowing to become more strategic in their business.
None of this personal information I know about Friedman changes the fact that some of the ideas that I took away from his book are not valid or that I no longer agree or disagree with them. But, it does shed new light on the way that I might reflect over his ideas that I read. Knowing a bit about the writer allows the reader a bit more room to see where the writer is getting their viewpoints and/or why they may be stating a position one way or the other. So, when he touts the good that comes out of international business practices of outsourcing jobs that will help create global economic expansion, I can look at that statement from various angles now that I know with who and what is being discussed over his dinner table.
I originally pictured a flat in NY, a type of Woody Allen existence that Friedman had. Or even perhaps lazying around the summer home in Cuba or the Keys like Hemmingway, continually trying to analyze the world through his own books, sources and friends. I am sure I am still correct in much of this, it is just that the world I now know is much different than the more normal world I was envisioning to which his information was coming from.
Friedman leads not what most people who reflect the life as a writer would lead. His normal crowd is the world elite and not the Harvard literary professor. I am not against people making money. This is what makes this world go around. I don't think that will change, and certainly not in my lifetime. As altruistic or nirvana-esque I might want the world to be more like, it is what it is. I feel it is just responsible journalism to let the reader know a bit about where one's ideas are coming from. In the back of a book, on the fold, it will discuss a writer's education, other books written, how many kids or a marriage or partner...not politics, not wealth, not religion, much of what will enlighten the reader to where the views so powerfully generate from.
When Friedman is someone who generally writes about economic and political topics perhaps it should be known to the readers that his viewpoints are coming from an elite side of global society. Although, he married into his wealth, he lives a very different writer's life. He is surrounded by the world's elite, always. Therefore, when he posits his views as if he is a normal kind of citizen, one must understand that he is delivering the message of the global elite in a pill that is to be swallowed by the average of society in order to allow the world elite their way while we all smile along.
I will close with some relevant lyrics:
Just a gigolo
everywhere I go
people know the part
I'm playing
Paid for every dance
selling each romance
every night some heart
betraying
There will come a day
youth will pass away
then what will they say
about me
When the end comes I know
they'll say just a gigolo
as life goes on
without me
'Cause I aint got nobody
nobody nobody cares for me
I'm so sad and lonely
sad and lonely sad and lonely
Won't some sweet mama
come and take a chance with me
cause I aint so bad
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Fey takes on Palin...AMAZING
For those that have missed this AMAZING skit on SNL!!!
Like I say...truth is better than...oh, wait...With Tina Fey and Amy Poehler playing Palin and Clinton helped create the highest rated Saturday Night Live Premiere since 2002. Although, McCain has since come out and blasted the skit as "sexist" and "disrespectful"...boo hoo!
Tina Fey was noted recently as saying, "I want to be done playing this lady on November 5, so if anyone could help me be done playing her on November 5, that would be good for me," Fey added that she was totally resistant in acknowledging her uncanny physical resemblance to Palin until her young daughter turned on the TV and teased ‘that's mummy.’
Like I say...truth is better than...oh, wait...With Tina Fey and Amy Poehler playing Palin and Clinton helped create the highest rated Saturday Night Live Premiere since 2002. Although, McCain has since come out and blasted the skit as "sexist" and "disrespectful"...boo hoo!
Tina Fey was noted recently as saying, "I want to be done playing this lady on November 5, so if anyone could help me be done playing her on November 5, that would be good for me," Fey added that she was totally resistant in acknowledging her uncanny physical resemblance to Palin until her young daughter turned on the TV and teased ‘that's mummy.’
Tommy Smothers still has it!!
For those that missed the posthumous award given to Tommy Smothers at this years Emmy awards I am including part of his speech. The prolific writer of comedy still has such a way with words:
“It’s hard for me to stay silent when I keep hearing that peace is only attainable through war. And there’s nothing more scary than watching ignorance in action,” he said, dedicating his award to “all people who feel compelled to speak out, and are not afraid to speak to power, and won’t shut up and refuse to be silenced.
Just one last thought, there’s one word that exists in every language on the face of the Earth, in every society from the time man began to speak and the word is “truth”. It exists in every language and it means exactly the same thing . . . . Truth - truth is what you get other people to believe.”
For a recap on my view of truth that I wrote in June, Click Here
“It’s hard for me to stay silent when I keep hearing that peace is only attainable through war. And there’s nothing more scary than watching ignorance in action,” he said, dedicating his award to “all people who feel compelled to speak out, and are not afraid to speak to power, and won’t shut up and refuse to be silenced.
Just one last thought, there’s one word that exists in every language on the face of the Earth, in every society from the time man began to speak and the word is “truth”. It exists in every language and it means exactly the same thing . . . . Truth - truth is what you get other people to believe.”
For a recap on my view of truth that I wrote in June, Click Here
Monday, September 22, 2008
Let's break this down to simple terms?!
The sad part of all of this economic breakdown is that due to the greed and power of those elite people in the top 1% club that have created this strategic mess (for not only the U.S. economy, but the global economy, and the huge profits for themselves) something still needs to be done. Uh, $700 Billion here, a few trillion there, and we won't raise taxes?!...where do these people come from?
I do applaud Pelosi for her persistence and insistence(at this point) in telling Bush that he must include in the bailout proposal issues that help the people of America and not simply the corporations. We will see how long that lasts before the Hill goes to recess.
I find it plausible to NOT have to raise taxes, but to simply state that there won't be taxes raised is unheard of in this situation. McCain also states that he will lower taxes. He states that he will cut defense spending?...I beg to differ and would state that this is simply another batch of lies coming from the senator trying anything to get into office. This military man will cut defense? I don't think so!
This whole current issue is simple really…uh-huh...it goes like this:
Paulson, Treasury Secretary, was discussing yesterday morning, on Meet the Press, that these actions are being done for the American people…uh-huh…So, Paulson, can you tell us how much is really going to be “needed” for this bailout? “Not at this time. We set a point of $700 Billion. We may not need that much, but it is also possible that we may end up asking for more!” He also stated that they are allowing foreign banks and corporations in on this in order to help this pass through more easily and expeditiously…In other words, the money that these rich crooks are stealing from the American tax payer will be able to be used to buy the REO’s off of the bank books by these same people’s offshore companies without taxation implications. Then, this will free up the necessary funds for the banking institutions to begin to lend again in order to help stimulate the economy, instead of them hoarding their money to make sure they can stay afloat, if nothing were to be done… Then, these offshore corporations, owned by the insider elite crooks, can then offer this real estate that they bought for pennies on the dollar away from the banks to the public at the now retail level. Despite the fact that the loans on this real estate is currently backed now by the socialist government programs called Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, that we the taxpayers own…is something we can call “Feddie”!! So, we are going to be buying back what we already own? Um… our loans, meaning the loans that the taxpayer is responsible for through the Freddie and Fannie bailout is also being sold back to the people again so that they can pay again?…So, what has been accomplished? In reality, nothing has changed, excepting the fact that the banks get to write off all of their losses and the people are stuck with their bad loans, again, and a huge tax burden. But, they can buy those same houses back with their money they aren’t getting from their jobs that they are losing. Oh, but the people will feel better now that they have been rescued by this brilliant scam and will begin to be more comfortable and spend and borrow again.
Simple, right?…uh-huh…
The brilliance of this Ponzi scheme is that there must be a solution to this problem regardless. It is a given at this point that there will be some big money makers through all of this, and that would be those who created this to begin with by deregulation of the finance industry.
But there must be something done in order to stimulate the economy as it has nearly come to a standstill in so many respects.
And, on top of this, if the American people don’t see through this scheme and vote for McCain, he will maintain Bush’s tax programs and actually reduce taxes for the rich (to help stimulate the economy)…uh-huh…
My god, truth is better than fiction!
I do applaud Pelosi for her persistence and insistence(at this point) in telling Bush that he must include in the bailout proposal issues that help the people of America and not simply the corporations. We will see how long that lasts before the Hill goes to recess.
I find it plausible to NOT have to raise taxes, but to simply state that there won't be taxes raised is unheard of in this situation. McCain also states that he will lower taxes. He states that he will cut defense spending?...I beg to differ and would state that this is simply another batch of lies coming from the senator trying anything to get into office. This military man will cut defense? I don't think so!
This whole current issue is simple really…uh-huh...it goes like this:
Paulson, Treasury Secretary, was discussing yesterday morning, on Meet the Press, that these actions are being done for the American people…uh-huh…So, Paulson, can you tell us how much is really going to be “needed” for this bailout? “Not at this time. We set a point of $700 Billion. We may not need that much, but it is also possible that we may end up asking for more!” He also stated that they are allowing foreign banks and corporations in on this in order to help this pass through more easily and expeditiously…In other words, the money that these rich crooks are stealing from the American tax payer will be able to be used to buy the REO’s off of the bank books by these same people’s offshore companies without taxation implications. Then, this will free up the necessary funds for the banking institutions to begin to lend again in order to help stimulate the economy, instead of them hoarding their money to make sure they can stay afloat, if nothing were to be done… Then, these offshore corporations, owned by the insider elite crooks, can then offer this real estate that they bought for pennies on the dollar away from the banks to the public at the now retail level. Despite the fact that the loans on this real estate is currently backed now by the socialist government programs called Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, that we the taxpayers own…is something we can call “Feddie”!! So, we are going to be buying back what we already own? Um… our loans, meaning the loans that the taxpayer is responsible for through the Freddie and Fannie bailout is also being sold back to the people again so that they can pay again?…So, what has been accomplished? In reality, nothing has changed, excepting the fact that the banks get to write off all of their losses and the people are stuck with their bad loans, again, and a huge tax burden. But, they can buy those same houses back with their money they aren’t getting from their jobs that they are losing. Oh, but the people will feel better now that they have been rescued by this brilliant scam and will begin to be more comfortable and spend and borrow again.
Simple, right?…uh-huh…
The brilliance of this Ponzi scheme is that there must be a solution to this problem regardless. It is a given at this point that there will be some big money makers through all of this, and that would be those who created this to begin with by deregulation of the finance industry.
