If you enjoy this blog and follow it regularly, I urge you to become a member by clicking on the ICON in the right column called FOLLOWERS OF THIS BLOG. We will be having special offerings in the future for the members of this blog. JOIN NOW and tell your friends to join!!
(If you have any difficulty or problems with this please comment or email so that we can address the issue immediately.)
I wanted to go back to the Oct. 16th entry and re-introduce the discussion of Adam Smith and his famed "Wealth of Nations" book.
We have seen, these past few days, the level of respect and recognition that the Bush administration has of where the money flow from the TARP bailout should go. It is quite obvious that they care more for the suits on Wall Street who decide to shower in the morning before they get to the office, than the do for the hard working Americans who must shower after they get home from work.
Again, we revisit the "Wealth of Nations", Book V, Ch.2, Of the Sources of the General or Public Revenue of the Society...
V.2.8
No two characters seem more inconsistent than those of trader and sovereign. If the trading spirit of the English East India Company renders them very bad sovereigns, the spirit of sovereignty seems to have rendered them equally bad traders. While they were traders only they managed their trade successfully, and were able to pay from their profits a moderate dividend to the proprietors of their stock. Since they became sovereigns, with a revenue which, it is said, was originally more than three millions sterling, they have been obliged to beg extraordinary assistance of government in order to avoid immediate bankruptcy. In their former situation, their servants in India considered themselves as the clerks of merchants: in their present situation, those servants consider themselves as the ministers of sovereigns.
V.2.9
A state may sometimes derive some part of its public revenue from the interest of money, as well as from the profits of stock. If it has amassed a treasure, it may lend a part of that treasure either to foreign states, or to its own subjects.
As we look at our current state of affairs that have plagued the American taxpayer in order to bailout the corporations, we are not seeing any of this "amassed treasure" that we have handed to Washington reach any of its "subjects".
Let's look again at the relevance to Smith's writings and today's economic crisis.
Treasury Secretary Paulson previously publicly professed that we should make sure these businesses (the financial institutions, AIG, and Fannie and Freddie) do not fail. However, as the people who shower in the morning in Washington try to find where to place the next $350 Billion, they continue to raise the issue of the private jets that the Big 3 used to get to Congress to ask for money. I agree that it wasn't a good move, however, the Washington suits neglect to mention all of the private jets that the financial institutions, AIG, and others use on a daily basis. They also forget to remind people of the ways that these bailed out firms of Wall Street have manipulated their books in order to still hand out year end bonuses to their people. They are calling them incentives for the new year...
The Republican welfare state for the rich shows us that the trickle down theory of economics does not work. It is like Washington has received a little slight of hand parlor trick from Vegas magicians to use with the tax payers money. Your and my future earnings. The funds from the hard working people who mostly shower after work, is being slighted from our wallets while we sit in the audience and smile unknowingly in amazement.
The interesting thing about this democratic capitalistic management philosophy that has transpired through the Bush administration is that we are riding a fine line to communism and or dictatorship. Now, through the Bush bailout, we are riding a fine line between capitalism and socialism.
As I have stated previously, there is NOT ONE WAY to do things as we have come to find that a totally free market capitalism does not work. When you put the suits of Wall Street in an arena without regulation it is the same as a kid in a candy store, or Joe the Plumber in Home Depot.
Our system is built on a capitalistic system with socialistic tendencies. What we have recently experienced is a huge redistribution of wealth to the rich with no parameters to the receivers of the tax payers funds. Or, rather a socialistic system for capitalistic tendencies. Congress failed us big time for giving out the nearly $500 Billion without strings attached or rules to the game. The suits of Wall Street are now unwilling to part with our money that we gave them. This is leaving the economy in a worse position than it was two months ago.
Paulson failed. Well, actually he begs to differ. But then, he showers in the morning. I would venture that he should also shower at night to remove all of the filth he creates during the day.
There is a slight irony to capitalism and Karl Marx. I use the first volume of Marx's major work, "Capital", which was published in German in 1867, as an example. In it, Marx focused on the labour(sic) theory of value and what he considered to be the exploitation of labour by capital. The labour(sic) theory of value held that the value of a thing was determined by the labor that went into its production. This contrasts with the modern understanding of mainstream economics, that the value of a thing is determined by what one is willing to give up to obtain the thing. Ironically, Smith is often cited for being the conceptual builder of free markets in Capitalism, and also cited as a main contributor to Communist theory, via Marx.
Smith believed that while human motives were often driven by selfishness and greed, the competition in the free market would tend to benefit society as a whole by keeping prices low, while still building in an incentive for a wide variety of goods and services. Nevertheless, he was wary of businessmen and argued against the formation of monopolies.
Due to the globalization of nearly everything, including currency, in order to keep prices low of products it is the hard working second and third world countries that do much of the labor. As the world becomes more competitive and smaller it is becoming harder to find ways to stretch the production dollar.
