Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Our Deregulated Disaster

Posted by Chris Johnson

The moment has finally arrived.  This moment, that of the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, has been brewing for some time and was predicted by those who had the long-term vision to look beyond the rhetoric of deregulation.  This is the same concept of deregulation that has its roots in Reaganomics and manifested itself in the form of the legislative efforts of Phil Gramm.  Gramm worked to pass the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 ; both of which attributed to the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and ushered in the deregulatory practices which have contributed to the crisis that the U.S. finds itself in today.

In response to the collapse of numerous institutions, President Bush has proposed a plan that would effectively give Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson complete control over $700 billion of taxpayer money to bail out some of the major financial institutions.  Not only would this plan give Paulson complete control over this money, but there would be no oversight and no accountability for any actions that Paulson may take with this money.  From Section 8 of the plan:

“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

It is language such as this that has led some to describe this bailout plan as an economic version of the PATRIOT Act.  This parallel references the speed with which this act is being pushed through Congress after a crisis, as well as the sweeping power that would be invested in one central figure, in this case regarding economic policy.  In the following paragraphs I will use this opportunity to discuss the viewpoints of three individuals who have given some insight into this recent crisis and will hopefully work to form a more productive narrative in the discussion of these issues.

Naomi Klein is a journalist and the author of The Shock Doctrine:  The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. In this book, her primary thesis is that during times of crisis, the right has pushed through radical economic policies that are otherwise publicly unpopular.  It is during this time of crisis where the public is “shocked” and the window for debate on these policies is often very small.  Klein argues that this is exactly what is happening with this current financial crisis.  This bailout plan is being touted by the government as a necessary fix and there are claims that this plan needs to be approved within the next week in order to prevent further damage from occurring.  Meanwhile, this crisis is being used in an attempt to push through policies that Klein claims would worsen the problem.  She wrote a recent piece for the Huffington Post in which she describes this:

“The best summary of how the right plans to use the economic crisis to push through their policy wish list comes from Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich. On Sunday, Gingrich laid out 18 policy prescriptions for Congress to take in order to “return to a Reagan-Thatcher policy of economic growth through fundamental reforms.” In the midst of this economic crisis, he is actually demanding the repeal of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which would lead to further deregulation of the financial industry. Gingrich is also calling for reforming the education system to allow “competition” (a.k.a. vouchers), strengthening border enforcement, cutting corporate taxes and his signature move: allowing offshore drilling.”

With the attempt to push through this massive bailout for the financial corporations, Klein also insists that this is a ticking time bomb that will eventually explode on the next administration.  Klein was on Democracy Now! earlier this week and explained how this bailout plan may only be the first shock.  From the transcript:

I’m also arguing that this is only stage one of the shock doctrine. They’re getting this—they’re lobbying for this huge bailout, obviously, but this bailout is a kind of a time bomb, because it’s all these bad debts, and they are going to explode on the next administration. I mean, we know that the Bush administration has already left the next administration with huge debt and deficit problems. They’ve just exploded those, expanded them. And what that means is that whoever the next president is is going to be inheriting this economic crisis that is being exacerbated by this bailout.

It is predictable, Klein argues, how a John McCain administration would handle this scenario because he has already expressed his support for privatizing Social Security and his willingness to cut social programs.  An Obama Administration would also face very serious pressure from the corporate interests which have funded his campaign as well as from campaign advisers such as Robert Rubin.  Klein claims that we can learn a lot from the candidacy of Bill Clinton.  He ran a populist campaign during the primary season, but when he found himself in the middle of economic troubles, he took a turn towards policies that favored Wall Street at the urging his advisers tied to corporate interests.  There will be immense pressure upon an Obama Administration to do the same, which is why Klein calls for massive grassroots pressure on all the candidates and members of Congress to not pass this bailout plan in its current form and bend to the corporate interests that caused this problem in the first place.

Glenn Greenwald is a former constitutional law and civil rights litigator.  He is also the author of a few books and currently writes daily for Salon.com.  Greenwald has written a few pieces in the recent week regarding this financial crisis and brings an interesting look into some of the issues of hypocrisy surrounding this crisis.  From his piece this previous Saturday:

What is more intrinsically corrupt than allowing people to engage in high-reward/no-risk capitalism—where they reap tens of millions of dollars and more every year while their reckless gambles are paying off only to then have the Government shift their losses to the citizenry at large once their schemes collapse? We’ve retroactively created a win-only system where the wealthiest corporations and their shareholders are free to gamble for as long as they win and then force others who have no upside to pay for their losses.