But there must be something done in order to stimulate the economy as it has nearly come to a standstill in so many respects.
And, on top of this, if the American people don’t see through this scheme and vote for McCain, he will maintain Bush’s tax programs and actually reduce taxes for the rich (to help stimulate the economy)…uh-huh…
My god, truth is better than fiction!
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Alexander Hamilton speaks about finance...
From the man who formed the capitalist system of government that we now use today tells us like it is...
"I do know a little something about banking and investment financing. So I would like to weigh in on this matter about the federal government rushing in to save the American people’s way of living as they have come to know it.
What your government and the pundits are telling you about how dire this situation is, is all lies.
It is a ploy by the rich to cover their bad financial judgments at the taxpayers expense. The only way they can pull it off is to scare the average American into thinking that if the government doesn’t bail out the multimillionaires and billionaires that the whole system will collapse. THAT IS NOT TRUE!
The true financial situation of the country is this. The super wealthy financiers have extended themselves too far by betting more money on a pot than they have to cover the bet. A modern analogy may be:
If you kept charging against a credit card because you could continue to make the minimum payments, you could continue to charge until you;
1. reached your credit limit
2. arranged to get the credit card company to increase your credit limit.
But, it the company raised the minimum or checked your financial behavior and subsequently lowered or stopped your credit limit, then you would have to start paying or go bankrupt.
That is what happened to the those rich company owners. They over reached their financial capability to meet the minimum payments on their debt. If this happened to you, the government would not step in and rescue you. So why are they doing it for these super rich people and how are they justifying it to you to get you to go along with the scam?
The why they are bailing out the super rich is simple. The super rich are them or their bosses. How are they justifying bailing them out now that’s the easy part for them. They scare the masses.
How? By telling them:
A the financial system will collapse if these companies are not bailed out; and
B. convince the average person he was also complicit in the cause of this debacle because he tried to purchase a mortgage that he knew that he couldn’t afford.
A. The first lie:
Lets examine what the average person has to risk losing:
1. His bank account.
2. His mutual fund or money market account;
3. His 401K or other retirement investment;
4. His ability to borrow money;
5.His employment because his employer can’t borrow money. That’s it folks. That’s all the risk the average person has in this pot.
At first glance it seems like it is what the scare propaganda is saying is correct the system will collapse if the government doesn’t bail out the super rich. But wait! There is another simpler solution to solving the average person’s loss in those five areas which were caused by the greed and unsound financial risks of the super rich. Later I will explain how they got away with doing it in the first place.
A. The truth:
1. The average person with a $100,000 on deposit has no risk of losing a penny. His money is insured by FDIC. If he has more, then he should have been more careful.
2. Mutual funds or money market accounts. - The federal government can step in and guarantee the protection of a reasonable amount of the average person’s investment in those areas up to $100,000. If he has more, he should have been more careful. He can always sue the Funds for mismanagement.
3. 401K’s and other individual retirement options. - They can be protected up to a certain amount without giving anything to the super rich who risked these people’s money recklessly.
4. Availability of money for borrowing. - The scare tactic that banks won’t lend money is just that. Banks will lend money, that’s their business. If they don’t, remember how these same crooks remind you that this is a capitalist system not a socialist one, then rest assured that a capitalist venture will arise whereby some new business will start lending money to fill the void. There is no need to rescue the fat cat who risked too much because of greed and now his band has to fold, that socialism. The same socialism that he cries when some politician proposes to give you universal health care. He is trying to convince you that socialism by government to help him is okay but not to help you.
5.Employment - Employment is always in danger. If the owner doesn’t manage his business properly, the employees will lose their jobs. Jobs will not be lost because the company can not get a loan. See 4. above.
B. The second lie:
The “experts” are dispatched to convince the average person that people who tried to buy a home that they couldn’t afford was a contributing cause to this debacle. Common sense should tell you that that is not true.
B. The truth:
It is the lending institution that determines whether the person they lend money is capable of repaying that loan. No one can just take out a loan or mortgage. He must qualify according to the rules set up and administered by the lender. If the lender is irresponsible when it comes to making loans, it is not the borrower’s fault. It does not matter how easy the government makes it for the lender to lend you money, if the lender lends money to a person or business that his do diligence should tell him that the borrower can not pay back, it is the LENDER's fault.
This absolves the average person from any responsibility for this debacle. It is the sole responsibility of the rich trying to get richer. If they had succeeded they would be arguing that the government shouldn’t be penalizing them for taking risks and being successful.
So having taken those risk and FAILED, why should the government suddenly turn socialist and pay off their losses.
I promised to tell you how they got away with all their risky investments using the public’s money.
First let me say that one of the chief purposes of government is to protect the people from foreign threat and domestic threat.
Under protection from domestic threat comes the requirement of government to protect the public for company, institution, and corporate abuses. This is done by the government setting common sense regulations in the form of laws that protect the public from actions that would recklessly endanger the public’s money when it is being managed by private businesses for profit.
I see you have talked about some of the characters that participated in the dismantling the common sense regulations that were originally set up to protect the public. Unfortunately America is bet by a bunch of savvy crooks who are adept at convincing the average greedy person that he too can become rich if government DEREGULATES businesses and allow them to deal with the public competition will protect the public. This disingenuous piece of logic is proposed on the bases that the people are sophisticated or knowledgeable enough about finances to protect themselves and their investments from the crooks.
The second thing these republicans have done is to go behind the public’s back and restrict the enforcement of even the minimal laws set forth by the government to regulate these industries. Like I have heard before. If there is no police the crooks will run amok. Some businesses were caught short because they believed that the government was policing the regulations that were in place.
The crooks knew that the government was not policing any regulations because they are the super rich who got the government to prevent the police from enforcing the regulations. Now the government is being used to reward those crooks with taxpayers money.
AH
...and this link to a great relative article:
by Raymond J Learsy for The Huffington Post
"I do know a little something about banking and investment financing. So I would like to weigh in on this matter about the federal government rushing in to save the American people’s way of living as they have come to know it.
What your government and the pundits are telling you about how dire this situation is, is all lies.
It is a ploy by the rich to cover their bad financial judgments at the taxpayers expense. The only way they can pull it off is to scare the average American into thinking that if the government doesn’t bail out the multimillionaires and billionaires that the whole system will collapse. THAT IS NOT TRUE!
The true financial situation of the country is this. The super wealthy financiers have extended themselves too far by betting more money on a pot than they have to cover the bet. A modern analogy may be:
If you kept charging against a credit card because you could continue to make the minimum payments, you could continue to charge until you;
1. reached your credit limit
2. arranged to get the credit card company to increase your credit limit.
But, it the company raised the minimum or checked your financial behavior and subsequently lowered or stopped your credit limit, then you would have to start paying or go bankrupt.
That is what happened to the those rich company owners. They over reached their financial capability to meet the minimum payments on their debt. If this happened to you, the government would not step in and rescue you. So why are they doing it for these super rich people and how are they justifying it to you to get you to go along with the scam?
The why they are bailing out the super rich is simple. The super rich are them or their bosses. How are they justifying bailing them out now that’s the easy part for them. They scare the masses.
How? By telling them:
A the financial system will collapse if these companies are not bailed out; and
B. convince the average person he was also complicit in the cause of this debacle because he tried to purchase a mortgage that he knew that he couldn’t afford.
A. The first lie:
Lets examine what the average person has to risk losing:
1. His bank account.
2. His mutual fund or money market account;
3. His 401K or other retirement investment;
4. His ability to borrow money;
5.His employment because his employer can’t borrow money. That’s it folks. That’s all the risk the average person has in this pot.
At first glance it seems like it is what the scare propaganda is saying is correct the system will collapse if the government doesn’t bail out the super rich. But wait! There is another simpler solution to solving the average person’s loss in those five areas which were caused by the greed and unsound financial risks of the super rich. Later I will explain how they got away with doing it in the first place.
A. The truth:
1. The average person with a $100,000 on deposit has no risk of losing a penny. His money is insured by FDIC. If he has more, then he should have been more careful.
2. Mutual funds or money market accounts. - The federal government can step in and guarantee the protection of a reasonable amount of the average person’s investment in those areas up to $100,000. If he has more, he should have been more careful. He can always sue the Funds for mismanagement.
3. 401K’s and other individual retirement options. - They can be protected up to a certain amount without giving anything to the super rich who risked these people’s money recklessly.
4. Availability of money for borrowing. - The scare tactic that banks won’t lend money is just that. Banks will lend money, that’s their business. If they don’t, remember how these same crooks remind you that this is a capitalist system not a socialist one, then rest assured that a capitalist venture will arise whereby some new business will start lending money to fill the void. There is no need to rescue the fat cat who risked too much because of greed and now his band has to fold, that socialism. The same socialism that he cries when some politician proposes to give you universal health care. He is trying to convince you that socialism by government to help him is okay but not to help you.
5.Employment - Employment is always in danger. If the owner doesn’t manage his business properly, the employees will lose their jobs. Jobs will not be lost because the company can not get a loan. See 4. above.
B. The second lie:
The “experts” are dispatched to convince the average person that people who tried to buy a home that they couldn’t afford was a contributing cause to this debacle. Common sense should tell you that that is not true.
B. The truth:
It is the lending institution that determines whether the person they lend money is capable of repaying that loan. No one can just take out a loan or mortgage. He must qualify according to the rules set up and administered by the lender. If the lender is irresponsible when it comes to making loans, it is not the borrower’s fault. It does not matter how easy the government makes it for the lender to lend you money, if the lender lends money to a person or business that his do diligence should tell him that the borrower can not pay back, it is the LENDER's fault.
This absolves the average person from any responsibility for this debacle. It is the sole responsibility of the rich trying to get richer. If they had succeeded they would be arguing that the government shouldn’t be penalizing them for taking risks and being successful.
So having taken those risk and FAILED, why should the government suddenly turn socialist and pay off their losses.
I promised to tell you how they got away with all their risky investments using the public’s money.