Smith discussed at length of the sovereign social state. In today's Republican party they continue to claim that the welfare state as being dis functional. That is until it is time to meet the needs of the sovereign. Our modern TARP program is case in point.
As quoted from The Wealth of Nations:
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages."
I hope that Obama comes out on Jan. 21, 2008, after his first nights sleep as President, addresses the nation by informing us that his first actions will be that the recipients of our hard earned funds MUST begin the distribute those funds back to the people and small businesses to get this economy moving again. That Detroit MUST make new cars that are electric, Hybrid, battery and more. That the government will begin to put money back into the infrastructure of the country and they need people to work...TODAY!
Bush knew about infrastructure and rebuilding. He just spent eight years and trillions of dollars in the WRONG country. Good riddence sir, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!
Man, I must be making money since it is still morning, but after this I need a shower.
This, the 217th entry in bloggoland! Thanks for reading and coming back. I always enjoy the comments, emails and the banter!!
(c)Copyright 2008 Doug Boggs
Showing posts with label AIG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AIG. Show all posts
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Sunday, November 16, 2008
The Structural Foundation of Society
Let's build a home.
Great idea! Let's start with the roof!...What? That seems to be the way the current administration and Repugnicants try make things work. It's called Reaganomics, trickle down theory, or now, with the current failing bailout programs, we can call it elitist socialism.
Let me try to explain.
If a foundation is not solid a building will fall. A foundation should be engineered carefully and be designed to withstand the numerous pressures of the local soil benefits and limitations. Whether the ground is made of rock, or clay you should build for the environment of the area in order to make sure your structure is physically sound. Some areas have earthquakes, some tornadoes, some have soft clay soil, some have high water levels. Therefore, sometimes you must install piers deep into the ground to help alleviate any motion that the soil may give to the structure. Whatever it may take to make sure that a foundation is solid. A foundation should include steel to aid the concrete in its structural properties. In earthquake regions the walls should be bolted to the foundation. If the plate of the walls are not attached solidly to the foundation during shaky times the walls will slip off of the foundation. The walls should be built to withstand the winds and protected from the outside elements so to reduce and eliminate any water and pest intrusion. The windows and doors should be properly sealed to ensure energy conservation. The roof should be secured to the wall structures to withstand high winds and lateral movement. There should be steel, clay or asphalt shingles on the roof to protect the structure from the weather. There should be appropriate locks and perhaps an alarm system to help protect the structure from intrusion.
This seems like a given. Simple really. There are rules to building a structure. In the United States we have codes that are normally followed. There is the Universal Building Code, which is used primarily throughout the United States, as well as, the International Building Code, which is used in some areas of the United States and as the enforcement for the industrialized and other emerging areas of the world.
Ok, now, let's build a nation. But, let's not have any regulations. or oversight. That is what Bush is stating and been doing for the past eight years. If there has been rules and oversight he has eliminated them. We got in this mess due to the de and un-regulating that has occurred over the past eight years. The Clinton administration began some of the open lending ideas to help the less advantaged become enabled to purchase a home. To create more home ownership throughout the country. Bush, took this idea, and opened the floodgates by eliminating any oversight to the financial industry which allowed anyone to own property whether they had a job, had any money or had any idea on how to pay for it. Through this, the financial industry allowed the creation of the Hedge Fund industry which has absolutely no oversight and regulations whatsoever. This allowed the financial industry to rethink how they could package and resell the mortgages throughout the financial world in order to get them off the banks books as soon as possible to alleviate the debt that banks had just incurred through the loan they had just approved. The mortgage industry had no oversight so convicted criminals were getting licenses to market, negotiate, and distribute loans to home buyers. They distributed the loans that they would make the most money on whether it was the best loan for the buyer or the property made no difference. The machine was making everyone a lot of money.
In other words, from the top down, the rich were lending money to anyone and everyone and didn't care about the repercussions of the loan payoff since the loan was now on the books of some other institution, packaged in such puzzling ways that no one knew exactly the value or payoff parameters of any specific loan. Anyway, they had insurance, and re-insurance...AIG, you've heard of them.
I think we all see the house of cards that Bush has been built with NO liability and oversight. I say no liability as the current administration, which includes Henry Paulson, who used to work at Goldman Sachs, is distributing the hundreds of billions of our tax dollars out to the most needy Americans, those financial institutions who created this. You see, he has given Goldman Sachs over $10 Billion and AIG, who was Goldman's largest trading partner, has received over $85 Billion and they are needing more.
What about the foundation? You know the foundation of society? Those people who work 40-60 hours a week to try to keep a house for their families and their kids in schools?
Well, Paulson will specifically state that the foundations of our economy are fractured, the foundations of our financial institutions are failing. Yet, the money gets sent to the top, the roof, to patch holes in the roof where it is still raining money.
The foundations of our economy are the Joe the Plumbers, and Joe six-pack. You remember those people that the Repugnicants worked so hard for their votes. Those who work their asses off to have a roof over their head for their family that is built on a solid foundation. Now, these people are losing their homes because the banks are needing to fix their roof!