This proposed bailout plan does exactly that.  It creates a win-win system for those who have engaged in practices and policies which have enriched those on Wall Street to the detriment of the working class.  This is a plan that would justify these actions through not only saving these institutions, but by providing no oversight or accountability for the way that the Treasury Secretary will handle the process of bailing these companies out.  Needless to say, in light of this it has been confusing to watch members of the right voice grave opposition to the Paulson Plan.  We now see the likes of Bill Kristol, Michelle Malkin, and Newt Gingrich vehemently opposed to a bailout plan that would save Wall Street at the expense of the taxpayer.  Greenwald explains the reason for this outrage:

They say it themselves: with the looming prospect of an Obama presidency, they may no longer be in charge of that Government and these “small government conservatives” have thus suddenly re-awoken to the virtues of checks and balances, oversight and other restraints.

This very re-awakening that Greenwald describes, outlines the hypocrisy of those on the right who are suddenly interested in regulation and oversight.  Many of these figures (including John McCain) have worked for the majority of their careers to limit government regulation and free the market from any kind of oversight.  Now, with the very real possibility of the power structure shifting, these same figures are suddenly calling for regulation and oversight.  There is sudden concern that too much power would be concentrated in the hands of the Treasury Secretary and these right wing opponents are expressing the need for checks and balances so that one man does not have too much concentrated power.  These are the same people who have spent the last eight years voicing their support for legislation such as FISA, the PATRIOT Act, and the Military Commissions Act; all of which had the radical affect of, you guessed it, concentrating power into the hands of one man.  Oddly enough, to quote Greenwald: “Right-wing opposition to the Paulson plan is vital for having any meaningful chance to stop it.” So we now find ourselves in the odd situation where it is necessary for the right-wing’s hypocrisy to help save us from the incompetence of the Congressional Democrats.  This would seem to point us toward the conclusion that there could be more wrong with this country than this financial crisis lets on.

This leads me to Dan La Botz.  La Botz is a Cincinnati born writer, teacher, and activist who has written numerous books and a recent paper on “Who Rules Cincinnati”.  The Beacon did an interview with him recently on this topic and I attended his lecture this past week at the main branch of the Cincinnati Public Library.  While La Botz’s primary focus was on corporate influence in Cincinnati, he also spoke to the recent financial crisis because, as he put it, it would be silly for him to give a financial talk the day after the stock market crash of 1929 and not mention the stock market crash. 

La Botz began with the point that this current financial problem is part of a bigger crisis of the American Capitalist system.  He gave several reasons for why he believes this is so.  Two of which were:

1.  The United States embarked upon a plan to control a central source of petroleum in order to expand American interests and control a region of the world from which they would be able to protect these interests.  This plan, La Botz argues, has failed.  The War and occupation of Iraq have ended up costing the United States, by some estimates, over a trillion dollars and has left the U.S. in debt to several foreign nations (most notably China and Japan).

2.  There is a disjuncture between the envisioned economy and what we see around us.  As a people, we have been continually told that our economy is strong and that the United States is a top player in the world markets.  This contradicts what people see around them.  People are experiencing a damaged infrastructure, job loss due to globalization, and the lack of basic needs to members of our society.

These points lead to the conclusion that this crisis is not only about finance, but about the status of our society and our place in the world.  Now you have a situation where you have governmental leaders and those on Wall Street running around trying to save capitalism by proposing sticking a band-aid on a gaping wound.  It is because of this that Dan La Botz does not think that we have the forces to fundamentally change things.  Similarly, Naomi Klein cautions those who think that capitalism is dead:

So, we should be really, really wary of this claim that we’re hearing that free market ideology is dead, that this marks the end of, you know, of capitalism. You know, I’m sorry, that is not the case. It may be going dormant for a little while to rationalize these massive bailouts, but it will come roaring back, and the crisis that is being deepened right now through these bailouts will be invoked for even more radical deregulation, privatization, tax cuts and so on.