First let me say that one of the chief purposes of government is to protect the people from foreign threat and domestic threat.
Under protection from domestic threat comes the requirement of government to protect the public for company, institution, and corporate abuses. This is done by the government setting common sense regulations in the form of laws that protect the public from actions that would recklessly endanger the public’s money when it is being managed by private businesses for profit.
I see you have talked about some of the characters that participated in the dismantling the common sense regulations that were originally set up to protect the public. Unfortunately America is bet by a bunch of savvy crooks who are adept at convincing the average greedy person that he too can become rich if government DEREGULATES businesses and allow them to deal with the public competition will protect the public. This disingenuous piece of logic is proposed on the bases that the people are sophisticated or knowledgeable enough about finances to protect themselves and their investments from the crooks.
The second thing these republicans have done is to go behind the public’s back and restrict the enforcement of even the minimal laws set forth by the government to regulate these industries. Like I have heard before. If there is no police the crooks will run amok. Some businesses were caught short because they believed that the government was policing the regulations that were in place.
The crooks knew that the government was not policing any regulations because they are the super rich who got the government to prevent the police from enforcing the regulations. Now the government is being used to reward those crooks with taxpayers money.
AH
...and this link to a great relative article:
by Raymond J Learsy for The Huffington Post
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Vermont is beautiful this time of year...
Remember the movie "White Christmas" with Bing Crosby, Danny Kay, Rosemary Clooney (George Clooney's aunt), and Vera Ellen? Vera had the best legs...! The great line, "Ah, Vermont is so beautiful this time of year...all that snow." Vermont is a beautiful place. I remember going there long ago on a family vacation to Maine. I need to go again, and this time of year would be perfect as the leaves will be beginning their fall colors and such.
We all know that Vermont is a rather left wing state. They were the first state to come forward asking Bush-Cheney for their resignations. In 2007, the state adopted a resolution calling for Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney. My guess is that he will not plan a visit there in the next few months either. Last March, the towns of Brattleboro and Marlboro, Vermont voted to seek indictments against Bush and Cheney over the war, and dozens of other towns voted at town meetings to call for his impeachment. This is the only state that the President has not visited in his entire time in office.
Charlotte Dennett deserves a cuddos! Dennett, 61, is the Progressive Party's candidate for Vermont Attorney General. She said Thursday she will prosecute President Bush for murder if she's elected on Nov. 4. Dennett and two others are challenging incumbent Attorney General William Sorrell, a Democrat, in the upcoming election. She states that Bush must be held accountable for the unnecessary deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers and over a million accounted Iraqi civilian deaths. She believes the Vermont attorney general would have jurisdiction to do so.
You all have read herein about the book, that I have been touting by former Los Angeles prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. He is the author of the new book "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder". In his book he stated that he and his staff would give assistance to any attorney general that takes on this task. Any state has jurisdiction, as every state has had a soldier that has died in Iraq.
"Someone has to step forward," said Dennett, flanked by Bugliosi at a news conference announcing her plan. "Someone has to say we cannot put up with this lack of accountability any more."
Bugliosi, 74, gained fame as the prosecutor of killer Charles Manson, said any state attorney general would have jurisdiction since Bush committed "overt acts" including the military's recruitment of soldiers in Vermont and allegedly lying about the threat posed by former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in speeches that were aired in Vermont and elsewhere.
"No man, even the president of the United States, is above the law," said Bugliosi.
Of course, The White House press office didn't respond to a request for comment Thursday. But Republican National Committee spokesman Blair Latoff denounced Dennett.
Typical politics. Typical Bush team. Deny till you die...
Latoff said, "It's extremely disappointing that a candidate for state attorney general is more concerned with radical left-wing provocation than upholding the law of Vermont. These incendiary suggestions may score points among the most fringe elements of American society, but can't be settling for anyone looking for an attorney general." I guess he doesn't give a shit about true accountability. Oh, that would mean his boss would go to prison. Can you imagine Bush going to prison. He is the man who has executed more than anyone...hmmm, I'd like to see that.
The incumbent, Sorrell, said he doesn't believe a Vermont attorney general would have the authority to charge Bush. Some beg to differ. "The reality is, in my view, that unless the crime takes place in Vermont, then I as the attorney general have no authority under Vermont law to be prosecuting the president," Sorrell said. The funny thing is that the crime did take place in Vermont, and Iowa, and Florida, and Texas...and Iraq. Perhaps a UN tribunal will get a backbone and do something?...right...
We all know that Vermont is a rather left wing state. They were the first state to come forward asking Bush-Cheney for their resignations. In 2007, the state adopted a resolution calling for Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney. My guess is that he will not plan a visit there in the next few months either. Last March, the towns of Brattleboro and Marlboro, Vermont voted to seek indictments against Bush and Cheney over the war, and dozens of other towns voted at town meetings to call for his impeachment. This is the only state that the President has not visited in his entire time in office.
Charlotte Dennett deserves a cuddos! Dennett, 61, is the Progressive Party's candidate for Vermont Attorney General. She said Thursday she will prosecute President Bush for murder if she's elected on Nov. 4. Dennett and two others are challenging incumbent Attorney General William Sorrell, a Democrat, in the upcoming election. She states that Bush must be held accountable for the unnecessary deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers and over a million accounted Iraqi civilian deaths. She believes the Vermont attorney general would have jurisdiction to do so.
You all have read herein about the book, that I have been touting by former Los Angeles prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. He is the author of the new book "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder". In his book he stated that he and his staff would give assistance to any attorney general that takes on this task. Any state has jurisdiction, as every state has had a soldier that has died in Iraq.
"Someone has to step forward," said Dennett, flanked by Bugliosi at a news conference announcing her plan. "Someone has to say we cannot put up with this lack of accountability any more."
Bugliosi, 74, gained fame as the prosecutor of killer Charles Manson, said any state attorney general would have jurisdiction since Bush committed "overt acts" including the military's recruitment of soldiers in Vermont and allegedly lying about the threat posed by former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in speeches that were aired in Vermont and elsewhere.
"No man, even the president of the United States, is above the law," said Bugliosi.
Of course, The White House press office didn't respond to a request for comment Thursday. But Republican National Committee spokesman Blair Latoff denounced Dennett.
Typical politics. Typical Bush team. Deny till you die...
Latoff said, "It's extremely disappointing that a candidate for state attorney general is more concerned with radical left-wing provocation than upholding the law of Vermont. These incendiary suggestions may score points among the most fringe elements of American society, but can't be settling for anyone looking for an attorney general." I guess he doesn't give a shit about true accountability. Oh, that would mean his boss would go to prison. Can you imagine Bush going to prison. He is the man who has executed more than anyone...hmmm, I'd like to see that.
The incumbent, Sorrell, said he doesn't believe a Vermont attorney general would have the authority to charge Bush. Some beg to differ. "The reality is, in my view, that unless the crime takes place in Vermont, then I as the attorney general have no authority under Vermont law to be prosecuting the president," Sorrell said. The funny thing is that the crime did take place in Vermont, and Iowa, and Florida, and Texas...and Iraq. Perhaps a UN tribunal will get a backbone and do something?...right...
Friday, September 19, 2008
SEC - FEC, what's the difference...?!
I couldn't let this one go by, for those that may have missed this!!!
McCain has no idea how to deal with finances, what country's exist, who is who and what is what...and he wants to rule the world!? Enough of the SAME!!
Oh, and the fact that last week, and the previous many weeks McCant has stated that he thought the economy was basically sound...that is until this week when he stated that it is the government and corporate greed that have placed the economy in such a delicate condition.
Watch!
McCain has no idea how to deal with finances, what country's exist, who is who and what is what...and he wants to rule the world!? Enough of the SAME!!
Oh, and the fact that last week, and the previous many weeks McCant has stated that he thought the economy was basically sound...that is until this week when he stated that it is the government and corporate greed that have placed the economy in such a delicate condition.
Watch!
Thursday, September 18, 2008
POW HERO voices his concern, and it ain't McCain!
There were hundreds of POW's, yet McCain tries daily to make sure the American public think that he was the master POW. Not true. Yes, he was a POW, and a hero, but the only hero, NO! There were hundreds and many were tortured for a lot longer than McCain was. Well, I found this on my favorite blog, but thought I would include here so my readers will catch this too. I feel it is important to see!!
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Robert, Rachel and Bill clear the air!
First I thought that I would include this blurb from Robert F Kennedy, Jr. on Sarah Palin's reading list;
Fascist writer Westbrook Pegler, an avowed racist who Sarah Palin approvingly quoted in her acceptance speech for the moral superiority of small town values, expressed his fervent hope about my father, Robert F. Kennedy, as he contemplated his own run for the presidency in 1965, that "some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow flies."
It might be worth asking Governor Palin for a tally of the other favorites from her reading list.
Today in the NY Times, David Brooks writes that Sarah Palin is unqualified for her position. If McCant doesn't see this as clearly as America can, he is unqualified for his position. Karl Rove, the Bush creator, has recently stated that McCain is running the dirties campaign he has ever seen. This coming from the man who has previously run the dirtiest campaign anyone has ever seen...Richard Cohen, of the Washington Post states how far McCain is off if he can stand behind and support this person as the second most powerful person in the world, hereby creating the instability of his decision making for the position of the most powerful person...
As for the following video, I couldn't say any of this more clearly!!
Fascist writer Westbrook Pegler, an avowed racist who Sarah Palin approvingly quoted in her acceptance speech for the moral superiority of small town values, expressed his fervent hope about my father, Robert F. Kennedy, as he contemplated his own run for the presidency in 1965, that "some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow flies."
It might be worth asking Governor Palin for a tally of the other favorites from her reading list.
Today in the NY Times, David Brooks writes that Sarah Palin is unqualified for her position. If McCant doesn't see this as clearly as America can, he is unqualified for his position. Karl Rove, the Bush creator, has recently stated that McCain is running the dirties campaign he has ever seen. This coming from the man who has previously run the dirtiest campaign anyone has ever seen...Richard Cohen, of the Washington Post states how far McCain is off if he can stand behind and support this person as the second most powerful person in the world, hereby creating the instability of his decision making for the position of the most powerful person...