We get to sit back and watch as the house of cards falls down from the bottom up. The ponzi scheme that this administration has created, that elitist type of Peter to pay Paul kind of capitalism that permeates the Repugnicant party, is being held up by no strings attached to their funds as they are able to magically keep the roof in the air while the walls and foundation of our society crumble to the ground in ruins.
When is January 20th?
(c)Copyright 2008 Doug Boggs
Great idea! Let's start with the roof!...What? That seems to be the way the current administration and Repugnicants try make things work. It's called Reaganomics, trickle down theory, or now, with the current failing bailout programs, we can call it elitist socialism.
Let me try to explain.
If a foundation is not solid a building will fall. A foundation should be engineered carefully and be designed to withstand the numerous pressures of the local soil benefits and limitations. Whether the ground is made of rock, or clay you should build for the environment of the area in order to make sure your structure is physically sound. Some areas have earthquakes, some tornadoes, some have soft clay soil, some have high water levels. Therefore, sometimes you must install piers deep into the ground to help alleviate any motion that the soil may give to the structure. Whatever it may take to make sure that a foundation is solid. A foundation should include steel to aid the concrete in its structural properties. In earthquake regions the walls should be bolted to the foundation. If the plate of the walls are not attached solidly to the foundation during shaky times the walls will slip off of the foundation. The walls should be built to withstand the winds and protected from the outside elements so to reduce and eliminate any water and pest intrusion. The windows and doors should be properly sealed to ensure energy conservation. The roof should be secured to the wall structures to withstand high winds and lateral movement. There should be steel, clay or asphalt shingles on the roof to protect the structure from the weather. There should be appropriate locks and perhaps an alarm system to help protect the structure from intrusion.
This seems like a given. Simple really. There are rules to building a structure. In the United States we have codes that are normally followed. There is the Universal Building Code, which is used primarily throughout the United States, as well as, the International Building Code, which is used in some areas of the United States and as the enforcement for the industrialized and other emerging areas of the world.
Ok, now, let's build a nation. But, let's not have any regulations. or oversight. That is what Bush is stating and been doing for the past eight years. If there has been rules and oversight he has eliminated them. We got in this mess due to the de and un-regulating that has occurred over the past eight years. The Clinton administration began some of the open lending ideas to help the less advantaged become enabled to purchase a home. To create more home ownership throughout the country. Bush, took this idea, and opened the floodgates by eliminating any oversight to the financial industry which allowed anyone to own property whether they had a job, had any money or had any idea on how to pay for it. Through this, the financial industry allowed the creation of the Hedge Fund industry which has absolutely no oversight and regulations whatsoever. This allowed the financial industry to rethink how they could package and resell the mortgages throughout the financial world in order to get them off the banks books as soon as possible to alleviate the debt that banks had just incurred through the loan they had just approved. The mortgage industry had no oversight so convicted criminals were getting licenses to market, negotiate, and distribute loans to home buyers. They distributed the loans that they would make the most money on whether it was the best loan for the buyer or the property made no difference. The machine was making everyone a lot of money.
In other words, from the top down, the rich were lending money to anyone and everyone and didn't care about the repercussions of the loan payoff since the loan was now on the books of some other institution, packaged in such puzzling ways that no one knew exactly the value or payoff parameters of any specific loan. Anyway, they had insurance, and re-insurance...AIG, you've heard of them.
I think we all see the house of cards that Bush has been built with NO liability and oversight. I say no liability as the current administration, which includes Henry Paulson, who used to work at Goldman Sachs, is distributing the hundreds of billions of our tax dollars out to the most needy Americans, those financial institutions who created this. You see, he has given Goldman Sachs over $10 Billion and AIG, who was Goldman's largest trading partner, has received over $85 Billion and they are needing more.
What about the foundation? You know the foundation of society? Those people who work 40-60 hours a week to try to keep a house for their families and their kids in schools?
Well, Paulson will specifically state that the foundations of our economy are fractured, the foundations of our financial institutions are failing. Yet, the money gets sent to the top, the roof, to patch holes in the roof where it is still raining money.
The foundations of our economy are the Joe the Plumbers, and Joe six-pack. You remember those people that the Repugnicants worked so hard for their votes. Those who work their asses off to have a roof over their head for their family that is built on a solid foundation. Now, these people are losing their homes because the banks are needing to fix their roof!
We get to sit back and watch as the house of cards falls down from the bottom up. The ponzi scheme that this administration has created, that elitist type of Peter to pay Paul kind of capitalism that permeates the Repugnicant party, is being held up by no strings attached to their funds as they are able to magically keep the roof in the air while the walls and foundation of our society crumble to the ground in ruins.
When is January 20th?
(c)Copyright 2008 Doug Boggs
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Take back the voice of the people!
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)
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)
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
***
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