In spite of the massive evidence that deregulation and a lack of oversight have caused the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression, you still see the same giant corporate forces trying to bailout the very system that led us to this very moment in time.  While it may be slightly encouraging to see members of Congress voicing their displeasure with the Paulson Plan it will not be enough to simply amend the plan and end up passing another so-called compromise bill.  These are the times when we need to be engaged in a serious discussion about what brought us to this point.  We can not afford to make decisions that will lead this country back down the same road which will continue to leave those who have the least suffering the most.  Massive public pressure must be applied to the leadership of this country demanding a fundamental examination of these policies and we must begin to have a conversation about the danger of concentrating even more power into the hands of the few and the necessity of returning more power to the people.

• Share This Article!
Listen to this article

Socializer!

Username

Password

Auto-login on future visits

Show my name in the online users list

Forgot your password?

Register

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.

trey says:
25 Sep 2008  at  01:41 am | #

OK, we know where Chris stands on this issue.  But I would like to know from all you Naderites and Greens, where the hell is Nader on this issue? Supposedly he has a reputation for great knowledge about how the REAL economy works but as far as I can tell he hasn’t broke through the media clutter to explain the situation in terms the average voter can understand (and Justin, you are part of his campaign, right?--why haven’t we seen any kind of analysis from Nader on this site about the crisis?) If there has ever been a time to break through what you guys call the corporate duopoly, its now.  Where the hell is Nader?

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  02:02 am | #

And Chris, this episode obviously lays bear who actually runs sh_t (and its not the politician front men) but despite all the adoration the left showers on the little guy and working class, fact is 95% of the country has not an inkling of a clue how the financial markets work. So those who do or at least blusteringly claim they do have us by the balls.

I’m sure both the Dems and the Repubs will cave eventually and give the power to their Wall Street masters, but truth be told I get the sense the right is more willing to go down with the ship on the principal of free-market consequences for choices made than the left is willing to go down with their principal of equality.

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  11:55 am | #

trey, thanks for asking. Ralph is out on the campaign trail and making noise about all the important issues of the day. He never stops and the media never stops trying to shut him out.Nader predicted this crisis. Ralph predicted this 8 years ago, he was still talking about it months before it happened and he has a 10 point plan to cool off the financial markets meltdown.

Ralph is asking ”why is there any need for a bailout”?

I’ve seen what the Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney has written, but I’m not sure where the link is. Try google.

I get the sense the right is more willing to go down with the ship on the principal of free-market consequences for choices made than the left is willing to go down with their principal of equality.

What are you talking about? Bush was a big “free marketer” and he also loves welfare for his friends. They don’t really care about free markets, they want just more money and power for their corporate friends.

Anon says:
25 Sep 2008  at  12:33 pm | #

This is the same group that has brought to our shores central banking, IRS, great depression, prohibition, numerous boom and bust cycles (pump and dump like the dot bomb, S&L meltdown) and perpetual war against terror, drugs, commies, axis of evil and the entertainment we call campaigns and elections.

Follow the money trail and you will find the Federal Reserve financed and owned by the Money Trust. The Morgans and Warburgs were financed by the Rothschilds of Europe who were financed by the Medici family of Italy (Vatican Bank) The Holy Roman Catholic Church is the largest real estate holder in the world and they are tax exempt (what a coincidence) The men in black robes (priests, judges, Darth Vader) are playing us and they’re winning. These powerful men behind the curtain have funded both sides of every conflict since the Roman Empire. They are the true terrorists and have been working their spells on us for so long that it has become a way of life.

In 1776 our forefathers cast off British rule and sought independence from the crown and shed blood to accomplish this. They stopped too soon because they didn’t cast off British commerce and the British Commercial Law (Admiralty Law) was left to fester in the bowels of our nation. The legal system we enjoy today has nothing to do with our Constitution and all land in this country is owned by a British Corporation called the US Government Incorporated. People are defined as “users” (see Senate Resolution #62 4-17-1933)

It states “The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of Government, i. e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” So you don’t own any land, you are merely a “user” in this grand scam. Real Estate is not so named because it has anything to do with anything real. The term derives from “Royal Estate” in which the King owned all and granted title and privlege to certain individuals in exchange for loyalty. If the King changed his mind your life changed under this system.

Our founders knew the Declaration of Independence was not reflective of conditions at the time it was written. They wrote the “All men were created equal” knowing those circumstances didn’t exist. It was used as a grappling hook they cast into the future to pull ourselves forward toward that ideal. We are not finished and must recognize the error of our ways.