As for the following video, I couldn't say any of this more clearly!!
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Another day on Wall Street and Just another politician....
I thought that this following article would be a good one to show my readers.
I wanted to get into some of the dynamics of the Wall Street collapse of Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Lehman Bros., but will do that after a bit more research...I can say that one good thing that will come out of that situation is that the interest rates are going to go down, as bonds are rising.
**********
So much for Sarah Palin's claim to be a maverick, someone who doesn't play politics the old-fashioned way. Now she is.
On Monday, John McCain's camp announced that Palin would not cooperate with a bipartisan investigation -- which includes an independent investigator -- of her role in firing Alaska's public safety commissioner.
A McCain campaign spokesman said Palin wouldn't take part "so long as it remained tainted and run by partisan individuals who have a predetermined conclusion."
He was referring to a Democratic state legislator involved in the probe who had said the case might produce criminal charges.
Unfortunately for Palin, she has told the American people she has nothing to hide in this case -- which means she ought to be cooperating fully.
Already, Palin is starting to look like all other politicians. She backtracks when things aren't going her way. She attacks anyone who doesn't agree with her.
And, in this particular case, she's inviting a subpoena for her testimony. If one comes in the next few weeks, Palin could be embroiled in a nasty legal affair touching on her veracity as governor just about the time Americans go to the polls in November.
By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
**********
Here is a response to the editorial from one of the readers;
I left the Christian Church some years ago. Hypocrisy and a flawed "salvation clause" were the clinchers. Saying they believe in the word of God for example while sending bombs and missles at innocent Iraqis (15,000 or more deaths) was too hypocritcal for me and the "all you have to do is ask for forgiveness" clause and all transgressions are swept under the carpet seemed like a blank check for evil - which unprovoked war, "holy" pedophiles, bigotted pastors, and the vile mud slinging politicians of the right bear out - all forgiven! Sarah Palin is the quintessential Right wing Christian politician - Says she's for transparency in government and tries a cover-up before she's even in office. She lauds family values and turns the child rearing over to nanny's and husband to pursue power. Lies about a bridge to nowhere - what else will she lie about? Don't worry, she's just another perfectly hypocritical Christian - she'll be forgiven. Already is apparently by her minions of like minded red necks ready to go to war with Russia. Geeez.. Wake up goons!
I wanted to get into some of the dynamics of the Wall Street collapse of Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Lehman Bros., but will do that after a bit more research...I can say that one good thing that will come out of that situation is that the interest rates are going to go down, as bonds are rising.
**********
So much for Sarah Palin's claim to be a maverick, someone who doesn't play politics the old-fashioned way. Now she is.
On Monday, John McCain's camp announced that Palin would not cooperate with a bipartisan investigation -- which includes an independent investigator -- of her role in firing Alaska's public safety commissioner.
A McCain campaign spokesman said Palin wouldn't take part "so long as it remained tainted and run by partisan individuals who have a predetermined conclusion."
He was referring to a Democratic state legislator involved in the probe who had said the case might produce criminal charges.
Unfortunately for Palin, she has told the American people she has nothing to hide in this case -- which means she ought to be cooperating fully.
Already, Palin is starting to look like all other politicians. She backtracks when things aren't going her way. She attacks anyone who doesn't agree with her.
And, in this particular case, she's inviting a subpoena for her testimony. If one comes in the next few weeks, Palin could be embroiled in a nasty legal affair touching on her veracity as governor just about the time Americans go to the polls in November.
By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
**********
Here is a response to the editorial from one of the readers;
I left the Christian Church some years ago. Hypocrisy and a flawed "salvation clause" were the clinchers. Saying they believe in the word of God for example while sending bombs and missles at innocent Iraqis (15,000 or more deaths) was too hypocritcal for me and the "all you have to do is ask for forgiveness" clause and all transgressions are swept under the carpet seemed like a blank check for evil - which unprovoked war, "holy" pedophiles, bigotted pastors, and the vile mud slinging politicians of the right bear out - all forgiven! Sarah Palin is the quintessential Right wing Christian politician - Says she's for transparency in government and tries a cover-up before she's even in office. She lauds family values and turns the child rearing over to nanny's and husband to pursue power. Lies about a bridge to nowhere - what else will she lie about? Don't worry, she's just another perfectly hypocritical Christian - she'll be forgiven. Already is apparently by her minions of like minded red necks ready to go to war with Russia. Geeez.. Wake up goons!
Monday, September 15, 2008
His Audacity of hope...
I give huge cuddos to Obama for doing what he is doing and his audacity of hope. To the capacity of what he has done, and to the character to which he has represented within this campaign. The lies, deception, and mis/disinformation that the McCant people spew is a travesty to the American people, the office for which he is attempting to gain, and the system of politics in general. I am simply amazed at the responses we are hearing from people regarding this campaign. I mean really!...
There was a 27 year old woman in Nevada, that was watching McCant's VP choice speak at her first solo rally in Carson City in front of approximately 3500 people. She is an unemployed barista from Yerington, NV, who held a sign that read "Hunter Chicks 4 Palin" on one side, and "Sarah Killed My Apathy" with a drawing of a deer rifle and a target on the other. She had supported Mitt Romney in the primary, said that she cried the day of McCant's VP's acceptance speech. "I think that it's great that the American people finally have a candidate who they can relate to, with morals," said Tracy, who said the issues she cares the most about are pro-life and the right to bear arms.
I know for a fact that Obama supports the right to bear arms, he just doesn't support the right to bear an automatic weapon that spews hundreds of bullets in a minute time frame. This kind of gun is unnecessary for a citizen to possess. The Constitution that expresses the right to bear arms was written when there was no true military in America. As a militia of commoners was needed at the time, the right to bear arms was a necessity in order to have the minutemen available to protect our freedoms in the early days of our country. This was back in 1770's when the muskets used shot once and took nearly 30 seconds to reload. The right to bear arms should still be a right for Americans, but the need for the automatic weapons on our streets is unnecessary and creates street violence rather than protects citizens.
The Pro life issue is another label of banter brought to the public through the right wing Repugnicants to create public discourse to sway the people's mindset to the far right without using direct religious connotations. It simply allows someone besides the person in need to make a decision for them on their behalf. In a case of rape or incest, as an example, McCant's VP choice states that she feels that the fetus should be born and the right of the woman has no say. I don't see how someone is able to enter the home of a private citizen and have the legal right to tell them they cannot eat this or that food in the privacy of their home, or discuss this topic or that topic at the dinner table, as it is illegal. That you can enter some one's private residence and tell them that they can only do it missionary style and no fellatio, or cunnilingus as it is a "deplorable" act. To be able to make these private decisions as to how they should live their private life, without their involvement. As we all know that religious political lobbying is where those debatable thoughts are coming from, this is NO separation of church and state. Obama, believes in freedom of choice, thus allowing another person the freedom to choose given their circumstance at the time. If a woman has been raped or a child has been involved in incest and is now pregnant, there is no reason that the rapist should have more rights than the female. It was NOT her decision to be in this position. With little to no sex education in schools any longer, and the average family unit has (maybe) two working parents, with little to no time left to parent any longer, as we can see and hear from any American today, it cannot only be left to the family to educate the young on sex. It should also be a part of societal responsibility. These children are to become the future of this country and we are leaving them behind!! They need to be taught to make rational and educated decisions on all aspects of their lives so as to hold a personal debate on their own thoughts and issues in order to summon an individual response. McCant's running mate is the perfect example of her own failed policy on this issue as her underage daughter is pregnant due to the mother's lack of attention to the child in order to educate her in abstinence, to which is the policy that she pronounces to the public as the best policy for sex education. The base that the Repugnicants state that they want less government and the government to be out of the person's life is bullshit propaganda!
How about the retired Republican Marine Corps pilot and LAPD homicide detective reverently invoke the names of Gloria Steinem and Bella Abzug. But Bob Lee, 73, of Reno, praised the VP pick as "the epitome of everything that I used to see Gloria [Steinem] and Bella Abzug promoting -- American women can be all things." He noted, "Sarah didn't make it on the coattails of her husband. Hillary [Clinton] rode the coattails of Bill." I don't see it?! This fact that people are claiming that McCan't's VP choice is like Gloria Steinem or Bella Abzug is absurd. Those women fought hard for the individual rights of women. Those women were true mavericks of their time who paved the way for women to be individual and independent citizens with the same rights and freedom's that men have. Abzug became a Congresswoman stating that, "A woman's place is in the house, the house of representatives!" Her father owned the "Live and Let Live Meat Market". She supported gay rights, women's rights, minority rights...Gloria Steinem is the voice of the modern American woman and an American Woman's rights activist icon. She was a Playboy Bunny, a journalist, and a labor rights activist. I don't understand how someone is able to compare them to this woman VP choice for the Repugnicant party who wants to limit women's rights, ban books, does not support gays or minorities causes. I don't see the correlation.
How about this guy who was having breakfast Friday morning at the counter at Paul's Restaurant in Whitehall, OH. This is a blue-collar suburb of Columbus and he is a retired aircraft designer named Richard Beard. He stressed that he knew all that he needed to know to vote against Obama. "Anyone who won't salute the flag or say the Pledge of Allegiance isn't worth voting for. And Obama doesn't have an American birth certificate or one that you can believe. The one from Hawaii is a fake." An original Ron Paul supporter with an NRA cap, would have been an unlikely Democratic voter even if Obama had been born in Ohio State. Smitten with Palin, Beard said, "She doesn't throw in any of that doublespeak like other politicians." Really?! I guess he is on the bridge to nowhere...perhaps he is hoping to get a financial handout from her earmarked funds she received for the state of Alaska...I'm sure he has experience in the immigration department to validate his statement that Obama's birth certificate is a fake...my god, where do these people come from?! Perhaps he just doesn't want to admit he is a racist! Plain and simple. Let the elephant out so all can see!