The Money Trust has hijacked our nation and through the Council on Foreign Relations and the corporate media we find ourselves on the brink of disaster and everyone is living in fear daily dosed out by talking heads. The antidote to fear is courage and that is what is needed to right this wrong. Time to dust off the declaration of Independence and re-issue it to the fascists currently in power and return our Nation to a government of, by and for the people.

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  01:17 pm | #

trey, if you don’t feel like reading you can just watch this.

Chris Johnson says:
25 Sep 2008  at  01:44 pm | #

Trey,

In addition to what Justin has posted, I noticed that Ralph Nader was on Democracy Now! this morning talking about these issues as well.  You can link to the video and transcript here.

Also, Justin mentioned Cynthia McKinney’s comments which can be found here.

Trey wrote: 

I get the sense the right is more willing to go down with the ship on the principal of free-market consequences for choices made

The fact that many of these figures who have pushed for more and more deregulation are now reversing themselves to “save the economy”, is quite telling.  The level of hypocrisy actually re-enforces that they will still try to manipulate policies (even during times of serious financial crisis) that will enrich those who got us into this mess in the first place.  I don’t think it is necessarily “going down with the ship”, but rather assuring that those who built the faulty ship have their lives saved in the lifeboats.

R says:
25 Sep 2008  at  03:02 pm | #

Great post 4… Fear is driven into our heads everyday from the media , which is also corporate , ie. GE , Disney, Microsoft and so on and so on. We were lead into a war by fear. Problem was we picked the wrong ballpark.

Courage at any cost is what will ultimately lead us out of this. Had the Investment banks, and other financial institutions would have only come clean a year ago, by declaring the total depth of the losses, we would have been well into the fix by now. Denial, or downright failure to declare the material facts is why we are where we are today. One of the biggest and most important rules that the Securities /Banking Industries have as a regulatory rule, is the “ Failure to state material facts”.  Both 5/3 and Macy’s are undergoing class actions suits as we speak for violating this rule.  It used to be that the SEC, NASD , and the NYSE would vigously enforce this rule.  Evidently, not any more.

13 years ago I was with the great firm of Bear Stearns. If I got a traffic ticket on Monday, there was a letter on my desk from all the regulatory agencies asking me to explain it the next morning. . That’s how tight it was. Now, I find it extremely odd that not one word about all this has come from the SEC. Mr Cox should indeed be held responsible, and fired.

The other responsible person is clear, the formally highly regarded Fed Chief Alan Greenspan. It was his policies, allowing the financial industry to package a single home, into 40 different traded instruments . Even the person who created these “instruments”, which were based on extremely complicated mathimatical computations, came out a year later and said “ wait a minute, the calculations are off. Nobody listened because EVERYONE was making a ton of money.

Banks and appraisers.  How many of us who bought a house over the last 10 years had the bank giving the loan, said “ this is what we need the house to appraise for, and also had the appraiser ask you “ what do you need the house to appraise for? “ You always got your number.  The appraisers ( there are honest ones, but few and far between) should be held accountable, as false valuations are a criminal act.

People who had loans and credit cards thrown at them. For mortages, no income verification was required. The banks were making tons of fees, so they didnt care.

Another big mistake.  CEOpay. When everyone was bitching about how much money CEO’s were making, there was extreme political/ regulatory pressure to tie compensation to the performance of the company( stock price) .  So what do they do? Inflate the financials to boost the stock price, which gave them even bigger payouts. They cooked the books and this went on so long, nobody had an actual value of the companies.

Stock market crash of 1929 lesson.  When average Joe uses borrowed money to speculate , that is the end of the pyramid.  So, banks were throwing out loans , and average Joe was playing “Flip this house “ and as prices climbed, they would pull out the equity , buy an SUV, a boat, vacation etc etc, and contiue to use borrowed money to speculate.  I had a bartender in Florida ( where everyone was speculating on real estate) bragging that he now owned 15 condo’s, removed all equity, and had the notion he would flip his properties at a 200 % profit. Florida was crazy with the price appreciation at the time.  I looked a friend and said “ he is toast”.  Another rule om the street is that Pigs get killed. We are seeing that now.