This is my reasoning to state that there are many Americans that are blinded by rhetoric and are incapable to think rationally and are part of the lemming society. Sad...
There was a 27 year old woman in Nevada, that was watching McCant's VP choice speak at her first solo rally in Carson City in front of approximately 3500 people. She is an unemployed barista from Yerington, NV, who held a sign that read "Hunter Chicks 4 Palin" on one side, and "Sarah Killed My Apathy" with a drawing of a deer rifle and a target on the other. She had supported Mitt Romney in the primary, said that she cried the day of McCant's VP's acceptance speech. "I think that it's great that the American people finally have a candidate who they can relate to, with morals," said Tracy, who said the issues she cares the most about are pro-life and the right to bear arms.
I know for a fact that Obama supports the right to bear arms, he just doesn't support the right to bear an automatic weapon that spews hundreds of bullets in a minute time frame. This kind of gun is unnecessary for a citizen to possess. The Constitution that expresses the right to bear arms was written when there was no true military in America. As a militia of commoners was needed at the time, the right to bear arms was a necessity in order to have the minutemen available to protect our freedoms in the early days of our country. This was back in 1770's when the muskets used shot once and took nearly 30 seconds to reload. The right to bear arms should still be a right for Americans, but the need for the automatic weapons on our streets is unnecessary and creates street violence rather than protects citizens.
The Pro life issue is another label of banter brought to the public through the right wing Repugnicants to create public discourse to sway the people's mindset to the far right without using direct religious connotations. It simply allows someone besides the person in need to make a decision for them on their behalf. In a case of rape or incest, as an example, McCant's VP choice states that she feels that the fetus should be born and the right of the woman has no say. I don't see how someone is able to enter the home of a private citizen and have the legal right to tell them they cannot eat this or that food in the privacy of their home, or discuss this topic or that topic at the dinner table, as it is illegal. That you can enter some one's private residence and tell them that they can only do it missionary style and no fellatio, or cunnilingus as it is a "deplorable" act. To be able to make these private decisions as to how they should live their private life, without their involvement. As we all know that religious political lobbying is where those debatable thoughts are coming from, this is NO separation of church and state. Obama, believes in freedom of choice, thus allowing another person the freedom to choose given their circumstance at the time. If a woman has been raped or a child has been involved in incest and is now pregnant, there is no reason that the rapist should have more rights than the female. It was NOT her decision to be in this position. With little to no sex education in schools any longer, and the average family unit has (maybe) two working parents, with little to no time left to parent any longer, as we can see and hear from any American today, it cannot only be left to the family to educate the young on sex. It should also be a part of societal responsibility. These children are to become the future of this country and we are leaving them behind!! They need to be taught to make rational and educated decisions on all aspects of their lives so as to hold a personal debate on their own thoughts and issues in order to summon an individual response. McCant's running mate is the perfect example of her own failed policy on this issue as her underage daughter is pregnant due to the mother's lack of attention to the child in order to educate her in abstinence, to which is the policy that she pronounces to the public as the best policy for sex education. The base that the Repugnicants state that they want less government and the government to be out of the person's life is bullshit propaganda!
How about the retired Republican Marine Corps pilot and LAPD homicide detective reverently invoke the names of Gloria Steinem and Bella Abzug. But Bob Lee, 73, of Reno, praised the VP pick as "the epitome of everything that I used to see Gloria [Steinem] and Bella Abzug promoting -- American women can be all things." He noted, "Sarah didn't make it on the coattails of her husband. Hillary [Clinton] rode the coattails of Bill." I don't see it?! This fact that people are claiming that McCan't's VP choice is like Gloria Steinem or Bella Abzug is absurd. Those women fought hard for the individual rights of women. Those women were true mavericks of their time who paved the way for women to be individual and independent citizens with the same rights and freedom's that men have. Abzug became a Congresswoman stating that, "A woman's place is in the house, the house of representatives!" Her father owned the "Live and Let Live Meat Market". She supported gay rights, women's rights, minority rights...Gloria Steinem is the voice of the modern American woman and an American Woman's rights activist icon. She was a Playboy Bunny, a journalist, and a labor rights activist. I don't understand how someone is able to compare them to this woman VP choice for the Repugnicant party who wants to limit women's rights, ban books, does not support gays or minorities causes. I don't see the correlation.
How about this guy who was having breakfast Friday morning at the counter at Paul's Restaurant in Whitehall, OH. This is a blue-collar suburb of Columbus and he is a retired aircraft designer named Richard Beard. He stressed that he knew all that he needed to know to vote against Obama. "Anyone who won't salute the flag or say the Pledge of Allegiance isn't worth voting for. And Obama doesn't have an American birth certificate or one that you can believe. The one from Hawaii is a fake." An original Ron Paul supporter with an NRA cap, would have been an unlikely Democratic voter even if Obama had been born in Ohio State. Smitten with Palin, Beard said, "She doesn't throw in any of that doublespeak like other politicians." Really?! I guess he is on the bridge to nowhere...perhaps he is hoping to get a financial handout from her earmarked funds she received for the state of Alaska...I'm sure he has experience in the immigration department to validate his statement that Obama's birth certificate is a fake...my god, where do these people come from?! Perhaps he just doesn't want to admit he is a racist! Plain and simple. Let the elephant out so all can see!
This is my reasoning to state that there are many Americans that are blinded by rhetoric and are incapable to think rationally and are part of the lemming society. Sad...
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Can history finally teach us...
I have stated many, many times herein that for those that travel outside of the US, (Palin would NOT be one of them) know that the rest of world thinks that Americans are lemming idiots(McCant/Palin believe this to be true based on their continued lies and deception to win the White House). There is much of the time that I can tend to agree. I now can state, that based on the myriad of emails here that this rings so true.
Rome did fall, and history seems to teach us nothing, so perhaps it is America's time to dwindle. The flag waving right wingers will state that I am unpatriotic to say something like that, (although being a true patriot is challenging what our leaders are doing rather then simple saying...ok! Go ahead and fuck me some more...)but I would state back that you get what you vote for. And since America has voted like "stupid" lemmings we are in the mess we are in.
It's historically typical banter and style for the Repugnicants to lie, cheat and steal their way into office to which they fuck shit up during their tenure. Then the democrats come in with the need to raise taxes to save our country from the demise that a previous term(s) of Repugnicants have done. The people come to not see this as saving anything, then get irritated at the situation as soon as the Repugnicants begin again to lie, cheat and steal with mis/disinformation which eventually gets them back in to the White House to do the same shit all over again.
If more of our country learned to and actually read, people would begin to learn about history and the nations ills and why we are where we are at, and just why the rest of the world thinks so lowly of our people.
It is a sad Catch 22, and unless our educational system gets better funding and teachers to educate our decreasing graduating populace, we will continue the degrading of this great country to become the next Rome.
I do have optimism that Obama will rise and the people will wake up in time, in order to help turn a new page in this country's history. If this does not happen in the next 60 days, and our lemmings once again vote "stupid" and we inaugurate the McCant/Pain ticket I then feel that this country has had its last leg...We can see that, more or less of, the rest of the world is hoping that Obama come into office based on the many responses here, the showing in Germany, and more.
The current administration has been pondering their legacy in these last months as they begin to see their exit. What to put into their libraries and such. Maybe these guys just shouldn't have a library, since do to their FAILED "no child left behind" education plan, that has left more uneducated people to our society who can't read what will be in the library anyway...The fact that they should ponder is that they have plundered this country into the ground, continue to run it further into bankruptcy with the bank bailouts by the taxpayer monies, and left it to the dogs, without caring a bit and the world knows it. All the while smiling straight into our faces...Worse than that, the world know that we as an American populace watched it all happen, did nothing during the demise to stop their carnage. That is a shame!
As an American, I feel the urge to apologize to the world for the past 8 years. But, since the beginning of even the thought that Bush/Dick would be in office I have screamed as much as possible for that NOT to happen...but it did. The fact that it did, I apologize for that. Perhaps I didn't scream loud enough?!
At any rate, Obama will come in and begin to clean things up. Perhaps doing well enough for eight years. While we have a Democratic house and Senate we can really make some needed changes to help put not only this country back on a civilized track, but put us inline with the rest of the world to help turn the global community into a cohesive unit that can begin to make the needed changes that the world needs in order to survive. We are at a crucial moment in our planet history and if we do not heed the call not only will this modern Rome die, but it just might take this blue marble down with it...
Vote Obama/Biden for real change, not the fake change filled with lies, deceit, greed and oligarchy!
I guess I'm done for the day...
Rome did fall, and history seems to teach us nothing, so perhaps it is America's time to dwindle. The flag waving right wingers will state that I am unpatriotic to say something like that, (although being a true patriot is challenging what our leaders are doing rather then simple saying...ok! Go ahead and fuck me some more...)but I would state back that you get what you vote for. And since America has voted like "stupid" lemmings we are in the mess we are in.
It's historically typical banter and style for the Repugnicants to lie, cheat and steal their way into office to which they fuck shit up during their tenure. Then the democrats come in with the need to raise taxes to save our country from the demise that a previous term(s) of Repugnicants have done. The people come to not see this as saving anything, then get irritated at the situation as soon as the Repugnicants begin again to lie, cheat and steal with mis/disinformation which eventually gets them back in to the White House to do the same shit all over again.
If more of our country learned to and actually read, people would begin to learn about history and the nations ills and why we are where we are at, and just why the rest of the world thinks so lowly of our people.
It is a sad Catch 22, and unless our educational system gets better funding and teachers to educate our decreasing graduating populace, we will continue the degrading of this great country to become the next Rome.
I do have optimism that Obama will rise and the people will wake up in time, in order to help turn a new page in this country's history. If this does not happen in the next 60 days, and our lemmings once again vote "stupid" and we inaugurate the McCant/Pain ticket I then feel that this country has had its last leg...We can see that, more or less of, the rest of the world is hoping that Obama come into office based on the many responses here, the showing in Germany, and more.
The current administration has been pondering their legacy in these last months as they begin to see their exit. What to put into their libraries and such. Maybe these guys just shouldn't have a library, since do to their FAILED "no child left behind" education plan, that has left more uneducated people to our society who can't read what will be in the library anyway...The fact that they should ponder is that they have plundered this country into the ground, continue to run it further into bankruptcy with the bank bailouts by the taxpayer monies, and left it to the dogs, without caring a bit and the world knows it. All the while smiling straight into our faces...Worse than that, the world know that we as an American populace watched it all happen, did nothing during the demise to stop their carnage. That is a shame!
As an American, I feel the urge to apologize to the world for the past 8 years. But, since the beginning of even the thought that Bush/Dick would be in office I have screamed as much as possible for that NOT to happen...but it did. The fact that it did, I apologize for that. Perhaps I didn't scream loud enough?!
At any rate, Obama will come in and begin to clean things up. Perhaps doing well enough for eight years. While we have a Democratic house and Senate we can really make some needed changes to help put not only this country back on a civilized track, but put us inline with the rest of the world to help turn the global community into a cohesive unit that can begin to make the needed changes that the world needs in order to survive. We are at a crucial moment in our planet history and if we do not heed the call not only will this modern Rome die, but it just might take this blue marble down with it...
Vote Obama/Biden for real change, not the fake change filled with lies, deceit, greed and oligarchy!
I guess I'm done for the day...
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Our Elementary Tax System at its core...
I received this in an email from a college buddy and thought it was good fun...Thanks, Squatty!
But interestingly enough it ties in with my previous entry of the Exit Tax that seems to be getting so much attention.
The other interesting thing to take note is that, although there is some truth to this riddle, the taxes savings distributions have no relation, in this story, to each person relative of income. This is where a flat tax might be in line for a more fair breakdown. At least then it is all relative to income.
I will also add that where I reside I am already paying what the seventh and eighth men are paying for a drink without having a friend with me. So this economics wouldn't add up no matter how you slice it...
**********
Bar Stool Economics:
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3 The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. "Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, " but he got $10!", "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I did!", "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, or attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
**********
I am a fan of the assistance programs like Social Security and Medicare. However, upon which we allowed our government to borrow from these funds in order to fraudulently state that they have balanced a budget this system has been doomed for failure. That is simple economics that the poor who need those payments have been coming out of pocket for those many years of admnistrations borrowing from those funds. Now, using those funds that are earmarked (ooooh, there is that word) for the aged and needy, based on relative income, we can see just how topside friendly this tax system can be.
And the McCant campaign thinks they can balance the budget without raising taxes...Perhaps the public will need to know where their funds will be coming from.
I know Alaska has a bit of an influx of funds that might be able to be used! (no offense to the Alaskan taxpayer...)
But interestingly enough it ties in with my previous entry of the Exit Tax that seems to be getting so much attention.
The other interesting thing to take note is that, although there is some truth to this riddle, the taxes savings distributions have no relation, in this story, to each person relative of income. This is where a flat tax might be in line for a more fair breakdown. At least then it is all relative to income.
I will also add that where I reside I am already paying what the seventh and eighth men are paying for a drink without having a friend with me. So this economics wouldn't add up no matter how you slice it...
**********
Bar Stool Economics:
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3 The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. "Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, " but he got $10!", "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I did!", "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, or attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
**********
I am a fan of the assistance programs like Social Security and Medicare. However, upon which we allowed our government to borrow from these funds in order to fraudulently state that they have balanced a budget this system has been doomed for failure. That is simple economics that the poor who need those payments have been coming out of pocket for those many years of admnistrations borrowing from those funds. Now, using those funds that are earmarked (ooooh, there is that word) for the aged and needy, based on relative income, we can see just how topside friendly this tax system can be.
And the McCant campaign thinks they can balance the budget without raising taxes...Perhaps the public will need to know where their funds will be coming from.
I know Alaska has a bit of an influx of funds that might be able to be used! (no offense to the Alaskan taxpayer...)
Friday, September 12, 2008
Just trying to get things straight...
With all of the different lies and misdeceptions and disinformation I am hoping to clear up all of the political madness…
Let me see if I have this straight…..
* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you’re ‘exotic, different.’
* If you grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, you’re a quintessential American story.
* If your name is Barack, you’re a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* If you name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you’re a maverick.
* If you graduate from Harvard law School, you are unstable.
* If you attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you’re well grounded.
* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate’s Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran’s Affairs committees, you don’t have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you’re qualified to become the country’s second highest ranking executive.
* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you’re not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you’re a Christian.
* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state’s school system, while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you’re very responsible.
* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family’s values don’t represent America’s.
* If you’re husband is nicknamed ‘First Dude’, with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn’t register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
OK, *much* clearer now.
I wish our press core would get a backbone and simply ask the relevant policy questions to which then all of the personality doodoo would get answered in its appropriate due time (fast) and without all of the fluff that covers everything. But, then we would find the truth so revealing that there would then be no need for a vote. The Repugnicants did quite well with their lies and disinformation during the Bush campaigns, but this is rediculous. If we can see all of the shit that is being thrown around this time the the Repugnicants, what does that show us that would take place in their White House…?
Just get to the basics and the rest will easily take care of itself. Obama and Biden can certainly stand on their own when it is against the truth for both campaign rivals.
Maybe the corporate press will get a backbone someday…
Let me see if I have this straight…..
* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you’re ‘exotic, different.’
* If you grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, you’re a quintessential American story.
* If your name is Barack, you’re a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* If you name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you’re a maverick.
* If you graduate from Harvard law School, you are unstable.
* If you attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you’re well grounded.
* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate’s Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran’s Affairs committees, you don’t have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you’re qualified to become the country’s second highest ranking executive.
* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you’re not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you’re a Christian.
* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state’s school system, while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you’re very responsible.
* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family’s values don’t represent America’s.
* If you’re husband is nicknamed ‘First Dude’, with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn’t register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
OK, *much* clearer now.
I wish our press core would get a backbone and simply ask the relevant policy questions to which then all of the personality doodoo would get answered in its appropriate due time (fast) and without all of the fluff that covers everything. But, then we would find the truth so revealing that there would then be no need for a vote. The Repugnicants did quite well with their lies and disinformation during the Bush campaigns, but this is rediculous. If we can see all of the shit that is being thrown around this time the the Repugnicants, what does that show us that would take place in their White House…?
Just get to the basics and the rest will easily take care of itself. Obama and Biden can certainly stand on their own when it is against the truth for both campaign rivals.
Maybe the corporate press will get a backbone someday…
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Deepak Chopra on Obama and the Palin Effect
by Deepak Chopra
Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin’s pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.
She is the reverse of Barack Obama, in essence his shadow, deriding his idealism and turning negativity into a cause for pride. In psychological terms the shadow is that part of the psyche that hides out of sight, countering our aspirations, virtue, and vision with qualities we are ashamed to face: anger, fear, revenge, violence, selfishness, and suspicion of “the other.” For millions of Americans, Obama triggers those feelings, but they don’t want to express them. He is calling for us to reach for our higher selves, and frankly, that stirs up hidden reactions of an unsavory kind. (Just to be perfectly clear, I am not making a verbal play out of the fact that Sen. Obama is black. The shadow is a metaphor widely in use before his arrival on the scene.) I recognize that psychological analysis of politics is usually not welcome by the public, but I believe such a perspective can be helpful here to understand Palin’s message. In her acceptance speech Gov. Palin sent a rousing call to those who want to celebrate their resistance to change and a higher vision
Look at what she stands for:
* Small town values — a nostaligic return to simpler times disguises a denial of America’s global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism.
* Ignorance of world affairs — a repudiation of the need to repair America’s image abroad.
* Family values — a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don’t need to be needed.
* Rigid stands on guns and abortion — a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree.
* Patriotism — the usual fallback in a failed war.
* ”Reform” — an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn’t fit your ideology.
Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from “us” pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of “I’m all right, Jack,” and “Why change? Everything’s OK as it is.” The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness
Obama’s call for higher ideals in politics can’t be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow — we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise.
Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin’s pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.
She is the reverse of Barack Obama, in essence his shadow, deriding his idealism and turning negativity into a cause for pride. In psychological terms the shadow is that part of the psyche that hides out of sight, countering our aspirations, virtue, and vision with qualities we are ashamed to face: anger, fear, revenge, violence, selfishness, and suspicion of “the other.” For millions of Americans, Obama triggers those feelings, but they don’t want to express them. He is calling for us to reach for our higher selves, and frankly, that stirs up hidden reactions of an unsavory kind. (Just to be perfectly clear, I am not making a verbal play out of the fact that Sen. Obama is black. The shadow is a metaphor widely in use before his arrival on the scene.) I recognize that psychological analysis of politics is usually not welcome by the public, but I believe such a perspective can be helpful here to understand Palin’s message. In her acceptance speech Gov. Palin sent a rousing call to those who want to celebrate their resistance to change and a higher vision
Look at what she stands for:
* Small town values — a nostaligic return to simpler times disguises a denial of America’s global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism.
* Ignorance of world affairs — a repudiation of the need to repair America’s image abroad.
* Family values — a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don’t need to be needed.
* Rigid stands on guns and abortion — a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree.
* Patriotism — the usual fallback in a failed war.
* ”Reform” — an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn’t fit your ideology.
Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from “us” pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of “I’m all right, Jack,” and “Why change? Everything’s OK as it is.” The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness
Obama’s call for higher ideals in politics can’t be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow — we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
You work hard for your money...
So hard for it honey.
You work hard for your money
and it just don't treat you right!
Donna Summer...What a gal! She did well with that one. And she is still getting paid! But, the money sure doesn't go as far as it used to, nowadays...So, do you think she is thinking of leaving the Unites States if McCain gets elected? I would imagine that the thought has passed through her brain, just as it seems to be through a lot of my blog readers.