I do not agree with the bailout. America is not in the business of buying private corporations .  One only has to look at Japan, to see what is going on. The Japanese, rather than disclose the true nature of the losses, was subsidizing thru a government corporation the failures and mistake of private corporations rather than “lose face” . So, they have been stagnant for many , many years.

We must have the courage , and the political will to come completely clean with the scope of the losses and bad loans. Failure to do this will only continue the problems for years to come.  It is MUCH larger than 700 Billion dollars. This number is not even a bandaid.  The idea of giving the Treasury Secretary, who happens to own stock in, and was Chairman of one the major players in this mess, Goldman Sachs, is a moronic notion.

#4 is right. Someone should indeed dust off and give every memeber of Congress a copy of the constitution. What is happening, the constitution does not allow, nor was it a part of their idea.

Government created the enviroment that allowed this, and surely cannot be trusted to do what is right to fix it. Government has time and time again demonstrated that they are the problem, and not the solution.It was them, and their special interests that got us here. They will not get us out.

Oh yeah, Barney Frank D MA should be run out of town. He knew and was aware of this for years.

I love Joe Biden’s solution. “Just like Frankling Roosevelt did in 1929, during the market crash, Mr Roosevelt went on TV and calmed the nation. “ Did anyone see Katie Courics face?  Our possible VP didn’t know that Ole Franklin was NOT the President, and Television hadn’t been created yet. Wonder if he created the internet too? Ahh our future looks bright.

I am looking at the lessor of 2 evils, and the only hope is to return as posted by #4, to a government by and for the people. Government and special interests caused this, they cannot be trusted to fix it.

The chips need to fall where they may, and the corporations need to make full disclosure of their losses.  Then, we the people can use our strength,wisdon, and ingenuity to put the pieces back together again.

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  03:31 pm | #

It’s hard to fathom the magnitude of this thing. $700 billion divided by about 138 million taxpayers is roughly $5000 per taxpayer. My wife and I both pay taxes, so that means my household is on the hook for $10,000 to cover just this bailout. Add in the other bailouts and it’s probably closer to $17,000. I realize the rich will pay more, and the poor will pay less, but anything in this price range is criminal.

Bush said he “expects” the underlying assets to eventually bear fruit and repay us, but I don’t believe it for a second. If there was any value left in those financial instruments, the bankers would have already tapped it. After all that’s what they do for a living.

If we were being shaken down for a couple hundred bucks to keep the economy sailing smoothly, I might buy it. But this is so mind-numbingly huge that I’m beginning to think we NEED a severe recession to ruin these bastards and force them into more frugal business practices.

It’s going to be painful for everybody, but somehow it will be a little more comforting to know that the idiots who caused this mess will be losing the most. That sounds a lot closer to true justice than this bailout scam.

Nix the bailout and bankrupt the corporations. We’ll take the big bath and when the vultures get done feeding on the carcasses, our economy will be much stronger as a result. Business as usual cannot continue.

Jason Gloyd says:
25 Sep 2008  at  05:27 pm | #

I love how Mark Miller can cut through the crap!

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  07:47 pm | #

Justin from #3, Bush may be behind the bailout but I saw on the news tonight that most of the Congressman who are opposed for ideological reasons ARE Repubs who believe rightly or wrongly in free-markets. Most on the left as far as I’ve heard are falling in line. These are the folks who will raise hell about tax cuts for the rich on the campaign trail but don’t mind giving bailout money to the super-rich.

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  08:08 pm | #

We could do a lot with $700 billion, but we will see the Republicans get with their loyal “opposition” party and give big business what they want.

I don’t think rich people pay more in taxes. The tax burden is increasingly being transfered to the poor and middle class. Remember what Billionaire Leona Helmsley said, “We don’t pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes.”

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  08:11 pm | #

trey, there will probably be a minority on both sides that oppose this, but I don’t think either party will represent the public interest.

says:
25 Sep 2008  at  09:03 pm | #

And Chris, it sounds comforting to say more regulations will solve the problem. But a couple things: 1.) a large contributor to the problem was the regulation to increase the amount of loans to poor and minority applicants with little regard for sound banking practices. and 2.) the actual reality will be $75,000/year civil servants with probably a mediocre education tring to keep on top of some of the sharpest minds around making multiple millions. I see some difficulties in that scenario.