You see, the most read page on my blog is on a topic regarding the new Exit Tax Bill that our fabulous Representatives UNANIMOUSLY voted in. For your reference you can find the blog entry HERE. Perhaps they couldn't find anything else to tax, so they decided to tax one's future income. Did you get that? They tax UNREALIZED gains if someone feels that this country is going to shit in a handbasket and they decide they wish to leave. That term is called to expatriate one's self. Also, they decided that they were going to tax that person's worldwide assets, not only what is held in the United States. Did you know that this is the ONLY country on this floating blue marble that does this?! One must give up one's passport to have this wrath come upon them. Which is quite a serious thought, but it has been catching more attention lately, as I can attest that this blog has seen a lot of interest in this topic. Ironic, that McCain's numbers are up a bit just like the searches for this topic.
This taxing of the unrealized gains is more known as a ‘mark-to-market' tax which applies to the net unrealized gain on the expatriate's worldwide assets. That is to say that if such property were sold (the ‘deemed sale') for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation date any net gain on this deemed sale in excess of US$600,000 is taxable. Well, most American's will never have to worry about this issue...or will they? You would think that this means that it is only for the rich, but it gets a little more close to home as you will find...
If you are a Trustee, of a non-grantor trust, now you must withhold and pay the IRS 30% of the portion of any distribution that would have been taxable to the expatriate had they not expatriated. In other words, you have to pay 30% as if the person never left the country. Failure to withhold the tax could subject the you, the trustee, to direct liability for the unpaid tax. That said, before you become a trustee for your well off sibling, parents, or in-laws, you might want to make sure things are square or you could be holding the bag...
To give you a bit of background on this term, the practice of mark to market first developed among traders on futures exchanges in the 19th century. It was not until the 1980s, (remember The Keating Five...uh, Bush's older brother...Those same people that are now working on McCain's campaign...Anyway,) that the practice spread to big banks and corporations far from the traditional trading pits, and beginning in the 1990s, mark-to-market accounting began to give rise to scandals.
To help better understand the original practice, we'll use a futures trader for our example. When this trader is taking a position, he/she deposits money with the exchange, called a "margin". This is intended to protect or "hedge" the exchange against loss. At the end of every trading day, each contract is marked to its present market value of the day. If the trader is on the winning side of a deal, then their contract has increased in value that day, and the exchange pays this profit into his account. On the other hand, if they are on the losing side, the exchange will debit their account. If they cannot pay this debt, then the margin is used as the collateral from which the loss is paid.
As the practice of marking to market caught on in corporations and banks, some of them seem to have discovered that this was a tempting way to commit accounting fraud, especially when the market price could not be objectively determined, so assets were being 'marked to model' using estimated valuations derived from financial modeling, and sometimes marked to fantasies. (Google Enron and/or the Enron scandal and you will see what I mean)
The Internal Revenue Code Section 475(some simple fun and humorous reading on the subject) contains the mark to market accounting method rule. Section 475 provides that dealers that elect mark to market treatment shall recognize gain or loss as if the property were sold for its fair market value on the last business day of the year, and any gain or loss shall be taken into account in that year. The section also states that one can elect mark to market treatment for any commodity (or their derivatives) which is actively traded (i.e., for which there is an established financial market that provides a reasonable basis to determine fair market value by disseminating price quotes from broker/dealers or actual prices from recent transactions) This might be a time that we will be seeing people, or shall I say mortgage backed security firms, using this Tax Code in order to stave off or be able to write down some of their real estate losses as well. Interesting, but I again, digress...
I don't want to digress too much here, but I thought I would just get into it a little so that people would be able to make reference and understand where this is going. You might be asking yourself if it would apply to me? Well, not everyone, but certainly A LOT of people in this country.
The Act applies to any expatriate if that individual (a) has a net worth of US$2 million or more; (b) has an average net U.S. income tax liability of greater than US$139,000 for the five year period prior to expatriation; or (c) fails to certify that he has complied with all U.S. federal tax obligations for the preceding five years (the ‘covered expatriate'). So, giving up a U.S. passport now carries a steep price tag. This new law enacted on June 17th, 2008 subjects certain individuals who expatriate or those who give up their green cards to immediate tax on the inherent gain on all of their worldwide assets and a tax on future gifts or bequests made to a U.S. citizen or resident. It seems that item A is catering to the more wealthy individuals, while item B holds a larger share of the general puclic, but item C can cover anyone who has failed to file taxes during any of the previous 5 years, perhaps an extention, or tax lien would make issue.
The Act consists of three key elements:
1. The mark-to-market tax on the covered expatriate's worldwide assets;
A. The tax now applies to the net unrealized gain on the covered expatriate's worldwide assets as if such property were sold for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation date to the extent that the net gain exceeds US$600,000. NOTE:the mark-to-market tax does not apply to (i) certain deferred compensation items; (ii) certain specified tax deferred accounts; or (iii) any interest in a nongrantor trust.
Deferred Compensation Items
Under the Act, certain deferred compensation items are subject to the mark-to-market tax. The covered expatriate is deemed to receive the present value of his accrued benefit on the day before the expatriation date. No early distribution excise tax applies by virtue of this treatment, and appropriate adjustments must be made to subsequent distributions from the plan to reflect such treatment.
Other qualifying deferred compensation items are not subject to the mark-to-market tax; however, the payor must deduct and withhold a tax of 30 percent from any taxable payment to a covered expatriate. A taxable payment is subject to withholding to the extent it would be included in the gross income of the covered expatriate if such person were a U.S. citizen or resident.
Specified Tax Deferred Accounts
Under the Act, the mark-to-market tax applies to certain specified tax deferred accounts. In the case of any interest in a specified account held by a covered expatriate on the day before the expatriation date, the expatriate is deemed to receive a distribution of his entire interest in the account on that date. Appropriate adjustments are made for subsequent distributions to take into account this treatment. These distributions are not subject to additional tax.
Interests in Non-Grantor Trusts
The Act makes a distinction between grantor trusts and non-grantor trusts. A grantor trust is ignored as a taxable entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The ‘owner' of a grantor trust must include in computing his personal tax liability the items of income, deduction and credit that are attributable to the trust. Therefore, in the case of the portion of any trust for which the covered expatriate is treated as the owner under the grantor trust provisions, the assets held by that portion of the trust are subject to the mark-to-market tax.
The mark-to-market tax does not generally apply to non-grantor trusts. Rather, in the case of any direct or indirect distribution from the trust to a covered expatriate, the trustee must deduct and withhold an amount equal to 30 percent of the distribution portion that would be included in the gross income of the covered expatriate if he were subject to U.S. income tax. The covered expatriate waives any right to claim a reduction in withholding under any treaty with the U.S. The Act does not really explain how the withholding will be enforced against a non-U.S. trustee of a trust. That said, one might think of having one's Trustee be a resident or a country outside of the United States, perhaps.
In addition, if the non-grantor trust distributes appreciated property to a covered expatriate, the trust recognizes gain as if the property were sold to the expatriate at its fair market value.
If a non-grantor trust becomes a grantor trust of which the covered expatriate is treated as the owner, such conversion is treated as a distribution to the covered expatriate and will trigger the 30 percent withholding tax.
Conversely, if a grantor trust becomes a non-grantor trust after the individual expatriates, it appears that the mark-to-market tax applies to assets in the grantor trust, and the 30 percent withholding requirement does not apply to the trust once it becomes a non-grantor trust. This is an important point because the grantor's expatriation commonly converts grantor trusts into non-grantor trusts.
2. A tax on certain gifts and bequests made by the covered expatriate to any US person; and...
A. The Act taxes certain ‘covered gifts or bequests' received by a U.S. citizen or resident. The tax, which is assessed at the highest marginal estate or gift tax rate at the time of the gift or bequest, applies only to the extent that the covered gift or bequest exceeds $12,000 during any calendar year. The tax is reduced by the amount of any gift or estate tax paid to a foreign country with respect to such covered gift or bequest. No allowance appears to exist for the $1 million exemption from U.S. gift tax or the $2 million exemption from U.S. estate tax normally granted to U.S. persons. Gifts or bequests made to a U.S. spouse or a qualified charity are not subject to the tax. So, perhaps one needs to create an offshore 501c3 (not 501a as you will see below) company to which you can fuel with your $1M-$2M, or $12,000 for that matter, and...again, I digress....
In the case of a covered gift or bequest made to a U.S. trust, the tax applies as if the trust were a U.S. citizen, and the trust is required to pay the tax. In the case of a covered gift or bequest made to a foreign trust, the tax applies to any distribution, whether from income or corpus, made from such trust to a recipient who is a U.S. citizen or resident, in the same manner as if such distribution were a covered gift or bequest.
3. A repeal of the current so-called 10-year shadow period for covered expatriates.
A. Prior law subjected expatriates to a so-called 10-year shadow period, which resulted in a covered expatriate being taxed as a U.S. citizen in any of the 10 years following expatriation in which the expatriate spent 30 days in more in the U.S. In addition, prior law taxed expatriates on all U.S. source income and gain during the shadow period.
Under the Act, individuals who expatriate on or after the date of enactment are not subject to the shadow period but are instead subject to the mark-to-market tax and the tax on gifts and bequests to U.S. citizens and residents.
You know the statement, "they got you coming and going..." I will continue to research more on this topic for those interested. This was hidden within the Heroes Earning Assistance and Relief Tax (HEART) Act (the ‘Act'), which provides tax relief for active duty military personnel and reservists. I am sure that there are great ideas and tax relief for those people, and rightly given as they are well underpaid for their service to their country, but this is simple pork added to a bill. The unanimous voting was for the other inclusive issues within the bill...
I am not condoning the attempt to bypass this Act. I am simply playing the devils advocate, as I am sure there are loopholes that the rich know of and will utilize. This is how things work!
Bibliography;
IRS, Sovereign Society, Taxpat, Wikipedia, Withers Worldwide
You work hard for your money
and it just don't treat you right!
Donna Summer...What a gal! She did well with that one. And she is still getting paid! But, the money sure doesn't go as far as it used to, nowadays...So, do you think she is thinking of leaving the Unites States if McCain gets elected? I would imagine that the thought has passed through her brain, just as it seems to be through a lot of my blog readers.
You see, the most read page on my blog is on a topic regarding the new Exit Tax Bill that our fabulous Representatives UNANIMOUSLY voted in. For your reference you can find the blog entry HERE. Perhaps they couldn't find anything else to tax, so they decided to tax one's future income. Did you get that? They tax UNREALIZED gains if someone feels that this country is going to shit in a handbasket and they decide they wish to leave. That term is called to expatriate one's self. Also, they decided that they were going to tax that person's worldwide assets, not only what is held in the United States. Did you know that this is the ONLY country on this floating blue marble that does this?! One must give up one's passport to have this wrath come upon them. Which is quite a serious thought, but it has been catching more attention lately, as I can attest that this blog has seen a lot of interest in this topic. Ironic, that McCain's numbers are up a bit just like the searches for this topic.
This taxing of the unrealized gains is more known as a ‘mark-to-market' tax which applies to the net unrealized gain on the expatriate's worldwide assets. That is to say that if such property were sold (the ‘deemed sale') for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation date any net gain on this deemed sale in excess of US$600,000 is taxable. Well, most American's will never have to worry about this issue...or will they? You would think that this means that it is only for the rich, but it gets a little more close to home as you will find...
If you are a Trustee, of a non-grantor trust, now you must withhold and pay the IRS 30% of the portion of any distribution that would have been taxable to the expatriate had they not expatriated. In other words, you have to pay 30% as if the person never left the country. Failure to withhold the tax could subject the you, the trustee, to direct liability for the unpaid tax. That said, before you become a trustee for your well off sibling, parents, or in-laws, you might want to make sure things are square or you could be holding the bag...
To give you a bit of background on this term, the practice of mark to market first developed among traders on futures exchanges in the 19th century. It was not until the 1980s, (remember The Keating Five...uh, Bush's older brother...Those same people that are now working on McCain's campaign...Anyway,) that the practice spread to big banks and corporations far from the traditional trading pits, and beginning in the 1990s, mark-to-market accounting began to give rise to scandals.
To help better understand the original practice, we'll use a futures trader for our example. When this trader is taking a position, he/she deposits money with the exchange, called a "margin". This is intended to protect or "hedge" the exchange against loss. At the end of every trading day, each contract is marked to its present market value of the day. If the trader is on the winning side of a deal, then their contract has increased in value that day, and the exchange pays this profit into his account. On the other hand, if they are on the losing side, the exchange will debit their account. If they cannot pay this debt, then the margin is used as the collateral from which the loss is paid.
As the practice of marking to market caught on in corporations and banks, some of them seem to have discovered that this was a tempting way to commit accounting fraud, especially when the market price could not be objectively determined, so assets were being 'marked to model' using estimated valuations derived from financial modeling, and sometimes marked to fantasies. (Google Enron and/or the Enron scandal and you will see what I mean)
The Internal Revenue Code Section 475(some simple fun and humorous reading on the subject) contains the mark to market accounting method rule. Section 475 provides that dealers that elect mark to market treatment shall recognize gain or loss as if the property were sold for its fair market value on the last business day of the year, and any gain or loss shall be taken into account in that year. The section also states that one can elect mark to market treatment for any commodity (or their derivatives) which is actively traded (i.e., for which there is an established financial market that provides a reasonable basis to determine fair market value by disseminating price quotes from broker/dealers or actual prices from recent transactions) This might be a time that we will be seeing people, or shall I say mortgage backed security firms, using this Tax Code in order to stave off or be able to write down some of their real estate losses as well. Interesting, but I again, digress...
I don't want to digress too much here, but I thought I would just get into it a little so that people would be able to make reference and understand where this is going. You might be asking yourself if it would apply to me? Well, not everyone, but certainly A LOT of people in this country.
The Act applies to any expatriate if that individual (a) has a net worth of US$2 million or more; (b) has an average net U.S. income tax liability of greater than US$139,000 for the five year period prior to expatriation; or (c) fails to certify that he has complied with all U.S. federal tax obligations for the preceding five years (the ‘covered expatriate'). So, giving up a U.S. passport now carries a steep price tag. This new law enacted on June 17th, 2008 subjects certain individuals who expatriate or those who give up their green cards to immediate tax on the inherent gain on all of their worldwide assets and a tax on future gifts or bequests made to a U.S. citizen or resident. It seems that item A is catering to the more wealthy individuals, while item B holds a larger share of the general puclic, but item C can cover anyone who has failed to file taxes during any of the previous 5 years, perhaps an extention, or tax lien would make issue.
The Act consists of three key elements:
1. The mark-to-market tax on the covered expatriate's worldwide assets;
A. The tax now applies to the net unrealized gain on the covered expatriate's worldwide assets as if such property were sold for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation date to the extent that the net gain exceeds US$600,000. NOTE:the mark-to-market tax does not apply to (i) certain deferred compensation items; (ii) certain specified tax deferred accounts; or (iii) any interest in a nongrantor trust.
Deferred Compensation Items
Under the Act, certain deferred compensation items are subject to the mark-to-market tax. The covered expatriate is deemed to receive the present value of his accrued benefit on the day before the expatriation date. No early distribution excise tax applies by virtue of this treatment, and appropriate adjustments must be made to subsequent distributions from the plan to reflect such treatment.
Other qualifying deferred compensation items are not subject to the mark-to-market tax; however, the payor must deduct and withhold a tax of 30 percent from any taxable payment to a covered expatriate. A taxable payment is subject to withholding to the extent it would be included in the gross income of the covered expatriate if such person were a U.S. citizen or resident.
Specified Tax Deferred Accounts
Under the Act, the mark-to-market tax applies to certain specified tax deferred accounts. In the case of any interest in a specified account held by a covered expatriate on the day before the expatriation date, the expatriate is deemed to receive a distribution of his entire interest in the account on that date. Appropriate adjustments are made for subsequent distributions to take into account this treatment. These distributions are not subject to additional tax.
Interests in Non-Grantor Trusts
The Act makes a distinction between grantor trusts and non-grantor trusts. A grantor trust is ignored as a taxable entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The ‘owner' of a grantor trust must include in computing his personal tax liability the items of income, deduction and credit that are attributable to the trust. Therefore, in the case of the portion of any trust for which the covered expatriate is treated as the owner under the grantor trust provisions, the assets held by that portion of the trust are subject to the mark-to-market tax.
The mark-to-market tax does not generally apply to non-grantor trusts. Rather, in the case of any direct or indirect distribution from the trust to a covered expatriate, the trustee must deduct and withhold an amount equal to 30 percent of the distribution portion that would be included in the gross income of the covered expatriate if he were subject to U.S. income tax. The covered expatriate waives any right to claim a reduction in withholding under any treaty with the U.S. The Act does not really explain how the withholding will be enforced against a non-U.S. trustee of a trust. That said, one might think of having one's Trustee be a resident or a country outside of the United States, perhaps.
In addition, if the non-grantor trust distributes appreciated property to a covered expatriate, the trust recognizes gain as if the property were sold to the expatriate at its fair market value.
If a non-grantor trust becomes a grantor trust of which the covered expatriate is treated as the owner, such conversion is treated as a distribution to the covered expatriate and will trigger the 30 percent withholding tax.
Conversely, if a grantor trust becomes a non-grantor trust after the individual expatriates, it appears that the mark-to-market tax applies to assets in the grantor trust, and the 30 percent withholding requirement does not apply to the trust once it becomes a non-grantor trust. This is an important point because the grantor's expatriation commonly converts grantor trusts into non-grantor trusts.
2. A tax on certain gifts and bequests made by the covered expatriate to any US person; and...
A. The Act taxes certain ‘covered gifts or bequests' received by a U.S. citizen or resident. The tax, which is assessed at the highest marginal estate or gift tax rate at the time of the gift or bequest, applies only to the extent that the covered gift or bequest exceeds $12,000 during any calendar year. The tax is reduced by the amount of any gift or estate tax paid to a foreign country with respect to such covered gift or bequest. No allowance appears to exist for the $1 million exemption from U.S. gift tax or the $2 million exemption from U.S. estate tax normally granted to U.S. persons. Gifts or bequests made to a U.S. spouse or a qualified charity are not subject to the tax. So, perhaps one needs to create an offshore 501c3 (not 501a as you will see below) company to which you can fuel with your $1M-$2M, or $12,000 for that matter, and...again, I digress....
In the case of a covered gift or bequest made to a U.S. trust, the tax applies as if the trust were a U.S. citizen, and the trust is required to pay the tax. In the case of a covered gift or bequest made to a foreign trust, the tax applies to any distribution, whether from income or corpus, made from such trust to a recipient who is a U.S. citizen or resident, in the same manner as if such distribution were a covered gift or bequest.
3. A repeal of the current so-called 10-year shadow period for covered expatriates.
A. Prior law subjected expatriates to a so-called 10-year shadow period, which resulted in a covered expatriate being taxed as a U.S. citizen in any of the 10 years following expatriation in which the expatriate spent 30 days in more in the U.S. In addition, prior law taxed expatriates on all U.S. source income and gain during the shadow period.
Under the Act, individuals who expatriate on or after the date of enactment are not subject to the shadow period but are instead subject to the mark-to-market tax and the tax on gifts and bequests to U.S. citizens and residents.
You know the statement, "they got you coming and going..." I will continue to research more on this topic for those interested. This was hidden within the Heroes Earning Assistance and Relief Tax (HEART) Act (the ‘Act'), which provides tax relief for active duty military personnel and reservists. I am sure that there are great ideas and tax relief for those people, and rightly given as they are well underpaid for their service to their country, but this is simple pork added to a bill. The unanimous voting was for the other inclusive issues within the bill...
I am not condoning the attempt to bypass this Act. I am simply playing the devils advocate, as I am sure there are loopholes that the rich know of and will utilize. This is how things work!
Bibliography;
IRS, Sovereign Society, Taxpat, Wikipedia, Withers Worldwide
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