Anon says:
25 Sep 2008  at  11:10 pm | #

Where is the gold? has anybody seen it? Or is it like the WMD’s? How about the 2.3 Trillion Donald Rumsfeld mentioned on September 10, 2001? Looks like we have received the “Expert Solution” by our government and the Federal Reserve Cartel. We traded our nation for some green paper strips and little metal disks. Manhatten was traded for $24 worth of beads...pity

says:
26 Sep 2008  at  05:20 am | #

So this is Gramm’s, Reagan’s, Bush’s and McCain’s fault?

Didn’t Clinton sign this legislation into law?  Didn’t 30+ Democrat Senators vote for it?

Didn’t two of Obama’s advisors help write this legislation?

Wasn’t the objective of this type of deregulation to grow the sub-prime market so those who previously weren’t eligible to buy homes could?

Justin: Cynthia McKinney is a demonstrable nut, cop-hitting Anti-Semite; you do yourself no favors attributing anything credible to her.

And most “poor” people pay little if anything in taxes.  Some actually receive tax rebates/refunds/EITC in excess of their tax liability.

Moving along now- nothing to see here.

says:
27 Sep 2008  at  06:52 am | #

WOW!!!!

This article places the blame squarely on lack of regulation.

What about the regulations mandating easy mortgages for the ones that can not afford one.

What about the regulations that transfered the power to print money to the FED and outlawed all other currencies.

The corporate whores had implied insurance from the government which incentivised risky investment.

Chris you make some good arguements but try to play the game from the beginning.

Transparency was absent and Moral Hazard was present.

With these two ingrediants all systems are doomed to failure.

The creation of Transparency and the absence of any and all Moral Hazards are the only solutions.

You eliminate Moral Hazard and Transparency will follow.

Chris Johnson says:
27 Sep 2008  at  09:46 am | #

Mr. Ryan,

I just wanted to address you comment that I place blame “squarely on the lack of regulation.”

At the end of the first paragraph of the article I say:

...both of which attributed to the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and ushered in the deregulatory practices which have contributed to the crisis that the U.S. finds itself in today.

There are some deregulatory practices have contributed to this crisis, but certainly there are many factors that have played into where we find ourselves today.  I am not saying that the solution is simply in more regulation, but in my last paragraph I say that there needs to be a very serious conversation about all the reasons that have led us to where we are.

says:
27 Sep 2008  at  04:26 pm | #

Justin: Cynthia McKinney is a demonstrable nut, cop-hitting Anti-Semite; you do yourself no favors attributing anything credible to her.

McCain is a demonstrable nut. He sings about bombing a country that hasn’t attacked us and really is no threat. He said there were WMD’s and we knew where they were. He said we’d be greeted as liberators. Mckinney was right on the war and many other issues.

And most “poor” people pay little if anything in taxes.  Some actually receive tax rebates/refunds/EITC in excess of their tax liability.

How much corporate welfare goes to corporations just in our city alone? Now we’re looking at a trillion dollar bail out for rich people. A majority of major corporations don’t pay their taxes. The rich get more write offs and shelters.

R says:
27 Sep 2008  at  09:42 pm | #

# 14 yes, the removal of the Gold standard , and replacing it with “ In God we Trust” was a brillant mental play wasn’t it?  God wouldn’t screw anyone would he?

Justin, There is a reason Ohio, Michigan and Kentucky have the highest unemployment rates. They have the higest corporate taxes.

I did a small gig in Kentucky and the state, 4 counties and 3 cities in Kentucky, and the state of Ohio and Cincinnati deducted taxes from my check.

That’s why there are dwindling jobs here. 

Cynthia Mckinney is a nut. It is not something she learned yesterday either. She has a loooong history.

Lastly, a little sneak surprise today from our congress. Another 650 BILLION bill went to the Presidents desk today. He will sign it.

We do not need this 700 Billion dollar bill, with a blank check. It isnt x-mas yet.  The buyout of MLPFS and Wamu proves that there are other was.  Some assitance, yes, 700 billion, NO.

Regulations were/are in place. They just were not enforced.  The SEC and NASD were asleep at the wheel. The only one to hold anyone accountable is The Attorney General of NY.  He is not done either.  There are planty of regulations, but, enforcement helps.  Socialism is not the answer. Income redistribution is not the answer.  Why should I have to bail out the appraisers that lied, the Mortgage Brokers who lied, and the banks that knew someone would clean up after them.

Like someone said, a little bit would be ok to restore confidence ( which is the real issue) but 700 billion. Nope.  A great idea would be to cut the capital gains tax to 10 %.  Money would fly into the good companies and the bad ones would be punsihed, and all the speculators who were playing self imposed ponzi schemes, well, maybe they would think twice before doing that again.

Nail companies like 5/3, and Macy’s, who have been defrauding their investors, and even worse, their employees buy lying to get them to buy there own stock.  Those people should also go to jail.  5/3 is on the watch list, and they are not at the bottom either.

White Male says:
28 Sep 2008  at  08:18 am | #

MARK MILLER WROTE......

It’s hard to fathom the magnitude of this thing. $700 billion divided by about 138 million taxpayers is roughly $5000 per taxpayer. My wife and I both pay taxes, so that means my household is on the hook for $10,000 to cover just this bailout. Add in the other bailouts and it’s probably closer to $17,000. I realize the rich will pay more, and the poor will pay less, but anything in this price range is criminal.

Yes, Mark Miller and many others who have lived responsibly, paid their taxes, never missed a mortgage payment, raised their children to have an excellent work ethic and probably has missed less than five days of work over the past 40 yeas will be the victims of the banks being pressured to loan money to those with bad credit history. 

Some will call Mark Miller a racist because of his concern that loans were made to UNqualifiied borrowers.
Inome and employement was not verified.
A drive by appraisal was all that was needed.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28714

Political correctness had already ruined education, sports, science and entertainment. But it took a Democratic president with a Democratic congress for political correctness to wreck the financial industry.

Rep. Barney Frank denounced Mankiw, saying he had no “concern about housing.” How dare you oppose suicidal loans to people who can’t repay them! The New York Times reported that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were “under heavy assault by the Republicans,” but these entities still had “important political allies” in the Democrats.

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton’s Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn’t a joke—it’s a fact.

The Mark Millers of the world will continue to work hard, save, do without, while being punished because of those who lacked the same values Mr. Miller.

Mark Miller is a victim of the evils of political correctness.

says:
28 Sep 2008  at  09:29 am | #

No one will call Mark Miller a racist, because he is not one.  You, however, are—and that is why you are so singularly fixated on the matter.

No more racist comments from you.

says:
28 Sep 2008  at  09:55 am | #

In the event “White Male” will try to leave more comments, even after I said he was not allowed, let me be clear.

White Male wrote:

Some will call Mark Miller a racist because of his concern that loans were made to UNqualifiied borrowers.
Inome and employement was not verified.

No one called Miller a racist.  Racist White Male, however, is the one to not only introduce the topic, but also to link race with income and employment.  Hence, I have called him “racist.”

I feel no need to comment on unrelated newspaper ads.  But certainly some Catholic schools have a strand of racism in their Boards.  Trust me.

White Male says:
29 Sep 2008  at  06:41 am | #

From the Dean of Cincinnati: No one called Miller a racist.  Racist White Male, however, is the one to not only introduce the topic, but also to link race with income and employment.  Hence, I have called him “racist.”

Where, Dean, in my post to I link race with income and employment?

I must have caught you on a bad day. 

Then you state that “But certainly some Catholic schools have a strand of racismin their Boards.  Trust me.”

I trust that you do not mean your former employer at Purcell-Marian.  That school, according to my sister, has a minority enrollment of some 40% and did when you taught there.  My sister, who lived in the same parish as the Principal when you were there became so fed up with the liberalism of that school that she sent her youngest daughter to Mt. Norte Dame.  It was a difficult descision because she had sent her other three children to Purcell-Marian.

You were unfair to me and I take it that you resent those who have lived respnsibly, worked hard, saved and scrimped, instilled a good work ethic in their children by example, paid their taxes, and taken each and every action as not to be a burden on society.

says:
29 Sep 2008  at  12:27 pm | #

Mr. Johnson:

I apologize for mistating your opinion.

I will admit that I skimmed it and was judging a book by its title.

Having said that ...

There is only one real clear reason why we are in the position we are in.

I trust know what that is. 

You exist.

You are in the battle.

Now, I hope and pray that you choose freedom.

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

<b>

<i>

<u>

quote

code

@

<a>

Close Tags

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: