Posts with the tag ECONOMICS

Being Arrested For Being Laid Off

George McCasland — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 18:08:54 EST

In this economy, with over 80% of layoffs being men, why are the courts not notifying fathers paying child support that it is not required to hire an attorney to get a modification in their child support payment to what it should be based on unemployment? Instead, the men who cannot afford an attorney fall behind and face the possibility of jail. In addition, if he can afford an attorney, he is questioned on why they cannot than afford to make their full payments?

Questions need to be presented to all state and county family courts as to why it's not known to divorced and single fathers that they have a right to free legal representation, as regards child support, under Federal Public Law 12. With this, they can make an official request to the Office of Child Support Enforcement for a review and modification of their child support obligation based on a change of circumstance. That change of circumstance is a significant change in economic resources due to circumstance beyond their control, such as an involuntary layoff. Federal law says they must represent either parent upon request.

These fathers are taught the child support enforcement is there to just make their life difficult, but that is not their primary task. They represent the laws addressing child support as it applies to "both" parents. They are not the exclusive representatives of the obligee parent, usually the mother.

Gregory's an American Helping America in Economic Recovery

Gregory "Gregory" — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:05:12 EST

Our lives and amount of time living in America are most likely on opposite ends of the spectrum. You could have a biography that shares a lifetime of life’s achievements and awards for commitment, dedication, and service to all America's people, i.e. Hurricane Katrina evacuees.

Recently, I've relocated to Texas, first to Dallas then to Houston. In the short time in Texas I’ve had several opportunities to understand why everything is big in Texas - in addition to the obvious size of this state. I would like for us to agree on two things right away; 1st size does matter and people are just people, just like you and me.

That being said, America needs the help of all American’s to jump start our current economy. And just like the Dallas Cowboy’s is one of America’s most popular football team. This economic stimulus solution needs to start with the most innovative and biggest entrepreneurial thinkers in the world, Americans in America.

Q: Why? A: Why not! Let’s just say, if the three biggest hospital groups in the US have offered to reduce their costs by $155bn over 10 years in an attempt to make health reform more affordable. What can American Corporations, Government, and the People collectively bring to the table that jumps starts our momentum into a faster economic recovery?

When responding please place your first name as the American that will help America. Let's all remember: John F. Kennedy's quote, "Ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country."

June 19th Day of Judgment the Witching Hour an Act of God the Greed Test

Richard Thomas Gerber — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 14:26:16 EDT

Storyline: On June 19th if some act in greed, en masse, the global economy will totally tank. What is special about June 19th is that in the financial realm it is known as the quadruple witching hour. The final hour of the stock market trading session on the third Friday of March, June, September, and December, when in addition to the expiration of option contracts and futures contracts, which indicates a triple witching hour, the expiration of single stock futures (SSFs) also occurs.

What is extra special about this June 19th is that by raising the H1N1 Virus to level 6 in an emergency secret meeting today, establishing a global Pandemic status, it triggers the force majeure clauses in contracts. Force majeure or “act of God” is somewhat ironic because if there are acts out of greed then the very system that permitted it will collapse by an act of God. Normally a force majeure clause removes the obligation to honor a contract, due to natural events beyond one’s control. So while in reality the somewhat mild H1N1 (swine flu) virus which is hardly a threat or cause for alarm could be used as a legal excuse to not honor contracts. However the real reason the contracts cannot be honored is not a result of the virus but rather the greed and corruption of those that had been running the system which failed because of imbalance due to greed and corruption. Of course if certain numbers can resist temptation, acting from a holistic perspective, then the system, as a result of collaboration, could be reconstructed without a total failure, or maybe not.

This could really get interesting and I am starting to see that the truth may be making a play to bring certain things to light and triggering a major systems evolution, and in fact a realization is coming that will bring change. It is a bit like a game of chess.

See it does and is happening in reality; check out this Google news search for force majeure.

http://news.google.com/news?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=force+majeure+

At one link we find this good question, what is the answer?

--->

Economic Force Majeure

Source: Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP - Does a severe downturn in the economy constitute an event of force majeure? If you can no longer get financing because banks do not have the money to lend, can you claim force majeure because events are beyond your control?

<---

The answer could be yes and no, depending on the role one is playing and in what context.

Here are some perspectives I proffer.

The Global Accounting System (monetary systems) are a man made creation it is not natural. If the Global Accounting System were based on natural principles we might say it was then beyond our control, however it is not at this time. The Economic System is actually manipulated and some things are contrived by independent agency attempting to produce effect, in other words unnatural cause. We have an economic system where there are some natural market forces at work but it is really dominated by human nature. Of course there are events that influence the system both natural and man made. In this context we might say the answer is “no”.

We also have the economic participants who must in order to live and sustain themselves utilize a system that is beyond their control, it is controlled by others sometimes to the controllers benefit and not that of the economic system participants as a whole. Therefore the inability to obtain financing to allow continued value creation could be considered beyond their control. In this context we might say the answer is “yes”.

One could also open up a can of worms with something I have pointed out long before, man is a part of nature, so any thing man does is an act of nature in a greater context, of course that also means that man is subject to the laws of nature, and if doing something that causes imbalance, threatens life or creates suffering, it will be corrected or if that is no possible destroyed by the natural forces of nature. In other words when an element in nature stops listening to the signals from the rest of the elements in the system it may cause dissonance and disruption in the system and threaten the whole body and therefore for the body to survive, if it cannot be corrected it must be destroyed.

There will be much greater understanding and realizations as one completes the articulation of economics in an easy to understand manner from a scientific and natural perspective and disseminates it. This will highlight the flaws of the current systems design and destroy the illusions that it is based upon that lead to detriment not benefit.

I also note that many in executive management may not intend detriment however when seeking guidance from those with vested interests one is getting distorted or inferior advice which results in detriment to the majority and the system as a whole. Management’s key deliverable is the correct choosing of individuals or entities to play support roles which include the ability for discernment of the truth and reality behind appearances and the ability to detect a compromised agent or those lacking in capacity.

Money Moves

AnnieT — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:35:03 EDT

I was talking to a friend who is pretty well off. He is the General Manager of an international hotel chain and a non supporter of President Obama. He is totally against taxing the rich and stated the reason. You know the rhetoric. 40% of people don't pay taxes, etc..., why should the rich suffer because of people like that. The conversation went on and he said that because of the new tax reforms people are moving to tax free or lower tax states and operating their businesses electronically. He said it with such satisfaction that I was appalled and all I could say is: 'That's not right'. Although I thought my words were lost on him, I just couldn't say anything else.

My stance is this. We don't live in a vacuum, or maybe some do. The money made by most businesses is the result of someone else is working. If it were not for the workers things would not progress. I understand workers are paid wages, but who gets rich? Not the workers. There are many reasons why, but most of all it because of high taxes unfairly distributed among people of varying economic stations.

I do not profess to be an economic genius, but I can add and substract. If anyone wants to educate me. Feel free.

Recession Survival Fair—Volunteers Needed

signsSansSignifieds — Thu, 28 May 2009 10:38:04 EDT

The Recession Survival Fair will take place on 6/6 at the Brooklyn Brownstone School in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn. Volunteers are needed now. Details here:

http://signsanssignified.blogspot.com/2009/05/recession-survival-fairvolunteers.html

OBAMAS PIGGY BANK NEW BALL GAME

Freeman Sims — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:31:00 EDT

GIVE OBAMA WHAT HE WANSTMAKE SURE THAT HE GETS THIS PAGE.PASS IT ON. TRY TO PUT OUT A PRESS RELEASE TO YOUR LOCAL NEWS AND TV STATIONS.MY PHONE 503-438-6305 PUT IT ON WWW.YOUTUBE.COM By: freeman43 Portland : OR : USA | about 1 month ago 2 0 Views: 43 APRIL 24 2009 2:15 PM PST MY PHONE 503-438-6305 Hello! My name is Freeman Sims. You are welcome to copy and use these articles. I do not own any of these Videos. I only own the Text and my Personal Photos. *** To make it Short, All of the Obama Volunteers, have Time on their Hands. They have Nothing to Do! These websites , http://www.obamaspiggybank.org and Http://www.obamaspiggybank.com Have been Registered Thru The IRS and The State of Oregon, To Accept Donations for President Barrack Obama to use to Replenish his Stimulus Package. Simple put, 300 Million USA Citizens Donate 1 Penny a Day. That amounts to $ 3Million a Day IN Obama’s piggy bank. You Can bet your bottom Dollar that, YES WE CAN. YES WE WILL. The Web Site is predicated up op on OUR Need to Wipe Out The National Debt. I have a Mile Long List of Analysis and ways to Refine the Campaign Program. The Mission is to, Totally Eliminate the national debt; by Christmas 2009; and to Provide Mr. Obama A SURPLUS OF 10 TRILLION DOLLARS, BY THE END OF HIS FIRST term. MY WEB SITES www.newballgame.org and www.obamaspiggybank.org ARE NOT UP YET. THEY ARE JUST SITTING ON GODADDY.COM , BECAUSE I AM ADUMMY AT BUILDING WEB SITES. IN THE MEAN-TIME I HAVE SET UP TWO ( 2 ) DONATION BANK ACCOUNTS. THEY ARE NON PROFIT WEBSITES AND BANK DONATION SITES. REGISTERED THRU THE OREGON STATE ATTORNEY GENERAN AND THE INTERNAL REVENUE.DID THIS ON FEB 25 2009 THEY ARE HOT, AND LIVE. I HAVE TESTED THE SITES, AND THEY DO ACCEPT MONEY.GO TO ANY BRANCH OFFICE IN THE COUNTRY AND DONATE. YOU CAN GO TO YOUR OWN BANK AND SEND FUNDS TO www.bankofamerica.com and www.wellsfargo.com MAKE A NOTATION = GAVE TO www.newballgame.org or www.obamaspiggybank.org DONATE ON LINE using youe account, or USE www.paypal.com DONATE HERE www.bankofamerica.com and www.wellsfargo.com *** NOTE *** ALWAYS PUT ON THE PAID-TO LINE , THE LAST 4 OF YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER. WHY? ** BECAUSE WHEN WE PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT, YOU WILL RECEIVE A TREASURY NOTE;THAT PAYS QUARTERLY.DIVIDENDS.*** STOP FUNDING YOUR IRA RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS.PEOPLE HAVE LOST BILLION WITH IRA RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS. SET UP AN AUTOMATIC PAYROLL DEDUCTION PLAN, AND DONATE TO www.newballgame.org or www.obamaspiggybank.org *** THEASURY NOTES CAN ONLY BE OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS.THEY ARE BACKED 100% BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND THE USA TREASURY DEPARTMENT. PAY YOUR SELF FIRST. ALL OF THE MONEY GOES TO PRESIDENT OBAMA. HE IS THE ONE THAT WILL HELP YOU SET UP YOUR TREASURY NOTE ACCOUNTS. HE WILL HAVE TO GET (ASAP), A VERY LARGE STAFF; TO HANDLE YOUR OVERWHELMING RESPONSES. YES WE CAN. PASS THIS ON. TWEETER IT, ETC. MOST OF ALL TRY TO PUT THIS PAGE IN TO *** A PRESS RELEASE IN YOUR LOCAL AND NATIONAL NEWS, AND TV. I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS CAMPAIGN FOR MORE THAN A YEAR. MR. OBAMA DOES NOT READ HIS E-MAIL. *** CORRECTION, THE OBAMA FAIMLY DID VISIT MY WEBSITE; www.obamasprivateporkbarrel.org LAST MAY. NOTHING CAME OF IT.Yes We Can. Yes We Will. How?? 1 cent at a time. Don’t tell me all the stuff about 10 years, using Pennies. I did the Math. There are a Kazillion ways to (skin the cat) Raise the Funds. Buy Stocks. They will be back Stronger than ever, by August2009I shall give you a Line by Line Analysis Later. Just Believe in The Audacity of Hope. It worked Before, and it Will Work Again. I am a WWII baby. I have been HERE before, fireside chats and all. We did it before and we can do it again.FDR took us form Zero to The Atomic Bomb. We will Hit the After Burner by mid July, so hold on to your Seat. You and The WORLD are in for a good old American Ingenuity RIDE.Simple as that.Now! Enjoy Yourself, by staying on this Page; until You Get It. Give Obama what he Wants, 1 cent at a time 300 million citizens, Donate 1 Penny a DayAmounts to 3 Million Dollars a Day.That is 21 Million a Week. 84 Million Dollars a Month. It adds up to 1 Billion and 800 Million a month.Or, give $5 per Person, per Month, which adds up to 1 Billion 500 Million Dollars a Month. *** Book Mark this page.5 dollars a month, per person adds up to 18 Billion a Year.Let the states have a Fund raising Contest. 1 Cent a day, doubled each day; amounts to the Surprisingamount of 10 million, 600 hundred thousand at the end of 31 days.That adds up to 530 million dollars. There are 2 major Cities inEach state, so we now have 1 billion and 60 million dollars perContest. How about if we have a contest for each of the 4 seasonsOf the year? That is 4 billion and 240 million dollars.We are trying to Replenish President Barrack Obama’s STIMULIS Package. We are Donating Money to Obama’s Piggy Bank. This means that we are Donating to ourselves.A Rising Tide lifts All Ships. We are workinf as fast as we can, to Hit the ground Running. www.obamaspiggybank.org is set up to receive theDonations, as is www.1centx2.com and www.newballgame.org For those who always type in . com , we have also registered Domains of www.1centx2.com + www.1pennyx2.com andwww.obamaspiggybank.com and www.obamaspiggybank.mobi Currently We have set up Donation accounts at Bank of America andWells Fargo Banks. We are also trying to bring US Bank, aboard.Not too shabby, for pitching Pennies! Hummmmm.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM1p0SQ1c7A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZhu8SaodPw&feature=related

GM's Chief Exec Fired! Good Move!

Gramma Willi — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:37:27 EDT

I am proud of our Obama's announcement today.

It is wonderful to see a smart, strong young man stepping up to the plate and doing what needs to be done. It is wonderful to see one of my "Change This!" Wish List items getting attended to. (see earlier blog "Change This!")

We have a lot of housecleaning to do - at least it's springtime and time for it anyway. I can't wait to watch this Failed Lead Executive Extirpation Program (FLEE, for short ;) become common practice as we go about our economic recovery. I look forward to courageous, honest and deserving players taking the place of a too-long-entrenched uncaring régime - good thing you have a lot of résumes to choose from.

My prayers are with you folks and, for what it's worth, I'm around for ya.

All My Relations, Gramma Willi

P.S. Bringing the Indian Tribes into the UN is a sheer stroke of genius. Mad props to everyone who is behind it! Suggestion - put some of those savvy Native Elders at the helm of some of these organizations.

Technology in Solar Power Increasing Rapidly

Unknown user — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 08:25:40 EDT

The technology in solar power continues to increase rapidly. The conventional rooftop solar panels developed by Solydra do not need to be tilted like others and can absorb sun light from all angels including reflected light from other rooftops. ActSolar developed the PowerString and early field test indicate that this solution can cumulatively deliver 40 to 80 percent more power over the operating life of a solar panel installation.

With incentives for commercial buildings and warehouses to implement this renewable energy technology, which also reduces green house gas, creates jobs, creates growth, reduces the trade deficit (oil), and strengthens the US dollar; this green energy technology will also give the US economy a boost.

The increase in demand will also result in more competition, research, innovations, and improvements. With the installations being concentrated in cities (commercial buildings) any maintenance required should also be competitive.

My First Time Hosting an Event

Obama for President — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 17:46:17 EDT

Hello friends,

I am just going to let you how my first time as an event's Host went. To tel you the truth it was not like I expected it to be, but I learned from it, and next time I will be more prepared. We went to a K-Mart store located in Bellflower on Rosescrans and McNab , CA and we could not hand out pledges because for them to let us do so, we have to contact their headquaters, and since it was week-end headquaters was close. Also I expected 8 people who sign up for the event, , and only 6 peoples showed up, only 3 was from the signed up list. and I am wondering if there is something that I did wrong or if the event was not advertized enough. How do people actually get more people. The weather was not favorable so we could not really do much. but it was my first time I guess, I hope next time will be better. I am counting on any of your advises, strategies in how you made your event more successfull. I will be reading your post with interest.

Thank you

Salma

OBAMA SONG-17yr old positive lyricist

Fundamental — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 20:39:43 EDT

I'm a 17yr old positive lyricist out of Richmond,VA. i wrote a rap song about OBAMA. you can hear it at myspace.com/3rdeyeup
no cursing, no negativity. real positive, creative lyrics. hope you guys check it out. peace n bless

The Whole Truth: Obama's Tax Rate Much Lower than Reagan's

N. Julio Barthson - E-Campaign Leader — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:47:16 EDT

DISCLAIMER: Organizing for America does not work with, nor has endorsed the political activities of, MoveOn.org. The following post is an individual initiative to share with my readers a message from MoveOn that I personally believe is very much in line with the efforts by Organizing for America and the original memebers of Obama for America to help President Obama solve our nation's economic problems and set us back on the path to prosperity.

Economist Dr. Kamran Mofid: U.S. Lectures ("Yes We Can!")

Hope4Unity — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:38:25 EDT

"Dr. Kamran Mofid is a visionary activist committed to the evolutionary transformation of social, ecological and spiritual values. His is a vision of a healing world, in which justice and peace are increased – rather than diminished – by the process of globalisation." -- Common Ground

http://www.cg.org/news_list.aspx

Kamran Mofid: Promoting Globalization for the Common Good

Alma and Clifford Pearson Distinguished Speakers Series

Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:00pm

Location: Samuelson Chapel - California Lutheran University

Event Description

"Kamran Mofid is founder of the Globalization for the Common Good Initiative and co-founder/editor of the Journal of Globalization for the Common Good. Born in Tehran, Iran, he received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Windsor, Ontario, and his doctorate in economics from the University of Birmingham, U.K. In 2001 he received a Certificate in Education in Pastoral Studies at Plater College, Oxford..." http://www.callutheran.edu/calendar/event/1787

To listen to the lecture please click here: http://www.callutheran.edu/CLV/

"Outside ideas of right doing
And wrong doing,
There is a field
I’ll meet you there." -- Rumi

Continued:

God Bless You & Thank You President Obama!

CD57 — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:37:48 EDT

My small business was in the brink of bankruptcy failing miserably during Bush era, but since President Obama took over it became an overnight success, my sales jumped from an average $20 a day to over $200 a day, last 5 weekends my daily sales were $600; what a great improvement my outlook for future is brighter now with full of confidence I waited patiently and now my boutique will not bankrupt, what a relief that is!

I look forward to hearing from all concerned readers of my blog please feel free to share your stories & comments, have a bright & wonderful day!

Listening to Republicans and Democrats argue.....

LOL — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:42:24 EST

over whether tax cuts or bigger government are the answer to our economic problems is like listening to the captain and the first mate of the Titanic argue over whether more and smaller buckets or less and bigger buckets are the answer to their situation.

You know what would be to impressive and a confidence builder? If Obama came out and said, “I am not sure how to fix the economy just yet, but we have determined what the problem is. While I can not assure you that I can keep any of you in your homes or keep you from falling into poverty, but I can promise that your kids won’t be in the same situation.” That would signify to me that he actually understands the cause of our current situation.

Throwing money at the big banks and the irresponsible housing lenders and borrower is about as impressive to me as George Jr. bombing camels to protect America from guys with butter knives from taken over airplanes. Neither are actually going to keep the condition from being repeated. At least when it comes to guys with butter knives on a plane, I can trust Americans will rise up and fight off the offending situation. I am not sure that I can count on Americans to stop agreeing to terms they don’t understand, and borrowing more money then they can afford to.

When everybody involved realizes that taxes and incentives are red herrings and economically unsound ways to influence circulation. Lowering taxes on the wealthy doesn’t cause them to start businesses. Lowering taxes on businesses doesn’t cause them to hire more people. By the same token charging hire taxes and redistributing the money to the poor doesn’t make them any less poor. The government creating temporary jobs only gives people false security and unpredictable income.

If the administration could put somebody to work following the money once it reaches the market, I would feel much more comfortable. So you send a stimulus check out. Where does the (in the last case) $1500 go when you send it to them. Obviously they were paying their bills, or maybe they weren’t and for that month they do. If they buy merchandise, how much of it is retained here in the US and how much is spent on places outside the economy.

If Obama announces he has put somebody in charge of following money as it enters and leaves our economy, I will feel much more comfortable with the faith everybody is putting in him.

Our Human Nature is Beyond a Response to Stimulus

Maurice from Villa Park, IL — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:08:32 EST

Our Human Nature is Beyond a Response to Stimulus

An emerging problem facing many people today is that the price of a product that is presented to the consumer does not accurately represent the consumers’ real costs. I would challenge any person to walk into any new car dealership and figure out what will be the real price to be paid or the real cost incurred based on the listed price on the sticker, the advertized price with or without rebates, unknown “APR’s”, dealer price, employee price, and whatever information you can gather from the internet. I know that agreeing on a price, weather cash or credit, can take hours. And when I am finished negotiating and driving away in my new car I wonder if what I agreed to pay was really fair or did I hurt myself by paying too much? I wish I knew!

The finance charges of buying anything using credit must be added to the initial purchase price to know its real cost. The cost of buying anything on credit is hidden or disguised from unaware or ignorant people. The price held in a person’s mind or seen on the sticker certainly does not equal the total payments made over time. It is probable that three different people with three different credit histories will all agree to purchase an identical car at the same price and all three people will incur very different real costs to their lives. Three examples of financing $20,000.00 of the purchase price of identical cars over a period of five years for our three different people of various credit histories could be:

1. Excellent credit…. $20,000.00 at 3% interest over five years is 60 payments of $359.37 totaling $21,562.46.

2. Fair credit…………..$20,000.00 at 8% interest over five years is 60 payments of $405.53 totaling $24,331.62.

3. Poor credit…………$20,000.00 at 15% interest over five years is 60 payments of $475.80 totaling $28,547.91.

These examples are not made to pass any moral judgments’ on borrower or lender. The examples exhibit the difference between the same $20,000.00 price in each person’s mind and the three different total costs of $21,562.46, $24,331.62 and $28,547.91 incurred by each individual respectively. We all know that the real cost of buying an identical car is different for different people in different circumstances. Fair or not, differing real costs for differing consumers is the reality people experience. What is problematic is that many people confuse the price they have in their mind with the total cost that is actually paid over time. The total cost paid over time is reality while the price they have in mind is not. The $20,000.00 price in mind is believed to represent each individuals’ real cost when in the real world each individual incurs, respectively, the different real costs of $21,562.46, $24,331.62 and $28,547.91. What is believed to be real (as price) is not real (as is the total cost over time); the idea that the price accurately represents the total cost when credit is used is mistaken.

Imagine being a person of fair credit, believing he is paying $20,000.00 for a car, and in reality paying $24,331.62 for that car over time. How many times can the $4331.62 mistake be repeated? I do not know. You might say that ‘people really do know how much they are paying or at least they should know’. That may be true: but, the first point is that their purchasing behavior was based on the belief that the $20,000.00 price held in mind was the real price they are paying; and, the second point is that the idea of the $24,331.62 total cost, if it came to mind at all, came to mind generally as an afterthought which had little or no influence on their purchasing behavior.

I wish to drive this point home just a bit further. Imagine being the home owner when I ask you how much you paid for your house. Will your answer be the buyer/seller negotiated price (of say $200,000.00)? Or will you answer with the total cost calculated over time (of say $20,000.00 down payment, $180,000.00 mortgage over 30 years at 4.5% with monthly payments of $912.03 for a total cost of $348,333.52)? Most people say $200,000.00. This may be self deception on a mass scale; a deception that for some people makes huge differences in their standard of living. A home buyer with less down payment or worse credit might agree to this: $0.00 down payment, $200,000.00 mortgage over 30 years at 5.5% with monthly payments of $1135.58 for a total cost of $408,806.90. While there is a $60,473.38 total cost difference facing the different buyers, I will bet, most home buyers will say and believe and behave as though they paid $200,000.00 for their house.

Reality will not be ignored long before it demands to be recognized, and in the real world price does not always equal cost. If I define price as the number that is held in one’s head it will equal the physical number printed on the products sticker or it will equal an amount negotiated (that is often to be financed) between buyer and seller. Within a cash transaction price will equal the cash exchanged for the product or service and most importantly it will accurately reflect an immediate real cost. Within a credit transaction price will not reflect a real cost and thinking that it does can be a costly mistake. Reality for the cash purchaser is different from the reality of the credit purchaser.

Real costs involving credit are the total cost calculated as price plus interest paid over time. If I define cost as what will be actually paid then that number must be calculated and kept in mind if an accurate representation of reality is to influence a purchaser’s behavior. Believing that price equals cost does not make it so. At Wall Mart or at a grocery store the cash, check, or amount debited, is equal to the price of the goods purchased. When those same goods are purchased using a credit card the price printed at the bottom of the receipt will not represent the real cost of the goods for that buyer. It is the knowing and respecting of this fact that price easily misrepresents cost that will influence behavior. Masses of people behave in a purchasing manner that suggests that they do not know or respect these truths. For many buyers using credit the purchase price held in mind never represents their real costs; their real costs are actually out of mind. What they think is the price they are paying is a fantasy held only in their imagination; reality is actually a rising total debt because real things purchased on credit have a higher real cost than at first appears.

As simple and as obvious as this seems it is my contention is that it is the ignorance (by many people, businesses, and governments) of this real difference between that price which we picture in our mind and that total cost which we really pay over time that is at the heart our present economic crisis today.

It is often hard for many people to believe how big their debt is when they believe they didn’t really spend that much. And perhaps they didn’t spend that much, but for what they did buy they ultimately paid a high price. Most people that buy on credit behave as though the price they are paying for the good is what it costs them. In reality it costs far more. With regard to a credit purchase a person’s belief in mind could hold that the price is low enough to represent the thing as being worth buying; whereas, for the person mindful of the real cost that cost is too high to represent the thing as being worth buying. A person’s behavior is based on what they believe to be real; that is, they see reality as the sticker price that is easily held in their head or they see reality as the total cost paid over time. In the first case, when only mindful of price, the price (which does not equal real cost) appears low and they purchase immediately. In the second case, when mindful of the real cost, the real cost (which does not equal price) appears high and they put off the purchase.

Behavior based on mistaking the price for cost has profound ramifications for economic systems. Credit purchases based on this mistake will artificially stimulates a demand for the goods and services purchased because the price appears lower than its real cost. Businesses, however, will actually produce enough goods to meet this propped up demand for all the consumers that confuse or ignore the difference between the idea of a low purchase price and the real cost involving credit. Behavior of persons mindfully considering the difference between a cash price and the higher real costs incurred by using credit will adjust demand downward with regard to any good or service requiring the use of that credit.

Our present economic crisis is based in the fact that a great number of people are being forced to becoming aware of a need to consider this price/cost difference. Their behavior, which led to an over extension of debt and an overconsumption of goods, is a direct result of not considering this difference. Their changing behavior, which is now withdrawing from the use of credit, is based in having in mind the real cost of using credit. When the real cost of credit is kept in mind then demand for goods and services will no longer be artificially stimulated. Demand will come down to a level based on the real costs instead of the non-credit cash price greatly impacting businesses that use credit to help generate profits.

Businesses that generate profits by financing the purchases of their goods or services are now facing difficulties proportionate to their use of that financing for those profits. It is conceivable that some companies switched to generating their profits through financing because price competition for cash purchases drove profits very low. It then became easier to compete for profits based on financing because that financing hid the real costs from most consumers. Automobile companies, retailers such as Sears, conglomerates like GE and any kind of business that has become dependent on their own financing of purchasers to generate profits has contributed to the misleading relationship between price and cost by presenting to consumers prices that seem low when in reality the financed cost is high. When using financing to generate profit the price tag on a good or service will tend to be lower (to entice people into using credit) than what would be necessary to generate that same profit without using financing. It is probable that businesses highly dependent on profits through financing will even discourage cash purchases because selling for cash at the list price will produce little or no profit at all.

Ultimately businesses that financed the purchasing of their own products built a capacity to produce enough goods to supply a market where people behaved in a manner that mistakenly accepted the price as equivalent to the financed cost. Once consumers realize their mistake they will withdraw demand leading not only to an oversupply of goods but also to an over capacity to produce them (the basis of deflation). Thus if the use of credit decreases so will the ability to generate enough profit to stay in business. And if credit tightens an initial oversupply of goods and services will face deflationary pressures (of too many goods needing to attract fewer available dollars) leading to falling prices. Once the original oversupply is consumed the list price on goods will have to rise to a point that will make up for the loss of profit that was generated by financing purchasers if the business is to continue operating. Of course the higher list price will also discourage demand.

Retail businesses (that are not operated as finance companies) generate their profits based on what is paid for the product at the moment the transaction occurs. Whether a good is paid for using cash, check, or credit makes little difference to the retailer at the time of purchase; because, for the retailer the price on the sticker accurately represents what is received in payment. From the retailers point of view the sticker price represents the real cost to the consumer. Inventory is ordered and manufacturers produce goods for a market based on that retail price; but, that retail price that seems real to the retailer is not the same as the real cost to the buyer using credit.

The consuming of products purchased on credit has long term effects on retailers and their customers. From the point of view of the retailer corporate profits should be able to be estimated by taking the price paid by the consumer, minus the businesses costs involving the product incurred, multiplied by the number of units sold. While that will work for past purchases it will not work well for future projections. In reality, the cost of credit is incurred in the future and this has two results: first, future demand will be less than current demand; and second, the real cost to consumers is much higher than the price the retailer receives. Future profits must adjust downward with a cannibalizing of demand.

The lender of credit becomes the collector of the difference between the price paid to the retailer and the real cost to the consumer; the retailer collects the sticker price and the consumer pays to the lender a higher real cost over time. By extending credit for purchases today the lender enables an increased stimulation of demand for today. By collecting payments of interest and principal in the future on today’s purchases the lender will stimulate a decrease in future demand by absorbing the consumer’s future purchasing power. For the unaware retailer or consumer the lender of credit is, in reality, collecting a sacrificial cost from both the retailer (sacrificing future demand) and the consumer (sacrificing future purchasing power); and, both retailer and consumer let it happen because of either ignorance or the convenience of having one bird in the hand rather than having two birds in the bush. Both the consumer and the retailer, when dependent on credit to complete the transaction are related to the lender of credit as addicts are related to their pusher. The lender, who is extending credit to facilitate today’s exchange between buyers and sellers, when those buyers and sellers are blind to the real costs of purchasing things, is no longer profiting by performing the service of assessing practicality and risk; but, the lender is profiting from both purchaser (in lessoning future purchasing power) and seller (in lessoning future demand) by supplying the convenience of immediate gratification to anybody ignorant of real cost assessment.

Yes, I am pointing fingers at the banks issuing credit to ignorant consumers! I am pointing fingers at payday loan companies serving desperate people seeking loans at loan shark rates! I wonder, what would happen to people if banks would issue enough credit to people that they might have trouble paying it back? If I was a bank, I would like to keep borrowers just under that troubled threshold. If I was a bank I would be interested to know what profits I could generate if, as a bank, I were to raise the interest rate on my customers from 10% to 20% or even 29%. I might even justify the rate increase based on a late payment; I might even use the post office to help generate some late payments by mailing out payment notices near do dates and requiring the payment to be mailed to the opposite coast. I might even raise fees on those late payments. Another thing I might try, if I were a bank, would be to entice credit users from my competitors to transfer their loan balance to my bank by promising an absurdly low interest rate of 0%; I will bet that at the first late payment the interest rate could be raised to 25% -- 0% to 25% in a heartbeat – what a good deal for bank profitability.

Hmmm… if we, as bankers, could only keep people under that painful threshold of not being able to make their monthly payments: Hmmm… if we cannot then the huge interest rates we are charging will have to make up for the amount of people defaulting on their debt: Hmmm… if that does not work perhaps we could get congress to make it harder for people to declare bankruptcy. How profitable can we banks be and what might be the overall consequences?

Hmmm… if we could only get these people out of debt we bet they would thank us and feel relieved: Hmmm… if we could only encourage the debtors to exchange some of their short term debt (such as credit card or auto loan debt) for the equity that is in the home; in this case expensive short term debt will be exchanged for cheaper long term debt. We realize that it would be like taking out a 30 year loan on a car that may only last about 10 years and we realize it would not be a good habit to establish; but, people need relief from their pain now and they deserve a vacation from all their debt. Perhaps people will thank us bankers for bailing them out of their troubles.

What must it be like to have $10,000.00 in credit card debt? At 10% the cost of servicing that debt for one year is $1,000.00. At 20% the cost would be $2,000.00. And, at 29% the cost would be $2900.00. For those consumers habitually in $10,000.00 of debt, at 29%, it means that the goods they purchase every year for $10,000.00 really costs them $12,900.00. It also means that the $2,900.00 of interest payments goes to the provider of finance and not to the profits of retailers or producers; in fact, the $2,900.00 cannot go to purchasing any good at all. In this example, it means that $2,900.00 of the total cost of $12,900.00 goes to the production of no-thing beyond convenience. In this example, it means that $2,900.00 must be subtracted from future purchasing power. In this example, it means that the real cost of goods to consumers that are habitually in debt is very high. It also means that in saving this $2,900.00 there is real hope.

There is hope that once people become mindful of and as long as they stay mindful of the cost of credit their behavior will be modified toward less demand with regard to the real cost of things used. Our present mindfulness of the high cost of credit, whether caused by job loss, out of pocket medical expenses, a credit overextension that can no longer be refinanced, or the actual pains of bankruptcy, will encourage a behavior toward increasing savings. Increasing savings or bankruptcy are the only things that will get people out of at least short term and high cost debt. And pain is the encouraging factor in keeping people mindful of their real circumstances.

Once people are out of debt and as long as they stay mindful of the real costs of things, then the real benefits of working through the pain can materialize. Those benefits will ultimately be a real increase in disposable income of $2,900.00 for the future out of debt person in the above example. That amounts to an increase in disposable income that dwarfs any stimulus check sent to consumers by the federal government last year or coming from the government in 2009. Not only that, by saving, consumers are actually behaving in a caring manner toward themselves. And, that $2,900.00 saved may eventually go towards purchasing a future good or service instead of future interest payments. That could lead to more employment of people that actually produce things that will be used. But, please note, this real kind of recovery can only be achieved by working through the pain. Giving and taking pills to deaden the pain will keep out of mind the things needed to be held in mind if behavior is to change.

As human beings we do not respond to stimuli in the same manner as plants or animals. All organic life responds in a manner of moving toward or away from stimuli. Human beings do not have to respond in the same way as organic beings because we can respond through knowledge of the thing that is stimulating us. It is through thinking and feeling things that are outside us that we get to know them and our place in the world. Things that are outside of us stimulate us into thinking and feeling about them. It is for this reason that what we think and feel about any thing always has to be checked out in the real world. Are we thinking correctly about things? Are we feeling appropriately? Answers to these questions are revealed only through activities we undertake. If we do not get the results we expected by our activities then our thoughts about how something could be accomplished are wrong or our motive to act in the direction we felt to be right is wrong or both our thinking and feeling are wrong. In any case we had better stop what we are doing and reflect. Was what we were thinking and feeling about things accurately telling us something about the real world outside of us or was it really telling us about something inside ourselves? Knowing the difference is what allows us to act as human beings and not just respond to stimuli like plants and animals. Getting to know the world outsides us and responding to it as it really is distinguishes us as human beings. Generally, in getting to know the real world we will sometimes experience pain. Pain is often a sign that we have been moving in the wrong direction. Pain generally stimulates people to wake up and reconsider their relations to the world. Pain says pay attention. Anesthesia for the pain is no cure.

Even the granting of easy credit to help sell the initial over supply of goods left in the marketplace will not place the now known high cost of credit back in the bottle. People are now leery of using credit because of the pain they are feeling; for, it is this pain that is keeping credit’s real cost in mind. Since the real cost of credit is better understood by the consumer the businesses that have supplied the goods and services based on the use of that credit will have to scale back production and they will also have to figure out how to generate profits on goods that are purchased at or near a cash price because those goods that need financing will be purchased by pained consumers more fully aware of the real higher cost of using credit.

Credit has no need to disappear. Goods will come to an end of their useful life and need to be replaced. Big ticket items will still need to be financed. And people will be educated by pain as to what they have been doing to themselves by ignoring reality. Like it or not, many people’s idea of how they would like reality to be is not mirroring how reality actually is. A necessary process of disillusionment is affecting everyday life. It is part of a process of getting healthy. What people are coming to terms with is that our present standard of living is being borrowed from our future standard of living. The consumer, in withdrawing from overdependence on credit, is showing a mindfulness of the problem. To believe that the consumer should do more of what is causing them pain by encouraging the further use of credit (by making it cheaper to borrow) is insanity. Saving is an act directed toward the future. It is and act directed at taking care of ourselves over time. And it is about time that the idea of participating in our own care better take root in our minds if it is to have any hope in changing our behavior in our future.

Businesses and governments do not know how to respond to the consumer’s new mind. Businesses and government officials are crying for more stimuli, either through greater government spending (most Democrats) or through decreases in taxes (most Republicans). In begging for the reestablishment of old and blind habits businesses and government desire the dissociation of price in mind from real cost because it is the traditional way things have been done. If they could only eliminate the pain then the consumer’s mind would seem at peace yet stay asleep to reality. But the consumer is awakening to the real problems of the cost of doing things in our habitual manner. And reality is forcing us to stop and reflect on how we are doing things. Reality will painfully stand in our way when we are doing things wrong. Hopefully we can get to know things as they really are and behave accordingly as the human beings we really are.

Maury Garvey, 2/25/09.

Hope we can believe in? How We Will Pay for the Economic Recovery Program.

John H. Schmitz — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:18:56 EST

Our nation has begun implementing a nearly 800 billion dollar Economic Recovery Plan. This money is on top of the 750 billion dollar TARP, and as we frequently hear would cost over two trillion dollars in total if they were paid for by conventional issuance of treasury bonds. The stated goal of both programs is to head off economic collapse, raise the bottom of the downward trough of the business cycle, and restore the economy to a rational marketplace. Those goals for the economy are our hopes, but we hold back our faith in those hopes because we know that government is a notoriously inefficient spender, and we suspect that corrupt practices and special interests will divert the investment funds into foolish and pointless directions. Experience tells us this is true, so we would be foolish to place our faith in the latest economic theory, or our wise leadership in Washington, or the captains of industry. After all, it was pie in the sky economists, dogmatic politicians and greedy, irresponsible businessmen who put us into the situation we are in. We cannot seriously trust these guys to fix this mess, can we?

Placing our trust in mankind can only lead to disappointment; the Marxists already tried that. While I personally did not spend the wealth that was created for me in the housing bubble, that wealth is now gone, and I have nothing to show for it although I am also not in debt. I did hope we would eventually see a Dow 30,000, and placed my hopes and retirement funds in the stock market, and now much of that money is gone. I guess I can only conclude that I cannot place my hope in my own wisdom. Nevertheless, we live in a deterministic society that believes in the laws of science and nature. Perhaps it is time we stopped gaming the fundamentals of economics to project the disappearance of the business cycle and deal with what the fundamentals of the economy really are. If the wealth I theoretically had when my house was worth the most at the peak of the housing bubble was not real, then what is the worth of a dollar today? The worth of a dollar is the fundamental element that can explain how we can spend our way out of the current economic depression/recession, and the key to how we are going to pay for it.

Since 1973 the value of a dollar has been tied to our nation’s Gross National Product, or GNP. Before that, we were on the gold standard which meant that dollars were tied to the value of gold, or actually had something solid behind them. I was 12 when we went off the gold standard, so I really do not remember being on it, but I don’t see how that was really a big change. The value of gold was tied to how many goods and services could be purchased with it, so it strikes me that the dollar was still worth a percentage of our economic output or GNP. A dollar’s worth today can be described as the fraction 1 over the total number of dollars in the system, and the number of dollars in the system is equal to the value of the goods and services that our economy produces. To simplify this further, if there are 100 dollars in circulation and you have one of them, then you can buy 1% of our GNP with it. The worth of a dollar is determined by the number of dollars in circulation, and the value of the goods and services produced by our economy.

So what has happened to those two variables in the last year? First of all, the collapse of the housing and stock bubbles greatly reduced the number of dollars that were in circulation. Some of that money, like the value of my house and the retirement funds that I did not borrow against, was in unrealized gains, and so was not an actual part of the active money supply, or M1. Much of it, however, was borrowed against and so was in the active money supply. The disappearance of all of that money, in theory, should make the remaining dollars more valuable. In the previous example a dollar was worth 1/100 of the GNP, well if we are now down to 95 dollars in the economy, my dollar should buy more since it is now worth 1/95 of GNP. It is this contraction in the money supply that has made it difficult for banks to lend. The dollars that they had have disappeared!

Another problem that we face in determining the worth of a dollar is that GNP has also been falling. To use the 100 dollar economy as an example, if the money supply fell by 5 dollars, but GNP also fell by 5% then the dollar would still buy the same amount of goods and services. There would neither be inflation nor deflation, just a lot of miserable people who have largely been kicked out of the economy since they have neither a job, nor any assets that they can spend.

So, what is a dollar worth today as compared to last year? The unsettling thing is that we really do not know. We know that the economy is contracting, and we know that the money supply has contracted, and continues to contract. Beyond that, we can see that there is an insufficiency of money supply to allow “normal” borrowing to take place. This uncertainty is the root cause of the volatility in world markets, and no argument about “moral hazard” is going to bring certainty. Since our economic problems are now rooted in both the GNP and money supply, it follows that we need to increase both.

Politically, our two parties fall into camps that each address one or the other of these problems, although Republicans have recently started to advocate a hands off approach. Republicans want to stimulate the economy through tax cuts, which basically gives free dollars to the beneficiaries since no corresponding reduction in government services is planned. This is the same as “printing” money to increase the money supply.

The Economic Recovery Plan seeks to expand GNP by creating demand in the marketplace. Right now, the only entity with money to spend is our government since the contraction of GNP makes investment by businesses undesirable. By spending money on fixing roads or building buildings we create jobs that would not otherwise be there, and those workers can then spend that money at the coffee shop, grocery store, or Wal-Mart. So, one dollar invested by the government in that sort of spending hopefully produces many more dollars in spending by the private sector, which increases the GNP. In economics, this concept is called “velocity.” Remember velocity because we will get back to it later, but understand that the velocity of money spent in the economy is likely to be greater than that of money saved in a tax cut. Beyond that, you have to have a job to get a tax cut.

Let us assume for a moment that the government, using either or both approaches, essentially prints the money to pay for this stimulus, since I have no idea who has the money to lend it to us. If every dollar we “print” creates two or three dollars in economic stimulus, then we actually raise our GNP numbers by more than we do our money supply, and a dollar actually gains in value! If we take the 100 dollar money supply, and “print” 10 more dollars, the economy would have to grow by 10% to keep the buying power of that dollar constant. If GNP grows by 20% on a 10% growth in money supply, the dollar is worth more! Now, this sounds like “pie in the sky” type economics!

The reason that this type of approach can be used now is two fold: we have a contracted money supply, and we have a contracting economy. If this approach were used in near full employment economic times, the money that the government spent would actually compete with the money the private sector had to spend and we would not see growth in GNP but would see growth in money supply. That would lead to inflation. Money supply increasing while the economy is stagnant or continues contracting will lead to the type of run away inflation that Germany experienced before the rise of Hitler. The key to a noninflationary increase in money supply is expansion of GNP, and that cannot happen if we are truly at full employment. (It can happen in full employment if worker productivity is increasing, but that is another subject.) The keys here are that we are not at full employment, and the money supply has definitely contracted. The difference between the contraction in money supply and the contraction in our economy is the amount of money we can literally print. We are in a window before the economy has contracted too much. We still have an opportunity to spend, but if the economy collapses, that opportunity will be gone. That is why we must act now!

So, we can print noninflationary money now, but will we ever have to pay the piper? Of course we will. Eventually it is hoped that the economy will recover and grow under its own momentum. At that time, the Fed will lose a lot of control over the money supply as stocks recover and housing values potentially begin to recover. At that time the economy will be “printing” its own money through velocity. (I told you we would get back to it.) When velocity increases the government must decrease money supply or new bubbles, like the ones that did us in this time, will occur. Essentially there are three ways that the government can do this:

1) Reduce spending. Fortunately, the new money created in the ERP has time constraints. Both the tax cuts and the projects will expire. While this does not actually take money out of the money supply, it at least stops pumping more money into it. Further cuts will probably be desirable, but I doubt politicians have the courage to make them.

2) Raise Taxes. If I doubt politicians have the courage to cut spending, I know they do not have the courage to raise taxes. Nevertheless, raising taxes to pay off our debts would reduce the money supply and counter the final option.

3) Inflation. This is the cruelest tax of all, and will eventually lead to another economic down turn. If velocity increases while economic output stays constant, money supply increases while GNP stays the same. A dollar will no longer buy as many goods as it did before the money supply increased. The Fed can counteract this by raising interest rates, but in essence that amounts to the same thing as inflation.

In the final analysis, some spending will expire, some taxes will be raised as tax cuts expire, and some inflation will inevitably occur. The mix of those paybacks will largely be determined by the economic policies we follow at that time.

Does this mean that we are placing our hope in politicians that we have not even elected yet? I guess that it does, and that is not a place I want to place my hopes for a fulfilling life. Nor do I want to trust the latest fad to come out of economic academia, and I have already said that I demonstrated a poor ability to perceive economic reality before this crash happened, so I am not a good place to deposit my own hopes. There must be something greater in which we can entrust our hopes. Maybe if we make wealth a means rather than an end we can escape the trap of measuring our lives against the economy. Forget about what a dollar is worth, what are you worth, and to whom? If we begin the search for those answers, maybe we will resist buying houses that we cannot afford and bidding up the prices of stocks. Both Karl Marx and Adam Smith agreed that the economy would function better if there were better people in it; Smith, however, unlike Marx, did not put forth a plan to accomplish that goal, since he already knew that one existed.

The Economic Recovery Plan of 2009 and the GI Bill.

John H. Schmitz — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 08:41:42 EST

In speaking with people about the president’s Economic Recovery Plan, a common question from both supporters and detractors is: “Has the government ever succeeded in something like this?” As a person with degrees in both Economics and History I can state confidently that there have been several times in recent history where something like the current plan has succeeded in reversing our country’s economic fortunes. Perhaps the one example that best illustrates the point is the post World War II example of the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, or GI Bill.

As World War II was drawing to a close President Roosevelt and many of our nation’s leaders faced a daunting challenge: what will happen when more than 15 million soldiers, sailors, and airmen get laid off from their jobs at a time when demand for the industrial goods produced by war time industry collapses? The country had faced a similar crisis after World War I, and lack of action had led to the veterans’ “Bonus March” of 1932, and contributed to the depth of the Great Depression. Social upheaval and economic collapse were a very realistic fear!

Harry W Colmery, a former Republican National Committee chairman, was one of the earliest proponents of a government program to mitigate the effects of the war’s end on the economy. Warren Atherton of the American Legion greatly influenced the content of the bill, and Arizona Democratic Senator Ernest W McFarland guided the legislation through Congress. So, the bill had initial support by the minority party, was greatly influenced by a “special interest group,” and was championed by the majority party! The Economic Recovery Plan also enjoyed initial support from Republicans, but largely managed to escape special interest input because the speed in which it was passed, and ended up having to be passed by the Democrats with little support from the minority party.

The main parts of the bill were provisions for college or vocational training, and one year of unemployment benefits for returning service men. So, it invested in our future by creating a more educated and skilled work force while deferring many people’s entry into the work force, and provided immediate help to the unemployed. Subsequent legislation, after the war including the Employment Act of 1946, and various programs aimed at making home ownership a practical goal for most families also had a stimulative economic effect. The Marshall Plan, with its buy American provisions did as much to bolster our economy as it did to rebuild Europe.

While our challenges after World War II were brought on by different circumstances, they were similar to the problems we face today: industry that needs to be retooled, a collapse of world wide demand caused by the inability of consumers to pay, a surge of suddenly unemployed workers, all of which is happening after years of deficit spending by the federal government. The actions that the United States took spurred demand across our economy by directing government spending into programs that created long lasting value for our nation. The Economic Recovery Plan has exactly the same goal.

Our country’s reaction to the economic challenge that it faced after World War II was hugely successful and can largely be credited with creating the middle class that became, and remains, the main economic driver in the U.S. economy. Our country eventually had to stop deficit spending, and bring forth a balanced budget when the economy got to a stable point, but it can be said that government fiscal (spending) policy has a long and mostly successful history as a tool for dealing with economic hardship. President Obama’s Economic Recovery Plan, like the GI Bill, is aimed at solving a problem BEFORE it gets out of hand. History says that it can work, and it is worthy of our enthusiastic support.

When You’re Stuck In Quicksand, Kicking Your Feet Only Makes You Sink Faster.

LOL — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:06:14 EST

When you are sinking in quicksand the natural reaction is to kick your feet and struggle. The problem is that kicking only causes you to sink faster. I know this is going to come as a blow to those who are trying to say, “The government should help us because we can’t pay for our house”, but you are mistaken. I am sorry. The only thing that this home rescue plan is going to do is cause the rest of us to go down with you. Not to mention your attempted salvation will result in the prices remaining artificially high.

The homeowner relief plan is a slap in my face

LOL — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:22:54 EST

I just don’t see the point. This country has become the land of the ignorant, selfish, and greedy. The home mortgage plan only re-enforces that idea. Let us say that you find out your child has a heroine addiction. Do you turn to them and say, “we are going to buy you some this time. But in the future, from here on out, you have to go get treatment for your addiction.” Sounds silly right? So how is that different to people who were addicted to credit, and ignorant of finances that “this time we will help you out” but in the future we need to be more responsible. Oh, but while you are being responsible, we need you to buy things, on credit, to get the economy moving again.

I am going to piss off a lot of people, but I don’t care. It is kind of the same response you get when you tell an addict that they have made bad choices. “but everybody around me were making the same choice.” If you are in a mortgage you can’t afford, it is because you were irresponsible. That is not a disputable fact. However, everybody wants to make “responsibility” a relative figure. It is not. If I should go belly up and be unable to afford my mortgage, well then in the end I was irresponsible. In nature they call that “dead”. In the US we call them “victims”

A stimulus for right now. Wage Reform

LOL — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:14:40 EST

Here is an idea that will work right now. It has to be acknowledged that when we draw ourselves out of this mess we are going to change the way we functioned before or we will end up in the same place all over again. (As it is many of our “stimulation techniques” remind me of the pirates from a few months back that drowned trying to swim to shore with all of their ransom money. Sometimes you got to let go of those things that you hold dear to survive.) One major change that could be enacted right now and have an immediate impact is wage reform.

By wage reform I don’t mean those old worn out ideals of “fair wage” or “living wages”. Those all have the same problem that our current minimum wages does, no relative direct connection between the top and the bottom. What I would propose is that (here come the cheers from the right) we completely get rid of minimum wage. But hold on, (now to re-anger them and confuse everybody else) We should replace it with a “minimum percentage”. What that simply means is that the lowest paid, toilet scraping janitor on your company payroll or any other direct employee would have to get at least X% of the highest paid, probably the CEO, employee on the books.

Stimulation - Music Video

mathpol — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 07:41:10 EST

The title refers to the stimulus package recently passed by Congress. Sung to the music of “Celebration”, by Kool and the Gang. Watch it here.

Obama and the legislative still not getting it.

LOL — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 08:37:27 EST

Credit In The Simplest Terms Possible. I Think

Let me ask a few questions. You can think to yourself or shout the answers out loud. Do you have a credit card debt? Do you know anybody who doesn’t have a credit card debt? You know, you are out at the bar or to eat with them do they always pay in cash? Do you know anybody over 20 that has none of the following. Home loan, car loan, school loan, or credit debt? Do you know people who work hard, make a decent wage, do the right things financially, but are still struggling? Do you have a years worth of savings accumulated in case joblessness or illness occurs? So how can it be that so many of us are working our butts off, making an alright living, not living lavish lives, and still could not make it a year with out income. Now, under that guise let us talk about the affect of credit on the US economy.

Ossam Bin Ladden and al Qaeda have won

LOL — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 15:31:28 EST

Let us look at these things logically. I like logic. It is as good a place to start as any. When conducting an investigation in theory, one starts with what one knows, and applies facts from the best predictor of the future, “history”. One also applies rational assertions that are open to debate from anybody who comes up with another more rational assertion. This technique can be applied even when dealing with irrational subjects, because even they have to yield to the laws of nature, science, and the trends of sociology.

So with that in mind. Here is the question that I would like to explore. What was it that al Qaeda wanted to accomplish by the actions of 9-11? Of course as a follow up, how successful was it?

How does Obama's Plan stop the ship from sinking?

LOL — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:32:05 EST

What Obama and this country’s financial leaders of this country don’t seem to understand is that simply bailing it out doesn’t fix the hole. How does giving a few people temporary jobs help solve the problem? By temporary I mean that hopefully it will not require 30 years to fix and build all of the infrastructure we need.

But let us say that some how, I don’t know where, the government comes up with money to pay for all of these projects. The money is sent to the state. The states allot the required amounts to the contractors. This goes into the payroll of the various businesses. The question they have to ask is, “then where does it go?” A good guess would be to look at who make up the top retailers in the country. Wal-Mart, Home Depot, CVS, Kroger, Costco, Target, Walgreen, Sears/ K-mart, Lowe’s, and Super Value make up the top 10. Next quantify what percentage of their gross income ends up being sent outside of the economy. How much of that local income is spent on paying low wages to people that are forced to shop at these chains and deliver even more money outside of the economy. What you see is that in very few turns of the original capital, almost all of the invested money is no longer circulating through the US economy. That leads us right back to where we are today.

How are any of these suggestions going to stop capital from going outside the economy. We are drowning in debt. That is a fact that is true from the individual family, through all branches of business and government, and ends on the capital steps. Is there anybody in Washington that really understands how we ended up here?

Stimulation (as in stimulating the economy)

mathpol — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:52:07 EST

This is the title of a video I have posted on You Tube.

The title refers to the stimulus package now before Congress. To be sung to the music of “Celebration”, by Kool and the Gang. Karaoke style.

Eating Elephants and More Economic Woes

Shelley — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 08:59:08 EST

As I watch all the political heevin' and hawin', bitin' and snippin' I got to thinking. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. As our economic situation is not occurring in a vacuum and because of the exceedingly high level of dysfunction in the government, a new method might be in order. Yes, the stimulus package needed to be passed yesteryear, but what if, instead, we just take it one step at a time.

Benefits: It would allow the republican descent to have a chance to digest a new way of seeing, doing, being. It allows for simpler arguments that can not be hijacked by political maneuvers. It limits extraneous add ons that may serve a few, but not the whole.

One of the complications of dealing with intelligent and visionary people is that often their sight can be too far reaching and overly complicated. So let's just take a step back and move throw this mess a little more deliberately and cautiously.

What if today we only tackled mortgages. Get that portion passed, and next week work on a specific job package, and the week after that another job package.

Yesterday I read someones blog with some really detailed solid ideas on rescuing mortgage holders and the banks that finance them. It had great appeal because it offered a solution, but also consequences. Even greater than my vague approach, which I think her (or him, not even sure if the author was a he or she, after spending 2 hrs trying to find that entry, I gave up, so maybe we'll get lucky and the author will read this entry?) her figures were more appropriate. I only recall 1 at the moment. In my last entry I said buying the paper at 80% of the current market value, and their post said 50%. Perhaps somewhere between the two would be appropriate. Either way, the details can be worked out by the cracker jack economic team and/or any senator or representative. Just as long as it is something that will be passed.

Bottom line...that is what needs to happen. We can tackle green jobs next week; healthcare, the week after; education, after that.

Not to mention dealing with singular actions leads to much smaller figures. This will be much more palatable to the general public, as well as, deflating the steam of the windbags who are only content to be obstacles.

The New Poor

LOL — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 07:39:14 EST

A story that examplifies the current economicsituation. I was on work assignment in a southern city. I was riding along with a couple of friends I had met from other places around the US. One of them spotted a beggar in the middle of the medium. He made a comment like, “You mean to tell me that guy can stand on the medium all day but he can’t get a job?” I was in the process of slamming on my breaks to stop next to him. The cars occupants were ushering me on out of some form of embarrassment. The one guy says to me, “were you really going to give that guys money?” I said “No way!” Confused I explained to them that I was going to ask him, “What are your financial secrets to success?”

Amazingly that didn’t get any one of them less confused. I explained, “that guy is much wealthier then I am.” There is no way that guy can get credit with no job. What he has is all his. Now me, I have a house mortgage the bank owns, School loan the government owns, two car loans the credit union owns, and $15,000 In credit card debt that I own. If the banks called in both of our accounts at the same time (mine and the street beggar), he would be around $180,000 richer then I am. Each day I slip a little further behind him. Each dollar puts him further ahead. I think the general consensus was that I was smoking something and should really share. I am used to that.

Economic Stimulus and Recovery

Faron, NC — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 09:08:17 EST

Unemployment: Regardless of the tax breaks, housing issues and all other ideas in any proposal. If you don’t stop the unemployment and put people back to work so they actually have money to benefit from the tax breaks and housing benefits proposed and so they can start purchasing items, getting loans for homes and vehicles, investing in stock and or otherwise spending money, then regardless of the amount of the package, you will not have stimulated spending or our economy. JOBS are the foundation of stimulation.

JOBS: It is vitally important that the jobs created are created throughout the country with various skills. I assure you that those that have lost their jobs and will lose their jobs are from various locations and with various skills. So specific projects, proposed in any bill, will not suffice since they are limited in both location and skill.

How do you create Jobs?: I continuously hear everyone say, including the President, that our small businesses are the backbone of job creation and our economy. Why is that? It’s because they are all across the country and provide a variety of jobs and they borrow and spend?
How do you stimulate small business?: Normally small businesses which are existing or that which wish to start up seek private funding through investement, loans and federal assistance. However due to the current economic EMERGENCY, the private sector options are no longer available. This leaves only Federal funding for small businesses.
Our Federal agencies hold many applications from small businesses.: Various agencies have applications from small businesses that want to do work, some of which the government is requesting to be done. Some of which they have come up with on their own, which are called “unsolicited proposals” but which could still be of value. Some of this work is manual labor, some of this work is research and a lot of it is a variety of other opportunities.
Some funds could already be available!: Many of these Federal agencies most likely already have some funds set aside for Grant funding or other funding. These agencies could pull all small business applications and Grand Total the amounts needed to fund all of them and the stimulus package could authorize additional funds, which may or may not be needed. The stimulus package and/or a Directive by the President should order these agencies to "clear their coffers". This may seem like an extreme measure, but these are extreme times.
Some may argue that this will diminish private investment opportunities.: Contrarily by providing these small businesses with funding to start up or perform work, they can begin to invest and seek investors with the capital which is provided to them and/or with their success as they grow .
Perhaps some of the funds being directed to the TARP packages could be redirected here.: Since the issue for our financial institutions is not neccesarily having the money available, but rather a way to move the money, our small businesses can provide for two means of helping with this issue. First they can provide the monies through creating bank accounts and/or making deposits into existing accounts. They will conduct daily business that will begin to rotate these funds and stimulate the economy.
The definition of small business has already been defined.: The Government has already defined the term "small business", so there is no need to redefine it or figure out what articulates into a small business.
These small businesses have already gone through the Grants.gov verification processes!: Before applying for Grants, SBIR’s and/or STTR’s each business must go through a verification process.
There are already established monitoring systems set up.: Government auditing, reports and etc..are already established by each agency.
Grants.gov already has bank routing numbers for each business.: As a requirement during the verification process, Grants.gov requires that a bank account already be established. The funds could be dispersed quickly and put to use quickly.
Unfortunately the amounts they offer, $100,000 to $150,00 in most case are not sufficient to actually start a business. A business beginning with nothing has to have the funds needed to buy supplies, lease property, purchase equipment etc… and cover salaries for at least a year to allow the business to grow and build a customer base which can sustain them. Another source for small business interest is the Small Business Administration.
It is important to provide enough funding: to allow for these businesses to start and to have enough to sustain them for at least a year, two years would be best, so that they can build a customer base to sustain themselves. Not all will succeed and it could be required that unused funds be returned if they fail. But I believe there will be many more that will succeed and some may even provide us all with some unexpected benefits.
So have theses agencies, a list of Granting Agencies is on Grants.gov, pull all small business applications and provide funding. Open up more opportunities for small businesses. These small businesses are ready, willing and able to begin work and put others to work, so let them.
What is the real benefit of small business?
They employ, they buy, they bank, they borrow, they invest, they provide investment opportunities and they spend all across the country.: This stabilizes current businesses and allows them to hire more employees, to buy, to borrow and to spend. They all pay taxes to their states, they pay for permits from municipalities, counties and/or other forms of government, creating State and local revenue. They are perpetual, in that they continue, whereas a stimulus check to Americans may help, it does not provide a continuing of spending and rotation of capital as small businesses would while conducting daily business. They do not require any trade agreement specifications or a “Buy American” provision.
Their employees buy, bank, invest, borrow and spend all across the country.: They pay State and local taxes which creates revenue for them.

In the end, the only real stimulation you could provide which can do what needs done, is through creating jobs all across the country with a variety of work skills. To meet that objective effectively you have to build up your small business base.

Taxes: This is another key part of the stimulation and recovery. Tax cuts can clearly help to build business and encourage spending by both the businesses and the workers, however to reiterate, if you don’t have a job, it does nothing.

Housing: Can be a part of helping and some legitimate proposals along these lines should always be considered.

State Aid: Some state aid can help, but keep in mind if you’re putting people to work you can reduce a large amount of funding for unemployment and Medicaid since it want be needed.

In closing, let's create jobs, create futures, stimulate capital rotation and continue this rotation and provide the ability to help pay back the debts incurred by the Federal Government. If small business is the backbone, then let’s support our back so we can stand up and walk, then maybe as we walk, we can soon begin to run again.

That way when all the other bills such as TARP and others can actually do some good.

Americans have a way of pulling themselves up. Give us a chance to show you how well we can do that and help us, help you, help us all.

Small Businesses, existing and new, could play a big part of stimulating our economy and progression to recovery. It should be included in conjunction with other ideas which are currently a part of the plan.

Visit Moon Sun Star

coralights — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:07:45 EST

I use my MoonSunStar.com Blog to express my anger and frustration over the politics of economics and beyond. It's pretty heavy - if you are interested.

Hmm...So that's why MyBO seems to be stuck with the DNC...and other bills to watch.

EMK — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:20:44 EST

Why didn't they make MyBO an independent blog (see the part called, sarcastically, "Jetsons vs Flintstones") is beyond me, but the MSM playing their games, as usual, it's no wonder why there seems to be a communication issue. (Though I think some debate and analysis of the stimulus package is necessary, but many of you won't agree.)

Anyway, blogs and news reports are talking about Cheney mentioning that the "country's in danger" over and over again, but what's he up to really...HR 645? Is California's situation one of his ideas for getting that bill to pass?

Pay attention to these bills, including HR 645:

IRS Revisions: HR 161, HR 162, & HR 779

Stop the Congressional Pay Raise Act: HR 156

Federal Reserve Abolition Act: HR 111

Now this one's not really important, but this is one is fun to look at: HR 778.

These are just my thoughts, but look at the bills that I have up, except HR 778, which I put up for fun!

EMK

Economic Revolution on COIN AGE - Flaws and Solutions

Richard Thomas Gerber — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:34:03 EST

Have we taken into account the flaws in the current system and the solutions on http://coinage.me that some are trying to suppress being brought to the attention of the citizens?

There is no reason the world should be in a recession or depression because the capacity it is an illusion and a farce you are being told. The capacity to produce or consume did not change one iota. The accounting system used to enable the exchange between producers and consumers was corrupted and trillions stolen. The stolen wealth needs be returned to the economic system participants.

The citizens are no longer going to buy into the process of the citizens of the United States going into debt (government doesn't own anything it is just a label, we do) with interest attached then having that given to banks to be loaned back disproportionately (favoring some entities) at a profit to the citizens of the United States. There is no reason on earth that an accounting system should cost trillions of dollars to run, and that is all the banking system is, a left brained accounting.

We do not need thousands of bank buildings to run our monetary accounting system adding to the cost and green house gasses. All we need is a number of data centers for the computer hardware. If we have all the data online and connected we can save trees because there will be no filling out of paper applications and appraisals can be automatically generating after a quick survey of condition and no more bogus loan application fees. We don’t even need Real Estate Agents to handle complex paper work or the Title companies any more, because the entire system will be integrated.

It is my understanding there is an ingenious solution getting ready to be launched that does not require legislation to fix the problem and the citizens can implement by their own accord using the same instruments banks and Wall Street used to create the current mess. However it will have a tangible and real backing, essentially pulling the rug out from underneath the banks and erasing the fictitious profits and wealth created by gambling and control of the monetary system. More on this mass citizen driven conversion with a million dollar cap later.

The people will come to understand four things cutting through the financial jargon and illusions created by those that benefit from it.

Derivatives = Bets
Credit Default Swaps = insurance on bets
Hedge Funds = borrowing of money to gamble with (unregulated and secret also used to manipulate markets)
Taxpayer Bailout = Taxpayers covering the gambling losses for gamblers

Extraction of wealth as a result of gambling (day traders) does not generate value for economic system participants (producers) but rather creates an imbalance and scarcity and concentration of wealth not earned through the creation on genuine value.

It is a form of passive violence committed against the people and should be curtailed as such.

Like any criminal element they need to be locked up so they can do no more harm and the criminal enterprises shut down.

Furthermore the citizens of the United States are due about $200,000 each in tort damages for the mismanagement and corruption of the system. This reward will fix the economic crisis. A prosecutor has expressed interest in seeing how the Bankers and Wall Street could be prosecuted under RICO statute (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) the other option is they admit their wrongs and make amends and repair damages of their own accord immediately.

Another alternative is that all interest due is made void and the borrowers must only pay back the principal, and interest paid to date will be applied as payment to the original amount of the principal.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing is that the people making the decisions that got us here usually do not feel the pain of their decisions. Some of the wealthy suggest to the people to practice "thrift" yet do we see the wealthy living thrift? We should eliminate waste with efficiency, but all should live in abundance having the essential economy.

We should recognize that some of the wealthy got that way generating enormous value for others while others played a game of manipulation, created artificial value, to extract their wealth. Some derived their wealth from the death, disease and fear industries while others actually created via the holistic industries. We should remember to make the distinction.

Calm Waters

Mike — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:19:18 EST

Personal observation I have become obsessed with watching CNBC and CNN and MSNBC now that Mr. Barack Obama is our president. I will flip over to Fox News for little ten minute intervals just to remind me of how crazy they are. I just watched Obama and Biden speak with the labor force leaders and sign what I am assuming is a bill or something like that, that Biden has been put in charge of to help generate jobs and economy for this broken nation of ours. I’ve watched the ridiculous partisanship that is still going on with the republicans who seem to be quite comfortable with acting like a bunch of spoiled little brats that didn’t get their way and will make damn sure that the president doesn’t move forward on the economic crisis and we need to rename this entire event. It’s not a crisis, it passed crisis levels months ago. The goofballs that report this stuff is calling this a class war. I like that. I think it’s time for the middle class and the poor of this nation to rise up and fight for the right to live in this free nation of ours the same way or at least close to the same way the elite do. I have a problem with the fact that everything we do in this country has the word war attached to it. If we could change that verbiage and mindset I believe we would see significant change in attitudes. Barack Obama has become president during a time when the economic wasteland is at a level that may not be fixed with just more money and more rhetorical mind sets. Obama is looking at our current situation the same way FDR had to look at our nation. We are going to have to put forth programs that help those Americans that need this assistance the most and need it right now. I find it infuriating when I hear the rich and the monitors of the rich on CNBC throw their arms in the air and wail about Obama working towards helping the middle class, the elderly and the poor in this country. We need entitlements for a large section of Americans right now. Barack Obama is obviously not ok with having the attitude that there is nothing we can do about the four million Americans who are out of work. Barack Obama does not accept that we have to watch small businesses and for that matter a number of big businesses fail because of the current situation. My frustration and heartbreak comes from an elitist group of Americans that really believe that they are better, smarter and cooler than other Americans. The playing field needs to be leveled. I sincerely believe that Barack Obama is doing exactly what needs to be done right now. I also hope that they are looking to the future as to how we level the money and assistance that is happening right now so that we can become the nation that we are capable of becoming again. We are not a kingdom where only a few prosper and the rest of the peasants get what is left, but, the problem is that we are exactly that right now. I’m listening right now to CNBC argue about bonuses. How can these people sit there and argue about bonuses. Those individual’s that are getting this bonus do not deserve them and as a middle class disabled American I believe they never deserved those bonuses. How did we get to this place? How is it justifiable to give someone an outrageous bonus for doing an absolutely horrible job? I worked my entire life, until I became disabled and I was given a bonus, a raise when I did a good job and if I didn’t do my job correctly I was fired. I don’t’ have a problem with ridiculous salaries. A salary has to be worked for. These people have to do exactly what the rest of the nation does on their thirteen thousand dollar a year job. They have to work for it. And if their salaries are in the millions then they better be working real hard to make things work, to make things right. I have mixed feelings about the banking system. I believe we should let the banking systems and the auto industries either get their act together or just go away and let the banks and companies that are successful take over. We need to bring this nation and its economic insanity down to a level that is fair and moral so that the middle class and the poor feel like what they do in this nation matters. By bringing the playing field down to a more sane and level place will also guarantee that entitlements will not be needed for the middle class or even the poor, elderly or disabled. The markets have become so emotional over the entire situation that it’s painful to watch them, well, painful and also humorous. I will sit and listen with an unfair sense of happiness that they are also worried about the future or I will have to take a break and change the channel because they have said something so unbelievably stupid and selfish that it just makes me crazy. They are frantic. They are losing their nice comfortable little kingdom and I believe that this is exactly what should happen. Knock these self righteous children off of their mountain that was made out of greed and corruption. Let them find out what it feels like to work thirty years on a job, saving money for retirement and have it all go away immediately and there are no solutions. I believe that the Barack Obama team is doing exactly what needs to be done and I am a little surprised at how difficult this is going to be. I think, unlike the rich, Obama is looking toward the future and we need to put policies and incentives together to get the current problem taken care of. If this means some of the kings and queens of this nation won’t be able to buy eighty thousand dollar rugs or purchase another new jet then so be it. Let them wine and complain. We need change and we need it now. I am an old hippy that has spent most of his life watching this government and nation slowly journey on a downward spiral, actually it’s been longer than thirty years, and I find it strange sometimes to remember how old I am. The downward spiral has finally caught up and is now going down at an alarming rate. For the first time in many, many years I have a sense of hope, I believe that our nation can become what we are so capable of becoming. I was the greatest of cynics and naysayers and anyone who reads my blogs knows this but here we are with a man that is willing to make the changes that need to be made. He has surrounded himself with people who are also focused on getting things done. Unfortunately economics isn’t the only problem that Obama faces. The wars and the Middle East that the previous administration completely screwed up have to be fixed and the greatest struggle is the whole mindset that goes on in this country about winning. We lost these wars the day we dropped bombs and sent our solders there. No one can deny that Barack Obama is doing exactly what he said he was going to do. It’s pretty damn exciting. We finally have a president that cares about all of the peoples that call this country their home. It’s funny watching those who thought they were the kings and queens find out they are the same as the rest of us schmucks.Hippy Mike

Is Rush Limbaugh on Drugs Again, or Simply the World's Biggest Ego Trip?

Eric from Covina, CA — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:33:05 EST

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Is Rush Limbaugh on Drugs Again, or Simply the World's Biggest Ego Trip?

Ultra Conservative Political shock jock, Rush Limbaugh, seems to have finally slipped off the reservation. It is hard to know whether he's back on drugs, or if the recent election returns have caused him to lose his mind all together.

In his latest bloviation he's challenging President Obama to enter into negotiations with him on an "Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan," which would divide up a trillion dollars earmarked for stimulating the economy, according to the election returns. Limbaugh reasons that since the President has pledged to take a bipartisan approach to governing, in Limbaugh's view, that entails the president controlling only the percentage of the bailout funds that reflects his margin of victory in the election. In other words, since President Obama won the election by 53% of the vote, he should only control 53% of the bailout funds. The remainder of the funds, that percentage that reflects Sen. McCain's percentage of the vote, should be controlled by none other than Rush himself, to be applied to the economy as way he sees fit.

Addressing the real basics – not secondary ones

Unknown user — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:47:44 EST

In the face of what I perceive as a deficiency in the current debate, I would like to raise a fundamental point - for the moment concerning the economic aspect. Other aspects and a more general perspective might follow - depending on the kind of response I get.

Today's view of economics focuses far too much on money, which is merely a medium of exchange. But by widely adopting this focus, money has been allowed to develop a dynamics that blows away its reason for existing - as we see in the crisis of the financial sector. An awareness must be attained of the fact that the real value is not in the money, but in whatever money stands for. You can't eat money, it is no direct shelter - for coping with reality you need the real thing. Comparing one real value with another real value is the principle of market - and even this institution does not depend on money for being functional. Before there is money, there is barter. It works - even though the exchange can work better with money. The point here is only that one should clarify completely the real dependencies, the fundamental meanings, and thereby the concepts that constitute the theory. Money can of course be used as a means for comparing values - but this is not a compulsory connection. The reality of value is more fundamental than the reality of money. This fact is not being taken adequately into consideration in discussing today's problems of the economy - while neglecting this fact warrants remaining in the theoretical and practical quagmire we should get out of.

Note that the difference between use value and exchange value was addressed already by Aristotle; it got lost when Adam Smith felt that the exchange value reflects sufficiently the use value, and believing that the latter can therefore be abandoned. Thinkers such as Marx or Veblen rediscovered the value of the distinction, but it has never been talen seriously enough for really coming to terms with reality. Now we are witnessing the consequences.

“Thanks, but no thanks” to conservative economics

Mary Bell from Alpine, TX — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:44:45 EST

Conservative economic policies have us slip-sliding down that old rocky slope. The mantras of that vision are well known to us all, as we’ve heard them over and over for the last 2 or 3 decades:
No free lunch
   What’s good for business is good for the country
   Free trade
   Deregulation
   Tax cuts
   Starve and shrink government
   Outsource
   Bust unions
    Privatize government services

The fundamental problem with this vision is that it ignores one simple, indisputable fact: WE’RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. This is true whether we are talking about the economy, the environment, towns and cities, states and nations, social groups, or our overall existence in space and time. If, we’re all in this together, then the “Golden Rule” that we care for others as we care for ourselves is our best strategy, not just for mere survival, but to thrive and live lives of purpose and meaning.

Big 3 Auto Bailout

TxNerd — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 12:29:00 EST

Perhaps the answer to the auto bailout is for the US Government to buy the physical plants that the auto makers are using to build cars right now. If they can't manage their business and go under then we could retool and use these facilities to speed production of new military vehicles, build windmills, solar power units, build barriers to help secure the flood-prone New Orlean and other coastal areas, build FEM housing, etc. The issue is not losing the auto makers but is insted is about losing vital jobs. If we can't build cars there must be something else we can build in these facilities to keep America productive and moving in the right direction.

We will probably give the auto makers a bailout plan but it should be a one time deal and should come with close government oversight. It should insist that the company and workers make the right decisions to ensure their company and their jobs going forward. We cannot be held hostage by for profit American companies.

FIFTY-THREE TRILLION DOLLARS

Eric Lykins — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 16:50:13 EST

53 trillion dollars is the sum of the government's current liabilities and unfunded entitlement promises, which translates to $455,000 per American household. Growing our way out of this crisis would require real economic growth in double digits for the next several decades. Even during the buoyant 1990s, the economy only grew at an average rate of 3.2% per year.

Faith-based money represents our fervent hope our government, specifically the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and Congress, will do whatever necessary to keep history's greatest confidence game - our economic system - alive and well. This game only works if there are players at the table who will be willing to buy our debt and finance our continued deficits.

The annual surplus of collections minus payments of Social Security is borrowed by the government to finance its day-to-day operations. The government in turn gives its IOUs, in the form of Treasury bonds, to the Social Security system, which now holds considerably more than a trillion dollars worth of these obligations.

A tax cut financed by deficit spending is economically stimulative. Government revenues decline, but government spending is unchanged and personal spending or saving is increased, leaving the equation out of balance, to which increases in government borrowing to fund the shortfall are required for equilibrium. Economically there is no difference between a tax cut and increased government spending when both are financed by increasing national debt. It becomes merely a question of who or what is doing the spending: consumers or government.

Our current financial path is not sustainable, and it is up to us to make fundamental change.

IT IS A CHECKBOOK, NOT A SHELL GAME. Respect it as you would Tennessee basketball.

Peter G. Peterson Foundation

Anecdotal Economics

Energy Industry Today

East Tennessee for Sustainable Infrastructure

Going back to the economics blackboard?

Steven — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:46:23 EST

So, let me get this straight--after all this talk of needing to let the markets decide on how to distribute capital as efficiently as possible, getting government out of the way so that the effects of "trickle downn economics" can work their magic, we are now confronted with a situation where the people with all the money (the rich) are not prepared to risk any of it actually to invest in the economy, because of the awful choices that were made by their investment advisors and financiers, and the chronic lack of demand of a populace who can no longer make up for their declining incomes by taking out more loans (denied by the investment strike of the rich--see above). And we are told that the answer is for the state (the society at large as represented in its government) to step in and bail out everyone and invest huge sums in infrastructure and the like to stimulate and create demand in the economy.

"Free market" capitalism only seems to work until it does not, and then the state has to step in big-time to put right capitalism's obvious flaws (if it has been unwise enough to forget that capitalism always needs to be kept under control to avoid this dysfunction).

Now, whose theory was it that capitalism was fatally flawed because it expoited the workers (read: middle class) by not giving them a fair share of income compared to the owners of the means of production (read: the rich), thus immiserating them (relatively) and leaving them with too small a share of the pie to buy the goods that they produced? I believe it was a certain Karl Marx.

And whose answer to this conundrum was to get the state to make up the shortfall in demand by instituting large deficit-speanding and investment in public works? I believe it was John Maynard Keynes.

So when will the Harvard Business School be putting Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes back to the top of the syllabus of their Economics 101 and Government 101--and deleting the "trickle-down" lot?

Currency Power

Blake from Sacramento, CA — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:13:20 EST

Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 gives Congress the power "to coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof."

What are they waiting for?

Impending $60 Trillion Disaster - Should The Government Simply Cancel all the "Naked CDS" Contracts?

PDSimic — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:42:26 EST

It would be interesting to know what percent of the AIG "loss" is attributed to the "naked CDS" contracts, the ones where the buyers of insurance where speculators with no real exposure to the CDS reference debt? In another words, how much of its "loss" is simply a gambling paper "loss" due to their contractual obligation to pay the CDS speculators their gambling "wins"?

The Credit Default Swaps - The Impending $60 Trillion Disaster and What our Government Should Do About it

PDSimic — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 20:31:30 EST

Original Article: The Real Reason for the Global Financial Crisis…the Story No One’s Talking About

Comment: PDSimic

The fundamental point seems that the CDS, being an unregulated OTC instrument, could have been entered as a way to bet on a default of some reference debt obligation to which the “protection” buyer had no economic exposure. While this is outrageous, there is a good news too. The good news is that speculators, not having a real exposure to the reference debt obligation can not possibly claim any real loss in the case of default of either insurance company or the reference debt obligation. All they could claim is a loss of opportunity to profit enormously from a successful bet that should never been allowed in the first place.

Some Recent Thoughts I Had on This Economic Crisis (10/12/2008)

Stephen Lee — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:55:33 EST

With the passage of nearly one month, this is a look back at my thoughts about solving the global financial crisis.

1. Secure and stabilize the mortgage payments by homeowners unable to pay. Federal government should force the mortgage lenders to write down the mortgage principal to reasonable value and offer current interest rate (i.e., take their loss for their stupidity to loan above reasonable values) and give a second mortgage to the homerowners with deferred payments. Idea is to enable these homeowners to hold on to their homes and continue to pay at their maximum ability. Eventually they will have to pay the government back. Restoring sustainable payments by these homeowners will stabilize the values of the "toxic" financial papers, instead of "mark to market" value of zero.

2. Federal government can inject capital into failing banks as equity investment and lower the reserve % on bank deposits for a 6 month emergency period, so that the banks can start lending more money with the same deposits. This is Soros' idea also.

3. Regulate and reform the rating agencies so that there is confidence in the market about the ratings of different financial papers from different issuers (Step in to nationalize them temporarily if necessary).

4. Develop a massive global database of all the toxic financial papers, tracing their relationships to all the companies and the subrpime mortage lenders and borrowers. This is provide transparency and certainty about the actual financial soundness of all companies involved with this financial crisis. With clarity, transparency and certainty, the sound and the unsound companies will be separated and ratings can be restored.

5. Change the mindset of all Americans, starting from the President, to act responsibly as a global citizen, and spend within the means. Raise taxes, cut spending, and be willing to work hard and settle for a lower standard of living.

Did George W. Bush Suspend the “Laws of Arithmetic”?

mathpol — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:03:38 EST

“It’s a Time to Listen, and to Obey the Laws of Arithmetic” is the title of an article in today’s New York Times by Harvard Professor Gregory Mankiw, who was chairman of President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers from 2003 to 2005. The article is incredibly patronizing and condescending. Here is the letter I sent to the Times.

I think it was very thoughtful of Gregory Mankiw, Harvard Professor and former Bush economic adviser, to give his patronizing little lecture to President-Elect Obama about how he should listen to his economic advisors, stating that "[t]hey will often give advice quite different from what will be coming from the Congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. To make sure the views of economic advisers are heard, they should have offices close to the Oval Office. The chief of staff should invite them to all the relevant meetings."

Professor Mankiw's column leads me to ask: Where was he while George W. Bush was busy bankrupting the country? Did he give Bush any lectures about obeying the "laws of arithmetic", or were these laws suspended after 9/11, along with parts of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?

(end of letter)

Talk about being an elitist! Some say Obama is one, but Mankiw certainly wasn’t talking to him “elitist to elitist” I especially liked the part about the proximity of the economic advisers’ offices to the Oval Office. Vice President Cheney’s office isn’t even in the White House, and the adviser Bush says he listens to the most is located somewhere in Heaven.

Spread the Wealth misinterpreted

Paul from Saint Cloud, MN — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 13:52:06 EST

I recently received an email from a friend that revealed the ignorance and impressionable nature of many of the American people. It was a satirical rant about how someone applied their own theory of "Spread the Wealth" and they were just so very proud of themselves. Here is my response.....

CHANGE WE NEED TOO!

Francesco Errante — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:31:55 EST

Heart felt congratulations to Mr. Barack Hussain Obama the 44th President of the United States of America.

In the hope that his presidency will help making this planet a better place!

Francesco Errante

www.Radiondistics.com

Flow-Up Economics

urartdood — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:27:55 EST

I have posted my first Blog on this site (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/glennmcdaniel), but will also post it on my website - urartdood.com

Poverty, hunger, homelessness haunt US: China's report

An Individual representing Free Speech — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 02:41:34 EST

Poverty, hunger and homelessness have been haunting the United States, the world richest country, according to the Human Rights Record of the United States in 2004.

The report, released by the Information Office of China's State Council on Thursday, said the United States refuses to ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights and took negative attitude to the economic, social and cultural rights of the laborers.

Redistribution of Wealth

Ian — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 02:34:36 EDT

I think I have it figured out.
Redistribution of wealth
Yesterday on my way to lunch at Chili's, I passed one of the homeless guysin that area, with a sign that read 'Vote Obama, I need the money.' Once inthe Chili's my waiter had on a 'Obama 08' tee shirt.
When the bill came, I decided not to tip the waiter and explained to himwhile he had given me exceptional service, that his tee shirt made me feelhe obviously believes in Senator Obama's plan to redistribute the wealth.I told him I was going to redistribute his tip to someone that I deemed morein need--the homeless guy outside. He stood there in disbelief and angrilystormed away.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $3 and told him to thank the waiterinside, as I had decided he could use the money more. The homeless guylooked at me in disbelief but seemed grateful.
As I got in my truck, I realized this rather unscientific redistributionexperiment had left the homeless guy quite happy for the money he did notearn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he didearn. Well, I guess this redistribution of wealth is going to take a whileto catch on with those doing the work....

McCains Plan : Extend Bush taxcuts for the rich and eliminate working class programs

RK — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:14:06 EDT

So I turn on the TV, and yet again I hear John McCain (silver spoon in mouth) uttering the same old Republican ideology, or what an educated and free thinking person might call "shoveling the crap" in mass to a small group of supporters. "Were going to cut taxes", well under McCains plan the wealthy can continue to enjoy the same benefits they had under George Bush, and "Were going to cut spending", and the working class can enjoy the same pain and suffering they have enjoyed under George Bush, with even more cuts in essential services and programs. McCain is the "Great Redistributor of Middle Class Wealth", the Republicans live under a simple formula...

Cut Taxes on Rich + (Use working class money to subsidize rich + Cut working class services)

There you have it the "Republican equation in America". All Bushies and McCainites have to do is sell their campaign as cutting taxes and spending using vagueness, misinformation, and lies, they have to make it sound like your getting a deal, and life will be good, but we know different. There is money for Wars, money for Wall Street, but have you looked at Main Street ? Main Street doesn't look like it once did. Abandoned and foreclosed homes, failed and exported businesses, crumbling infrastructure, rising crime and homelessness. Look what the GOP did to Main Street, you barely recognize it after eight years of Bush economics, so ask yourself, do we want to give Bush economics four more years ?, because John McCain's lies, are George Bush's lies, they share the same morality, values, and economic theory, they roam in the same circle of friends, and they use the same economic equation. A vote for John McCain is a vote against the middle class, and an extension of crisis after crisis. Vote for CHANGE and send John McCain back to his multimillion dollar lifestyle in Arizona.

Current Economics 101

Karma1 — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:02:10 EDT

Sunset JAGTRRA in the first 100 days.
   In a nutshell, JAGTRRA forced the bulk of the responsibility of financing this country to the working class, for example, even today, the top {W-2} wage earners can pay up to 35% of their income to taxes. Where literally, those who live solely off of dividend and cap gain income, at the highest rates pay only 15% on that type of income. Let’s simply admit income is income, whether earned as wages, or earned on investments, and should bear equal tax burdens. It was to sunset in 2008 anyway. I vehemently suggest SUNSET JAGTRRA! This would barely increase taxes for the working class if at all, as their dividend income and cap gain income (if there are any this year,) is nearly completely acquired via IRAs, 401Ks, and Pensions and so being, not taxable…… at all!
   In 2003, A letter signed by about 450 of the nation’s top economists, warned President Bush about his tax plan with the following words: “passing these tax cuts will worsen the long-term budget outlook, adding to the nation’s projected chronic deficits. This fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income.”
   If we indeed did not have a looming debt over our heads, there may not be a need to change the tax structures. HOWEVER, President Bush, having not an iota of economic plausibility, having bankrupted several of his own companies, has created a woeful economic state in the U.S.   I would agree with McCain who questions the need for increased taxation. But the truth remains that the U.S. economy in four more years at the current rate of indebtedness, loss in jobs, and tax base; will not be able to borrow enough money to fill its greed! And Socialism will be imposed by hook or by crook, mandated by the majority of Americans who will have nothing and will be willing to physically spread the wealth, with or without the governments‘ help.
   It is time that the top income earners paid it‘s fair share of the national debt. The wisest of economists in this country foresaw the problem, urged a change of direction and their predictions have proved true. It is time to make the playing field even again, and not in a lop-sided sinking ship in favor of the most wealthy. This is not Socialism, this is FAIR TAXATION, with REPRESENTATION, APPLIED TO ALL AMERICAN PEOPLE LIVING ON AN INCOME!!!

Warren Buffett for spreading the wealth

Gian Pablo — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:22:48 EDT

Fascinating interview with Warren Buffett in the NY times, a couple of years ago.

This quote from Mr. Buffett stands out: “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

As I mention in my own blog, this statement is literally true: the wealthy, allied with the Bush regime, have literally devastated the middle class in a war.

When someone accuses Obama of being "socialist", ask them what the word is for taking wealth from the poor and the middle class, and giving it to the wealthy, which is what Bush has done and McCain will do?

Here's a great graphical comparison of the Obama and McCain tax plans that lays out pretty clearly.

My Mind Progresses as my Body Regresses--What's Up With That?

Robbrian — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:29:39 EDT

Bon Mots and other favorite word compilations Thu 1/17/2008 7:46 AM Reading List "Under capitalism, man exploits man.
Under communism, it's just the opposite."J.K.GalbraithOver the past fifty years this incomplete list of my favorite books reveals the progression in my political and economic preferences. I've included links for those of you with different persuasions but sufficiently open minded to integrate differing points of view.

Mindset of Excess: MBA Education

Hope4Unity — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:30:16 EDT

Dr. Kamran Mofid, Economist and Founder of Globalisation for the Common Good Initiative:

Re: When it came to the crunch, MBAs didn't help

In an article in today's Observer (26 October 2008), Simon Caulkin, management editor, reflects on the MBA programmes, teachings and their contributions to the current global financial crisis. Caulkin begins his reflection as follows: "It's not just in finance that the inquests have begun. What part have the business schools and business academics played in the implosion of the world's banking system? That was the question posed in a letter to the Financial Times last week by Nottingham University Business School's Professor Ken Starkey. Hedge funds, private equity, investment banking, venture capital and consulting - the high priesthood of financial capitalism - were overwhelmingly MBAs' preferred job destinations, he noted. Now the schools needed to 'reflect on the role of the MBA and MBAs in the carnage of Wall Street' and consider 'how management education has contributed to the mindset that has led to the excesses of the last two decades'".

Caulkin then follows his argument by highlighting a few more other professors from other business schools, notably Professor James Fleck, dean of The Open University Business School and Professor Martin Parker of Leicester School of Management who have questioned the spirit of their teachings in the face of the current crisis.

I salute all these and other academics for their courage and honesty in speaking out against the inhumanity and injustices of neo-classical economics and asking for new models and theories of teaching. This is all well and good. But this kind of self criticism, however welcomed and timely, is mostly done post-crisis. We should all note that there were many academics, economists, including myself and others who have been asking fundamental questions about these MBA programmes and courses. Sadly it seems that we were not listened to.

Socialism Just Around the Corner..... Really???

Karma1 — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:10:15 EDT

A few things John McCain has markedly improved upon in this election season, is name calling, whining, and maligning fresh ideas from the Obama campaign. There is a document on the Obama/Biden website, “The Blueprint for Change.” It’s a 35 page outline that lays out Senator Obama’s “Plan for America.” No where in the entire document do I see, or get the flavor for a movement to classic Marxist Socialism. Unless, of course, you don’t want Social Security stabilized, or the Medicare/Medicaid programs put back together from it’s current slice and dice disarray.
On the other side of the coin, however, I would say that looking back at the last 8 years, and all of the turmoil associated from 2001 to the present, we live in a state closely related to Totalitarian-Fascism….. I would guardedly say, as close as this nation has ever been so ensnared. Given the option, without apology, the Republican machine would love an unopposed single party political system, with ultimate control over economic and social life. Inherently within the Republican Party is the notion that a centralized control of business, repression of all opposition, and extreme theocratic-nationalism represent the penultimate goal of this nation.
At the time of the attacks on 9/11/2001, the two nationally elected leaders of this country, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney allowed the perpetrators of 9/11 to attack our borders. This is a right judgment, because the phone log records show that no orders to defend were given to the able and ready U.S. Air Force until after they could NOT be effective! And from that point forward, through today, the Republican Machine has disemboweled personal freedom after personal freedom while we sat by hopelessly watching. But tell me how many plans have been thwarted, how many arrests made of those overheard on the phone lines plotting against us??? NOT A ONE, but control us they do.
This is the party of John McCain, and this is the machine that would have him as their new hand puppet, as they continue to sweep in for the ultimate control. This is the true plan and party line: one political party, no opposition, the rich getting richer, the middle class diminishing, and the establishment of a fascist theocratic nation.

Respectfully submitted,

Scott Draper

A New Deal for America

Kelly from Raleigh, NC — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:54:17 EDT

A New Deal for America

“Throughout the nation men and women, forgotten in the political philosphy of the Government, look to us here for guidance and for more equitable opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth… I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people. This is more than a political campaign. It is a call to arms.” Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his speech accepting the Democratic Nomination for President, 1932

In 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt offered a New Deal, a series of programs over the course of three years that lifted America out of The Great Depression. In 2009, presented with an economic crisis, America is poised to receive a 21st century New Deal. With overwhelming majorities in the House, filibuster or near filibuster proof numbers in the Senate, and an Obama White House, the Democratic Party will be enabled to present bold and expansive policy and remedy. Obviously, Democrats greet this with joy, Republicans with dread. Obama is poised to be a 21st century FDR, the type of leader who not just leads, but transforms.

America’s economic system is crumbling under internal and external transformative pressure. The emergence of the global economy has converged with decades of governing philosophy to bring our economy to the brink over the last few weeks. Conservatism has deregulated entire pillars of industry: banking, finance, industrial, utilities, telecommunications, and on, and on. At the same time, American capitalism has run unfettered, spilling out into the global economy for more and more economic gain. Cheap labor in China and India, free trade agreements, lowering import tariffs, complex tax structures (including but not limited to off shore tax shelters) have eroded the very foundation of America’s economic system: consumerism. More importantly we have lost hope in the American dream of each generation doing better than that before.

In the past month, government has acted with precipitance of judgment, akin to patching holes as the levy fails. Conservative principles, built on the bedrock of laissez faire governing principles, has more than washed away, it has drowned. What now exists of conservatism is a paradox. Government can assist and grant favor to corporations and to the wealthy. However, the poor, disadvantaged, and “the least among us” must pull themselves up by the proverbial bootstrap. Through inconsistency, conservatism has failed in its principles. As a governing idea, faced with economic reality, it has been proven incapable.

The twenty first century’s New Deal stands ready to fill the void. A confluence of necessity, gravity and an eager populace is driving this election in the Democratic column. Obama's plan for America is nothing short of a New Deal, and he starts with an economy that, albeit weakened, is in far better shape than in 1933. The New Deal of the 1930’s left the nation with lasting institutions and programs, things today we take for granted. These economic pillars are so ingrained in our economy that we could not function effectively without them. Social Security, the FDIC, the SEC, and the Tennessee Valley Authority were all specific government programs addressing weaknesses and failure in the banking system, retirement, stock and trade, job growth and infrastructure. Like FDR, Obama is proposing broad and sweeping answers for our ailing nation.

The components of Obama’s plan addresses all major the major weaknesses in our economic system. We will make major investments in our infrastructure, which, in many regions, is rapidly depreciating. The bridge collapse in Minnesota is a glaring example of the urgent need for this investment. Many new corporate regulations, including tax and oversight will address job loss, greed, mismanagement, and fraud. The result will be fairer capitalism, consumer protection, safer opportunities for investment, and protection of American workers and their jobs. He proposes new investment and government programs for research and development to address energy independence. These programs will stimulate the economy, produce job growth, and increase average salaries. Finally, Obama will steer America toward universal healthcare.

The New Deal was not without controversy, and the charges that reverberated then are the same as the charges leveled today. Americans are warned of plans to “redistribute wealth.” In this case, socialism is equated to laudable efforts to level the playing field and create greater inclusiveness in our economic prosperity. Labeling progressive and liberal economic policy as socialism does not reverberate among voters younger than 50. In a harsh economic crisis, among any age bracket, the scare tactics fall flat. The Red Scare of today is more of a whimper, ineffective and not remotely convincing.

Obama’s New Deal creates an America that looks like the America that emerged after World War II: strong, renewed, and influential. Prosperity flows and new pillars of economic might are erected. America is a more leveraged negotiator in the global economy. Workers gain economically, and wages rise. Government jump starts new industries, jobs and skill sets that tackle major environmental dilemmas and fossil fuel dependency. Millions of new workers rebuild the roads and bridges, as well as mass transit systems for our cities. Foundations of education at the primary, secondary and collegiate levels train visionaries that restore our place as the world’s innovator. Corporations reap the benefit of a consumer empowered with more savings and increased spending power. Utopia, it is not, but America is back on its “path towards perfection.”

The Issues, Neatly and Concisely

Karma1 — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:38:37 EDT

A comparison of the websites of Senators Barack Obama and John McCain makes clear which candidate has thoughtfully considered the issues of our times and is offering plausible solutions. One website has a well-defined 33-page plan; the other has a hunt-and-peck feature that leads to anecdotal paragraphs explaining some possible options.

We owe it to ourselves as voters to be educated and fact filled, to use logic and good sense in deciding this election. So, read, study, and learn. I promise you, the Republican Party is not the same as it was when grandpa was a Republican. Likewise, the Democratic Party is not the same as when you volunteered for it in high school. In 2008, the Republican Party stands steeped in and poised to continue its reckless behavior of deficit spending. The Democratic Party is ready to lead the way back to balanced budgets and treasury surpluses.

Maverick: Right Term, Wrong Definition.

Karma1 — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:33:49 EDT

The common definition of maverick in the U.S. and Canada is “an unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it.” If indeed this definition is what Senator McCain and Governor Palin refer to in their use of the term, then we should most absolutely fear McCain. Although he astonishingly asserts the untrue notion that Senator Obama got his political start in the living room of a terrorist, we can say that McCain was branded early in his own career by none other than the American financial terrorist, Charles Keating. Unfortunately, I believe his inability to focus on current problems with our economy and the world economy as a whole is substantially due to two points: McCain has little to no conceptualization of economic forecasting or implementation, and I sadly guess that somewhere on his hide is branded CK, not meaning Calvin Klein.

Elitism, Ingroups and Social Identity Theory

An Individual representing Free Speech — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:00:11 EDT

When you use the English language, when I say, "The Elitists" people on average think, "Rich People that Put Themselves Above us All.". But, then they pick up the dictionary, and look at word usage, and it's like listening to a street gang member demand, "Respect" and when they've finished defining what they really want, it's either control or consideration.

Economic Strategy: Keeping the Game Going

Delray Lauren — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:04:29 EDT

McCain is doing what I expected, fighting back the growing Obama tide of change by reverting to the old Republican playbook of flawed economic reasoning and accusations of socialism. McCain reverts to that because they are more effective at appealing to moderates than any Ayers Robocall. Here is an argument to help counter what amounts to economic fear-mongering by those misguided conservatives who will not let go of their Reaganomics textbooks.

The reason that the McCain plan should not be implemented has nothing to do with “fairness” or “spreading the wealth” as a principle of income redistribution for the sake of some sort of “socialism”, it is a real and necessary strategy to build a strong, solid economy. Why? It all comes back to jobs.

Giving more money to a big company is not going to encourage them to hire more people if that company doesn’t have the customers to sell their products to. They’re not going to just have a few extra sales people or cashiers or waitpersons, cooks, or…yes, even plumbers…. on their staff just sitting around with nothing to do because their customers don’t have the money to purchase their products or use their services. But that’s what Trickle-Down theory of economics tells us will happen. That if we give more money to the top echelons of the economy that the money will trickle down to everyone else.

In times of economic crisis like these, we need to build our economy from the ground up. American consumers need to know they can make their mortgage payment and pay for health care or the education of their children…and then they will spend the money that will get the economy back on track. When the American people have confidence in their economy and their personal situation, then they will spend money which will lead to an increase in sales for that company which will then hire more sales people, cashiers, waitpersons, cooks and plumbers.

My favorite analogy is from FDR’s economic advisor who likened the economy to a poker game. When all the money is concentrated in the hands of one player, the only way for the game to continue is for that player to lend money to the other players. When credit runs out, the game ends. That is what we got to see unfold these last couple of months. The player with the most can take pleasure in the fact that they have the most chips, but the game is done. The chips are not worth as much to the winning player since there is nothing to use them for, and the losing players are destitute and out of the game entirely. In the case of our economy, we cannot let that happen. We do not want the game to end. We need the game to go on and on and on for the sake of all the players and citizens involved. To get the game moving again the house, or in this case the government, has two choices: they give money to the richest player so they can lend money to others, causing the poor players to fall even further in the hole with ever-escalating debt….or the house can give the poorer players some chips directly. Those poorer players can then make the decision to pay down their debt and improve the overall credit situation of the game/economy or they can keep playing and hope to generate more chips on their own. The economy churns again and the players are all happy.

For the last 8 years we’ve seen policies that gave the chips to the wealthy players. Instead of those players putting the money back into the economy, there has been an unprecedented surge in the industries that cater to the wealthiest citizens and businesses: the financial services industry and real estate. The 90’s had the Internet and Bio Tech booms and bubbles that burst, but after the correction we were still left with progress and innovation. The Republican economic policies that Bush implemented and McCain wants to double-down on, have led to booms in industries that center on the buying and selling of financial “products”….that is, the buying and selling of MONEY. Instead of innovation in science, in energy, or something that furthers the progress of humanity, the trickle-down theory leads to the hoarding of wealth and improvements in areas of the economy that have little benefit to the overall economy of the country or the world.

Our economy was so imbalanced that the “correction” of the financial services industry brought the entire world economy to its knees. Credit was the main thing keeping the economy growing, and when that ran out…the game was over. We have seen what happens with the Bush/McCain economic policies. Doing more of the same to correct the problem will not work. It is time that the house try a different approach.

Just for fun: What if Keith Olbermann interviewed John McCain?

Martin Edwin "Mick" from Churchton, MD — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:28:51 EDT

“A FEW GOOD, ALMOST LUCID, MOMENTS”

KEITH OLBERMANN PLAYS ‘HARDBALL’ WITH JOHN MCCAIN, WHO’S DOWN FOR THE COUNT

JOHN MCCAIN: You want answers?

KEITH OLBERMANN: I think I'm entitled to them.

JOHN MCCAIN: You want answers?

KEITH OLBERMANN: I want the truth!

JOHN MCCAIN: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has a certain, precious amount of wealthy people. And those wealthy people have the right to protect what they have, any way they can. If they don’t do it, who's gonna do it? You? You, Keith Olbermann? I, as their candidate, have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for those lower and middle classes and you curse the people who give them jobs. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that all those unemployed, underemployed and soon-to-be-unemployed people, while tragic, probably didn’t work very hard anyway. (Look at how little they earned compared to CEOs' salaries and their well-deserved golden parachutes!!!) And the existence of trickle down Republican economics, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, is what has raised that free market tide so that all boats, big and small, could float...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about these facts, like with your friends at Georgetown parties, you want me on call. You need me on call.

We use phrases like “loose regulations, squishy credit lines and a warm place to count the profits” ...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending our captains of industry. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who still rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very economic bubble I helped George Bush to provide, then questions the manner in which we provided it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you grow some patriotic gonads and eschew socialism. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

KEITH OLBERMANN: Did you support George Bush and all his works?

JOHN MCCAIN: (quietly) I did the job that the Republican Party sent me to do.

KEITH OLBERMANN: Did you support George Bush and his economic policies?

JOHN MCCAIN: You're goddamn right I did!!

(c)

John Mc Cain, and raising Property Values

An Individual representing Free Speech — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:13:03 EDT

Anyone in realestate or property management knows that rent almost always parallels mortgage payments, and when property values increase, the rent goes up. If you're worried about the Economy, you can't worry about just one of the many markets, like Realestate alone.

Economic Terrorism of the U.S. Citizens

Karma1 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:38:23 EDT

Terrorism September 2008 was reminiscent of September 2001, except that the terrorists this time, are home grown. We have this peculiar connotation of a terrorist, who is dark complexioned, scruffy faced, with big brown eyes, and routinely speaks a language most Americans don’t understand. However the definition of a terrorist is: “a method of governing, which creates a feeling, instance, or cause of intense fear.
Terrorists don’t require weapons, nuclear arsenals, or biological weaponry to produce intense fear. The last three weeks, showed the terror in the eyes of the American people, watching their lives’ savings dwindle, their corporate sponsored 401Ks and personal IRAs plummet. Locally, we saw one of the most horrific responses to this intense fear, as a law abiding citizen donned a self-inflicted bullet wound, as the Sherriff’s office came to foreclose the property.
President Reagan, and Presidents Bush merely became hand puppets of a greedy, well oiled machine, willing to amass wealth for themselves and their “Old Boy” networks. Using the Trickle Down Economic Theory, their slogan is “great wealth by any means.” For this sick, mindless set, there are no morals, no decency, and by no means any compassion. These thieves hide behind a cross, while changing money in their temple.
Under the ravenous auspices of this canine class duo, Bush and Cheney, two very destructive reforms were introduced in 2003; JAGTRRA, the “Job and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act,” and a curtailment of the Anti-Predatory Lending Laws, which all 50 states had enacted by 2003.
JAGTRRA, which most imposingly shifted the tax burden on to the working class, and well away from the wealthiest Americans, left the tax rate on wage earners as high as 35%. But correspondingly, reduced the highest tax rate of the wealthy who don’t earn income on a W-2, but earn income through dividends, gains, and interest, to a sickeningly level of 10% - 15%.
So fearful of the foreseeable economic doom, (terror) wrapped up in this tax reform bill, a letter signed by about 450 tax economists was sent to President Bush in 2003. This letter contested, “this fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income.”
We have seen the disastrous fall out of this turn in economic idiocy. To have engaged the largest federal government in the entire history of the United States, a military drain of $10+ billion per month, and now a falling Gross Domestic Product, we cannot continue to merely tax the working class of people, and not increase the rate of taxation of the wealthiest to the same rates the working class pays. Income is income, whether it is earned by real work, or it is earned as dividends, interest and gains. And it must all be taxed equally.
Though the wealthy whine about this because they have so much to be taxed, but that’s not true, the taxes are not based on the values of assets, rather on the income gained on those assets. Rather, it taxes the increase of their wealth which they did nothing to acquire. Let us not forget this single very important point, that those who are the wealthiest have the most to loose if the markets are not regulated, if this nation is invaded, or if civil unrest became the resultant…..

Yes, terrorists are at work in this country, in its capitol, in its very White House. But we don’t think of terrorism in that vain. But it exists, it is in control, and it apologizes for nothing. Its only motto is “feed my greed.”

jobs, taxes, jobs, social security, jobs, baby boomers, jobs, pork, middle class, jobs, working peole, jobs, special interests, jobs,

Robert from Absecon, NJ — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:52:37 EDT

The rampant corruption - yes, corruption, let's call it what it is - in Washington must end, and it must end now. The corporate plunderers and their puppet politicians have, literally, bled this great nation dry. Our nation's capital has been nothing less than a porkfest picnic ground for many years, and through a number of administrations (of both major parties). We're not just talking about "earmarks", or even "corporate welfare". These are both parts of the big picture, but let's not forget government an defense cotracts, or the actual legislative acts that pander to "special interests". Government has become a "for profit" business.....for private, not public, profit. This must stop, and it must stop now, or the America we grew up in, the America we love, will be just a memory.

We choose to believe, and pray, that Barak will be different, will stay true. He claims to represent the majority of the people, not the majority of the wealth. God, please let it be so. The American majority cannot wait another four years for change. This is the truth that we, the people, know all too well, as our ability to make (the most essential) ends meet has all but disappeared, into the pockets of the "porkers".

But, there remains the question of just how deeply Barak understands our middle class plight. He promises tax breaks, but let's be honest. Most of us would happily pay more taxes, when it would mean that we are earning more. Senator Obama, the people's plight is not about taxes, it's about our incomes. A 15% tax break, for most families, is worth two weeks of medical insurance, maybe. And, at the rate that medical costs are rising, it will be worth two days insurance by the time your tax break is legislated. Because our incomes are in decline, savings are down (or gone), while costs (of essentials) are skyrocketing, and debt (incurred to pay the skyrocketing cost of essentials) is staggering.

We, the working majority of Americans, need jobs. Good, stable jobs that provide living wages. Most of the employment growth has been in the "service sector". While we're being "real", let's also be realistic. The only significant job creation in this country has been in poverty level jobs. Yes, these jobs are necessary.....for kids who need money for their Friday night dates. But, staying "real", these jobs can't begin to support a family, even a two parent family with both parents working two full time jobs. It just ain't gonna happen. Not here, not now.

We need jobs, real jobs. And, we need to fill them with real people. The working people of today's America. The displaced, the downsized, the disenfranchised. These are the people who must be trained for "new" jobs.

Barak, if you could take a survey of all the "baby boomers" who are nearing "retirement" age, you'll find a very, very large percentage have been herein described. They/we are desperate, with falling incomes or unemployment, no savings, and massive indebtedness. Retirement isn't/won't be an option, unless/until forced by failing health.

For them/us, social security looks simultaneously like a supplimental income and a curse. The current laws assume that they/we will have adequate savings when we begin collecting. But they/we don't. And, the pittance allowed (before benefits are penalized) won't be enough.

I am a 59 year old married man. I have a grown son, but I also have a baby daughter who will soon be 2. She will graduate high school (and begin college) when I am 75. I am now earning the same amount (in actual dollars) as I was in the 1970's. My health is failing (which I can't afford because I'm earning 1970's money). I have no savings (because I'm earning 1970's money). I have far too much debt (because I'm earning 1970's money). A tax credit of 15%, or even 100%, isn't going to fix the problem, because I'm earning 1970's money.

I, and the working people of America, of whom I'm sadly representative, are not earning wages that meet the needs of the 21st century. This, Senator Barak Obama, is the problem that must be immediately addressed. We pray you understand, and put our faith in you.

please share this with your undecided & Republican friends

Jonathan — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:34:08 EDT

My sister sent this e-mail today describing why she supports Obama and opposes McCain. I think it is thorough and succinct enough to share it with everyone.

180* Change Needed to Fix Economy!!

Karma1 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:24:39 EDT

At today's level of deficit spending, war expenditure, and the fall of the whole world economy, in four more years, there won't be enough money in the world to borrow to cover our {ass}ets.

Having worked over ten years as Tax Specialist for a brokerage firm, I know that these Mortgage-backed securities, {CMOs and REMICs} were a growing favorite investment when more traditional interest bearing CDs, Treasuries, and Corporate bonds were offering falling interest rates. And annually I had probably 50-60 hour long phone calls from clients' accountants regarding many of the aspects of the tax reporting that is inherent in these obnoxious things. But it wasn't limited to Fannie Mae and Freddie-Mac; Bank of America, Chase Manhattan, Citigroup, Countrywide, and others were also very involved.

While there is definitely some undeniable truth to the concept that if credit is made available to a wider group of people, and to some degree, that was a factor in this whole financial crisis, that is merely a small part of the mix. The further, and indisputable truth is that President Geo W Bush played a much heavier hand to protect his greedy banker allies than the public will ever know.

Fact 1) At the federal level, during the 90's there were changes made to relax "some" laws for obtaining federally backed mortgages guaranteed via Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac, to open the market to a greater cross section of the population at large.

Fact 2) Realizing that there was dirty dealing going on between lenders and borrowers, ALL 50 STATES, between 1998 and 2003 had enacted laws to stop the act of predatory lending, and protect their citizens from the abuses that states' Attorneys General could already see happening against citizens.

Fact 3) in 2003, responding to the whining of his banker cronies, the Bush mis-administration by using an obscure rule that is written into the governance of the OCC, curtailed all 50 states from further enacting or enforcing their predatory lending legislation.

Fact 4) Also in 2003, before the enactment of the Job and Growth Tax reform and Recovery Act, JAGTRRA, a phenomenal list of who’s who in the world of economics, including 10 winners of the Noble Prize in Economics sent a letter to Bush, stating the following, “the 2003 Bush tax cuts will increase inequality and the budget deficit, decreasing the ability of the U.S. government to fund essential services, while failing to produce economic growth.
Passing these tax cuts will worsen the long-term budget outlook, adding to the nation’s projected chronic deficits. This fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income.”

This means that all of the U.S. citizens, who work and pay the tax burden for this nation, and were subject to these predatory lenders, {these lenders owned by the largest banking institutions in the nation} were left in the unconscionable hands of the amoral banking institutions…. and the jaws of the immoral bankers and loan originators, handsomely handed over by the derelict president, George W Bush!!! There by, poisoning the pools of REMIC securities that were made available to investors, via FNMA, Freddie-MAC, Countrywide, and countless other Real Estate Conduit businesses. These investment conduits then slithered their way into thousands of mutual funds, both open ended and closed ended, poisoning our retirement sources: IRAs, and 401Ks and eventually creating a drought in the credit system, even to the level of municipal bonds.

Yes, the 50 states unanimously decided to act and save the consumers from these wolves; and the mis-administration down trod those legislative protections and allowed the full pack of wolves to surround the herd of sheep. 450 leading Economists stood up and said JAGTRRA would bring more harm in the end, but Bush wouldn’t listen. The shame began in the arrogance of an ignorant president, the greed of Wall Street CEOs and bankers, continued in the ignorance of the borrowers, was stopped by the states, and was subsequently reinstituted by President Bush.

Respectfully Submitted,

McCain and Economics

Karma1 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:18:15 EDT

McCain and Economics Dated April 24th, 2008

Let’s just start by saying this is not the Senator’s strong suit and his economic strategy is the, equivalent of the current administrations mindless, laissez-faire, game of financial Russian roulette, as it applies to the vast majority of Americans.

Simply, Senator McCain wants to maintain the current status quo. In his long anticipated presentation about the U.S. economy, McCain had this to say:

He was confident about America 's economic future. "The fundamentals of our economy are strong," he insisted. This to me raises serious concern about his grasp on reality. It also causes me to wonder if candidates running for the office of the President of the United States , who are aged 65 or older should be required to undergo a battery of tests, used to determine if an individual is in any stage of dementia. Not to imply all those over 65 are in such stages. But the job is leader of the free world, commander in chief, etc.

The truth is, the current laissez-faire economic policy is a mere continuation of the Regan era {prime example of one who should have been tested for dementia} “Trickle Down Theory.” However, what they didn’t tell the American people in the 1980’s, is that the “Trickle Down Theory” is best defined by the following: The vast wealth of this nation trickles down to the poor and middle class, while at the same time gushes up to the benefit of the top 5% of the richest Americans.

But then those magical words the GOP so loves to use were uttered. McCain indicated that the Democratic candidates would immediately return to their practice of “tax and spend,” and hide that economic policy under the guise of hope. Not so Senator McCain, the beauty of laissez-faire economics, at least in this case, is the sunset provision. In 2010, the tax rates automatically revert to their 2003 levels, in which case the rich will have to pay taxes again. The Democrats are no longer the tax and spend party. They have taken over where the Republicans have failed and have become the party of fiscal responsibility, where the Republicans now remain the "debt and spend party."

Scott Draper
140 Hickory Rd, Akron , OH 44333 330-666-4152

Resources You Can Use Today to Help Elect Obama

Martin Dudziak — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:09:49 EDT

OK, Folks, there are plenty of resources I and some associates and colleagues have assembled.

All of this and more (just contact me by email or phone) can be used openly and publicly.

Please give credit for quotations, please be careful on editing and using concept material and facts, and please Be Aware of How the McCain-Palin and Undecided People THINK. Our biggest challenge is in Proper Means of Outreach and Communications - finding the right way past the prjudices, predispositions, "and closed minds". It can be done! You just need to get into the right mental frame for the particular person and address what are their concerns.

Some are going to be hopeless, absolutely shut and closed. Well, we are not likely to succeed right now, October 2008, with die-hard racists and the far-right. What we need to do is work on the people can be reached with attentive communications, and with Facts, Facts, Facts.

So, here is my main Essay on Why Obama+Biden in 2008 and Why it is so Important that this Team wins and not the other guys:

http://forteplan.com/obama.pdf or http://forteplan.com/obama.doc

Besides this, there are other resources, and I am putting them into this directory, and you can download them. These are mostly Facts, including graphs, about things concerning USA and the World, also some essays from my 2006 campaign against the "Bush-Lieutenant" Eric Cantor (R-VA), and you should be able to make use of some of this data.

Go to http://forteplan.com/obama

There are or will be more material including folders with names of people that perhaps You can reach and contact better than me.

Finally, there is this blog, not well managed of late because of shorftage of time, but full of good resources: http://forteplan.com/isec/blog

Sincerely,

Dr. Martin J. Dudziak
martin@forteplan.com or martin.dudziak@gmail.com 747-847-5511 or 202-415-7295

Pump up Economics

Tim Schram — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:53:10 EDT

The conservatives have an easy to understand slogan for their economic philosophy "Trickle down Economics" and have labeled ours "Tax and Spend". It is time we came up with our own slogan for our philosophy and stop letting them stick us with a negative one. We should work on a new label for theirs as well. one that reflects its negative impact on the economy. Any suggestions?

I suggest "Pump up Economics" for our philosophy. When low to middle income households receive incentives and tax breaks they spend it. They cannot afford to shelter it overseas. This makes businesses more profitable causing them to expand and hire more people. As the businesses grow so does Wall Street encouraging capital investment. Everyone benefits as the money rises through the economy.

It is time to stop living off the scraps thrown down by the CEOs and large capital investors.And I agree with Senator Biden when he said it is our patriotic duty to pay taxes. We need a defense and infrastructure. It is only fair that those that benefit the most monetarily from these services pay the most to maintain them.

The 700 Billion Won't Help Unless.....

An Individual representing Free Speech — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:42:42 EDT

The 700 Billion won't help us unless, the entry level employees and the rest see a real wage increase that actually places the would be, minimum wage earner above the cost of living. Why, is simple, you don't have a market for anything that isn't just a shrinking population of rich people getting richer using inflation to make up for a lack of sales.

Joe the Super Awesome Plumber?

Economan — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:44 EDT

Ouch! How low will the Republican Party go? Planting a fake plumber at an Obama rally? Time for a little debunking. So it turns out, Joe isn't even a licensed plumber. He only earned $40,000 in 2006, and worst of all, owes $1,183 in back taxes. All of this is in the Toledo Blade report here. I think any journalist should dig deeper into this to see if in fact the GOP paid this liar to appear at the Obama rally and ask his inane question.

Let's look at the facts. In order for Joe the plumber to make a gross salary of $250,000... he would have to earn $684/per day and would have to work all 365 days in the year. Assuming he works 24 hours out of the day, he would need to make $28.54/hour. The median salary for a plumber with over 20 years of plumbing experience... a whopping $21.57

This would mean that even working for every waking second, Joe would need to make over the median wage of a very experienced plumber. Joe, sadly, has no license and little experience, bringing his median wage down to $16.58. Yes, plumbers seem to charge a lot, but, once you factor in their costs, materials, gas, worker wages, health insurance, etc. It really isn't as much as you think.

The blatant McCain trick here is to try to make everyone think that increasing taxes would somehow dampen the American dream and slow growth. So, a company that has the opportunity to make a lot of money would resist growing the business just to avoid paying more taxes? That has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Honestly... what economic textbook has anyone read that provides concrete evidence that lower taxes actually promote growth in the economy?! Poppycock, I say!

New (Web-based)Bank of the United States

Frederick from Evanston, IL — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:08:40 EDT

This post has been buried and not fully discussed so I am reposting it as the other fixes have not been very effective. The advantage of this plan is that it is not dependent on the behavior of the entrenched bankers to work but does give them an example and some friendly competition to get back to work. By using the records of the IRS we can devise a formula to set a limit on any American's bank card - that of the taxes he paid averaged over the past 5 years! Similarly we can project his ability to pay off a home loan. I do not believe this system should try to replace the private banks but rather provide a redundant failsafe so that the world's economy may go on under difficult circumstances. Please read the extended post for rest of the story...

Are We Ready to Step Up to the Challenge?

Uma — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 05:34:08 EDT

Greetings!

After watching the final presidential debate Wednesday night, the message was clear: it's time for people to step-up and accept the challenge of improving the quality instead of the quantity of our lives.

Economics is a big issue in America: commerce, trade and businesses of all types and the people who manage and work for them drives our lifestyles down the road toward the "American Dream." Now, watching the current financial drama unfold, the question is: "What has the American Dream become?"

Over the past few weeks, one word has threaded its way through almost every discussion: greed. The excesses that have brought us to this point in time where the lifestyles of many people is "one-step away from homelessness." Because individual and organizational greed has become the new lifestyle, glamorized and encouraged. Hoarding necessities while others do without. Finding pleasure in causing another person to lose their home or job. This is mindset of more people that you see in the news every day. The influence is spread throughout our daily lives like jam on bread; in the newspaper, on your mobile phone, on the Internet. The message being sent is all about "getting more."

The challenge we face now is the same one as in the past when balance needs to be restored. In the historical documents from almost every country, there have been similar events that produced the same type of result we are experiencing today.

The news headlines have been flashing warning signs of the impending financial crisis for some time, yet many individuals did not want to believe it could happen. But it has and now every adult individual, regardless of age, race, gender or position needs to adjust their thinking and behavior if we are going to improve the quality of life in America.

We are making a major decision to elect a leader to head this challenge: this will be our captain, our quarterback and our hero that shares our experience of being victorious once again. We are facing a common enemy, the destruction of the American lifestyle and its character of its people; intelligent, brave, educated, loyal, healthy, compassionate, trustworthy, enterprising, loving and faithful. What image would you prefer than this one?

The challenge is for us to move to a higher ground; there is enough for everyone, if we treat each other as we want to be treated, everyday in every way. Learn to live within your means. Simplify your lifestyle: what do you really need to be comfortable? How much food do you need to eat to be healthy? How many shoes and clothes are you wearing? Let's express our creativity and work in cooperation toward our mutual benefit: how is one person living alone going to maintain a $3,500, $2,500, $1,500 or $750 rental fee or mortgage payment? Are we going to allow our skepticism to prevent our progress?

Start with the little ones; our children are watching us. They want to see what we are going to do now, when a man who is attuned to our values needs our support to champion our cause. Are we going to cling to the fear and apathy that has become far too common with our generation? We must focus our attention on what we want for the change to take place. Let's talk about what we want in our lives instead of crying the blues about what's we don't like.

Look at the anger in our young people: they are exploding all around us, and there are many parents who are so busy working that they are not even aware of what's happening in their children's lives.Pay attention to them. Talk to them about their issues. Read a book with them, go to the park, library, museum, ballpark or theater. Change the language that you use with young people. There are several languages, although English is only the third most commonly spoken it has well over 900,000 words to use in addition to terms of profanity. Look at the big picture: what would you say if your daughter or son asked you: "Why didn't you DO something?

And what can you do? There are plenty of adults with unresolved issues; anger, disappointment, resentment and mistrust from past experiences. Seeking gratification in material possessions and generally not being satisfied once they have them. Take a look around your mind and see what your inner dialog is saying: is it working for you?

If we do not control our emotions, they will control us. Let's get a grip people, and show ourselves and others the respect we all deserve as human beings. Can we relate to each other honestly even when we are playing a game? Can we accept as men and women, that we all play games, but it's okay if we play fair?

This is a battle we have on our hands, and winning it will make better people of us as a result. But make no mistake, there are also people who are just as determined to win and keep things going in the direction started 8 years ago.

More than once in the last 20 years America has had a wake-up call that made it clear that every American does not agree with what we want. Power and money are two difficult things to manage well and most people will not give these away. Put yourself in their shoes and you will begin to see how things are going to get sticky before the quality of life improves.

It's time to step out of the victim role and step up to the role of victor, Let's be victors it for ourselves, ancestors, mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, brothers and sisters: our folks whoever they are. Let's be victors for the Creator. Let's work and elect Barack Obama in 20 days and then let's win this battle. I've stepped-up to the challenge, let me hear about you.

One Love,
Uma Sumeros

Heath Insurace - McCain-Bush Economics - Nobel Prize to Paul Krugman (from Bloomberg.com)

Doug from Fort Lauderdale, FL — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:07:49 EDT

ohn McCain is just carrying forward failed/flawed Republican/Bush policies for health insurance. Paul Krugman won the Nobel Prize for Economics: On Feb. 11, 2005, he referred to Bush as ``someone who takes food from the mouth of babes and gives the proceeds to his millionaire friends.'' On Jan. 22, 2007, Bush, with his plan to use tax credits to buy health insurance, is ``not even trying to hide his fundamental indifference to the plight of the less- fortunate,'' Krugman wrote. Here, once again, we can see that J

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aajJvdNTpNtc&refer=us

Typical Judgment: Apparently, I'm a Conspirator Against America

Ian — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:49:54 EDT

"You used to be cool man, but now you're part of the vast liberal conspiracy to ruin the country. Poor form man, poor form [sic]"

My email to friends and family

Chelsea66 — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 15:32:08 EDT

I put together the following email for my friends and family who are undecided about who they want for president, so I thought I'd post it here in case it inspires anyone else to do the same. Since I've been so passionately for Obama these past months I made the email as objective as possible so they'd actually listen to what I said. I've included McCain's political positions as well as Obama's on the three most important issues to me this election: Economy, Health Care, and Education. I passionately believe that once the noise from the spin machines and the mud throwing is cleared away, the policies of Barack Obama speak for themselves, and are very clearly the change that America needs to return to what we once were. Join with me in talking to your undecided friends and family members. Speak out as one voice advocating change!

Here it is:

Hey, I know I've been talking a whole lot about the election these days, but I really think that this election is a critical point to reverse some of the the disastrous policies under Bush.

Since I know it's hard to get the facts straight this election I wanted to send you some links to Obama's official positions on some of the most important issues:

-Economy: http://my.barackobama.com/EconomyFlyer
-Health Care: http://my.barackobama.com/HealthcareFlyer
-Education: http://my.barackobama.com/EducationFlyer

And in an effort at fairness, here are McCain's official positions as well. Information is critical to all of us and you all need to start paying attention to it if you haven't already:

-Economy: http://www.johnmccain.com/EconomyBriefing
-Health Care:http://www.johnmccain.com/HealthcareBriefing
-Education: http://www.johnmccain.com/EducationBriefing

Here's a cheat sheet for the candidates positions (with sources cited in case you don't believe them):
http://ofrecord.com/PolicyPositions

The election is coming up fast, and it's time you start doing some research and taking a stand.

P.S. If you want more information I also found the following from third party websites.

Here's WebMD's summary of the candidate's positions on health care (I couldn't find a comprehensive 3rd party position paper on the economy or education):
http://www.webmd.com/CompareCandidates

However, with respect to science education in this country I did find this:
http://www.sciencedebate2008.com/14Questions

And just for fun, a list of the biggest "whoppers" of this election season (site that is extremely trustworthy):
http://www.factcheck.org/TheWhoppersOf2008

From Left Field: A Path to a Stable Housing Market

Dameon — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 21:16:22 EDT

I attempt to fix the financial crisis on my own.

Tax Cuts to Corporations do not mean Job Creation in US

Unknown user — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:44:19 EDT

Senator John McCain keeps insisting that more tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations will create jobs in the US. This is not true.

There is no proof that tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations create jobs in the US? For example the wealthy can invest in a foreign emerging economy stocks or markets and corporations can use the money to build factories in China and combined with cheaper labor this adds up to even bigger profits. Being profitable and competitive is what corporations are all about. How does this affect US jobs or create US jobs? Has the US been losing jobs or creating jobs?

I would also like to know how the campaign contributions of Obama and McCain compare. I know that if I was wealth or a corporation I would probably support or endorse John McCain no matter what the effects on my country or fellow American citizen was. It's just business and about money right?

Energy Independence

DJ Chang — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:15:42 EDT

About Energy IndependenceThe United States is the leading economy on this planet. We consume more oil than the next 20 countries combined.
We're at war. Who is the enemy?
What's At Risk
Before we identify the enemy, let's understand what is at risk.

Oil prices have exploded. It costs a hundred dollars to fill the tank.
Food prices change daily. Costs to transport goods have been the change factor.
Industrial output is more expensive for the same reason.
The US is less competitive, resulting in loss of the dollar's purchasing power. We buy less with the same dollars.
Our dependence on imported oil endangers our national security.
Higher costs, fewer jobs - that's the current economy.

Even worse, energy consumption impacts the atmosphere. Whether global warming, melting the ice cap, or shifting the ecosystem, the uncertainty hurts the globe. Uncontrolled consumption is not the leadership image that we should project to the world - the billions more who are also eager to consume.
As long as consumption is not controlled, oil prices will continue to rise. Oil is a non-renewable, limited-supply product. The risks include economics, national security, and global stability. These are everyone's problems...

Seven Reasons to Support Obama

David from Las Vegas, NV — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:13:13 EDT

Below is an e-mail exchange I had with my mom. She's a McCain supporter and had forwarded an e-mail explaining why people were going to vote for McCain. This is my response:

******************

Mom,

Thank you for forwarding that, as I've been trying to find someone to articulate why they liked McCains' platform. I'll assume that you agree with what you forwarded since you don't indicate to the contrary. Here's my response and why I think people should vote for Obama instead of McCain:

Yes, McCain conducted himself in accordance with the Code of Conduct when he was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. A code taught to all our military members. That he held to it is a credit to him, but not unique to him. Also, the fact that he served in the military is laudable. But it is also one of the primary reasons that he is less qualified to be a good President. It is the same reason that I would not be a good President. People instinctively reach for what they are most familiar with. In my case, as in Senator McCain's case, that is the military. How could it be otherwise? It is what we have lived and what we know. However, the military should be the very last of the tools a president reaches for in his pursuit of foreign relations and policy. Sen McCain knows this, and has on occasion even uttered these words in public. But he hasn't internalized them. This is readily evidenced by his proposal that we implement a spending "freeze" with the exception of the military and veteran affairs as a means of addressing our current financial crisis. This very clearly communicates what his priorities are, and I believe them to be wrong. Having served 14.5 years in the military myself, I feel I am entitled to weigh in on this issue. As for the "unblemished record" the below author claims, this is simply not true. McCain was one of the Keating 5--directly involved in the largest savings and loan fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. It is unfortunate that you were unable to watch the video I sent you, as it appears to detail the particulars of this as narrarated by the government regulator who was directly involved with it. That notwithstanding, a quick google of "Keating 5" should bring up the relevant facts of the matter. While the resulting congressional inquiry did not find that McCain acted "improperly", it did find that he exercised "poor judgment". Beyond this, one has but to fact check the attack ads that McCain is running to find his tactics both dishonest and hypocritical. I specifically refer to the ad where Obama is portrayed as saying that Americans were just "air raiding villages and killing civilians" in Afghanistan. It then goes on to berate him for having voted against a funding bill for the troops. On the first point, the words shown are taken out of context and spun. In context, he was actually advancing the idea that we need to increase the number of ground troops in Afghanistan so that we are not limited to air raids on villages which DO kill civilians along with their intended targets. Being an Air Force fighter pilot, I can tell you with authority that that's a fact. Obama also steadfastly refers to the work that our soldiers are doing as "heroic" and advocates great benefits be extended to them, both in terms of education and health care (to include much better treatment for post traumatic stress disorder--a condition known to affect many of our homeless veterans). On the second point, McCain is grossly hypocritical to even bring this up, since he ALSO voted against the particular funding bill that is being referenced--but he conveniently didn't want to tell you that part.

However, enough of throwing spears at McCain. The individual who wrote the message you sent complains that no-one he's talked to can articulate why a person should vote FOR Obama. As incredible as this seems to me, I can answer that mail. Here are a few of the reasons that I like Obama (in no particular order):

1) Among the tasks facing our next President is the restoration of American standing and stature in the world. Obama is already vastly more favorably viewed in international circles than is McCain, making this task easier for him to accomplish. Not "easy", mind you, but "easier" since he has a better starting position.

2) Obama is intimately versed in both black and white culture, making him a leading figure in overcoming the remaining race relation issues that linger in our country. Being mulatto, there are many who reflexively grouped him with and treated him as black. However, being raised by his white single mother, and then by his white grandparents, he has lived through both sides of the issues are and so understands both sides at a very fundamental level. If you missed the speech that he gave on race relations, it is well worth referencing--easily on par and in keeping with the tenor struck by such distinguished men as Martin Luther King. And for those who have asserted that "you don't elect a black man to lead a white country" (a direct quote, these people are still out there), I have two suggestions. First, check your racist attitude at the door. Second, check the projected demographics which indicate that in the very near future, this will no longer be a majority white country.

3) Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthiest 5% of Americans while giving tax cuts or no tax increases to the other 95% of us seems the only responsible thing to do in light of the fact that we have doubled the national debt over the course of the last 8 years. We have to pay for that SOMEHOW, and the primary way government gets money is through taxes. So, while nobody enjoys taxes, it is our collective responsibility to pay the debts that we have, as a nation, already run up. It is true that Obama proposes a number of new programs that will cost money. However it is also true that he consistently outlines how he intends to pay for each of his intended initiatives. By contrast, McCain's intended policy of continuing to give tax cuts to big corporations has already been proven a failure. This really comes as no surprise to me. Trickle-down economics doesn't and never will work for the simple reason that people are greedy. This is not meant so much as a pejorative statement, just an observation. If they weren't basically a little greedy, then we wouldn't praise people for being generous--it would be the norm. From this perspective, if you give more money to people at the top, who don't need to go spend it on anything, its really not surprising to me that they're usually going to keep it. On the other hand, if you make more money available to people who are struggling to make ends meet, it seems obvious that they will turn around and buy more of the things that they are in need of. If you want to jump start the economic engine, this seems a much better way to go about it. While we're on the subject of economics, I have spoken with a distressing number of people who seem to hold an altogether caustic opinion of the poor in this country. Yes, it is probably true that some of them are in that position because they're lazy. But to assume that such is the norm is both elitist and, in my experience, incorrect. Many of the "poor" people that I am personally familiar with are junior enlisted members in our armed forces, who routinely put in a 10 to 12 hour work day and then (when they're not deployed) go work a second job to try to provide adequately for their families. To castigate such fine people as "lazy" is deeply offensive to me.

4) Obama favors strong investment in renewable energy sources in an effort to rid ourselves of dependance on Middle Eastern oil over the next 10 years. This is actually a point that the two candidates agree on--the differences are only in the details. While not wildly enthusiastic about it (and contrary to McCain's claims), Obama does support offshore drilling to tap additional domestic sources of oil. However, he also points out that there is no conceivable way that we can simply drill ourselves out of this fix. We only have 3% of the world's known oil reserves, yet consume 25% of the world's oil. At best, increased domestic drilling can represent part of a bridge to a new mix of energy sources. By aggressively pursuing wind, solar, bio-fuels, geo-thermal, clean coal, and nuclear technologies, we can simultaneously stop sending $700B a year to other nations for their oil (many of whom don't really like us), and create thousands of new jobs here in America. Jobs that cannot be shipped overseas, since they will revolve around building and sustaining the new energy infrastructure that we create.

5) Obama champions strong investment in improving our nation's schools, to include incentive pay for outstanding teachers along with an across the board raise in teachers' salaries. Beyond this, he calls on our youth to invest in their country, either in the military or in a greatly expanded version of the Peace Corp. I think this is a fantastic idea, as it will give many more Americans the opportunity to serve in an organization greater than themselves in pursuit of national goals and improvement. It will allow them to identify themselves as Americans and gain pride in their nation. Even better, in my book, is if that service includes the opportunity to serve overseas, as this would be an eye-opening experience to many--helping them to finally understand the freedoms and privileges that they grew up taking for granted. This is not to fault anyone. I am merely stating that most in our country lack this perspective, and without it, how can you really appreciate what you've got? In return for the youth investing in our country, our country will invest in them, extending the same kinds of educational benefits currently accorded to those who serve in our military through the G.I. Bill. This will make going to college a much more attainable goal for many who are both willing and capable of completing higher education, but simply lack the means to do so at this time. By thus establishing a more educated and much more broadly experienced workforce, the nation will benefit in its ability to compete in a global economy.

6) It is true the Obama has not served in the military himself. However, he demonstrates a much firmer grasp of very basic military principals than McCain does. To begin with, a gentleman by the name of Sun Tzu made a remarkable observation a VERY long time ago, which is still true today. The observation was that never, in the history of the whole world, has it been a good thing for any nation to be perpetually at war. Our nation has been in perpetual conflict since at least the first Gulf War (arguably much longer). We just called the intervening years Operations NORTHERN and SOUTHERN watch (among others). McCain is on public record as having no problems with continuing to fight in Iraq for as long as the "next hundred years". The reasons that protracted conflict are bad are many. They include the following though: First, war is expensive both in terms of blood and money--and you will bleed your country dry of both if you remain at war indefinitely. Second, the longer you fight an enemy, the more you teach him your tactics and the more effective you make him. Even if our whole country was wildly enthusiastic about being in Iraq, the fact remains that we can't afford it. We are spending $10B per month there. This is money that we don't have. We are having to borrow it from countries like China, adding to an already massive national debt. We are doing this while the Iraqis are sitting on a $79B surplus. Yes, we invaded Iraq and yes, it would have been extremely irresponsible to then turn around and leave immediately. However, that's not what we did. We invaded them over 5 years ago and have invested heavily in trying to help them rebuild since then. Many of the remaining problems are rooted in deep fault-lines within Iraq's own population. For time out of mind, Sunnis and Shi'ites have fought each other--and until THEY work out a compromise that will work for THEM, all we are going to do by being there is akin to puting a band-aid on a case of gangrene and getting our troops killed in the process. This brings me to a second basic military principal which Obama demonstrates a better fundamental grasp of: the necessity to commit sufficient force to a military endeavor to achieve victory. Obama is very clear on the point that we are involved in two wars: one in Iraq, and one in Afghanistan. One which should never have been started, and one which we cannot afford to lose respectively. On Sept 11, 2001, our nation was attacked, and we rightly answered that attack. I served in Kyrgyzstan in 2002 with an international coalition of 8 nations who all stood with us and believed in the justice of our cause. We had a very good opening game, but since then we have lost our way. As a result, many who once stood with us, do so no longer. There was no reason that had to happen. As I mentioned earlier, Obama correctly champions the idea of increasing our troop commitment to Afghanistan in order to finally finish the job that we started there. However, with the massive commitments we currently face in Iraq, we are unable to do this. We have nothing else left to send. Our guard and reserve forces are fully tapped already--which functionally means that we have no reserve (which is a terrible position to be in, but I won't go in to that here). Therefore, I heartily approve of Obama's proposal that we responsibly and expeditiously end our involvement in Iraq so that we can conclude business in Afghanistan--the original and true front in this "war on terror".

A personal observation at this point: While we definitely had to respond to the Sept 11, 2001 attack, declaring "war on terrorism" was not the way to go about it for two fundamental reasons. First, terrorism is a method of warfare which always has (and always will) be chosen by the weaker side in a conflict as the most effective means of fighting the stronger side. It is cheap, it is effective, and it is very easy to maintain for a very long time. Thus, there will always be terrorists. This leads right back to Sun Tzu's caution about not fighting perpetual wars. Second, since we backed the mujahadeen (essentially a collection of 7 different terrorist organizations) as a means of kicking the Russians out of Afghanistan, it is entirely hypocritical of us to then turn around a crusade against a method of warfare that we have used ourselves. So, while we needed to respond to the attack we suffered, we also needed to establish what our strategic objectives would be. Once again, Obama has articulated a position that I agree with: kill Osama Bin Laden. This is specific, it is measurable, and it is achievable. All too often, people seem to think that the implied end-state for our "war on terror" is to kill all terrorists everywhere. This could not be further from the truth. For proof of my point, just look to history. In World War II, we didn't kill all the Germans. We didn't even kill all the Nazis. Nor did we kill all the Japanese. Nor even all of those most devoted to their emporer. The point is that at some point, we have to figure out how we're going to live with those who were once our enemies. And this brings me to another reason that I like Obama:

7. Obama has said that he intends to sit down and talk with both our friends AND our enemies. This is in keeping with my basic understanding of what diplomacy is. That he is intent on trying diplomacy first is exactly what we should want in our leaders. To borrow a quote from the musical 1776 (attributed to Stephen Hopkins, one of our founding fathers), "I've never seen, heard, nor smelt an issue so dangerous it couldn't be talked about--hell yes! I'm for debating anything!" President Bush's policy, which McCain appears intent on continuing, of refusing to speak with nations we don't like is another proven failure. For example, under this policy, Iran has gone from zero to now claiming over 6000 nuclear centrifuges. While it is possible that this would have happened even had we been in dialog with them, there is also the possibility that a diplomatic resolution could have been reached--and we know that not talking to them didn't produce the desired result.

As this is getting rather long winded, I will content myself with the first seven reasons that sprang to mind for why I think people should vote FOR Obama. Please feel free to forward this to anyone you like, and I welcome discussions with any who so desire. My truest hope is, regardless of which candidate people choose to vote for--that they will be voting for their candidate's positions, not merely in opposition to the "other" party. David

--- On Wed, 10/8/08, Pamela wrote:

From: Pamela
Subject: Fw: Letter worth reading
To:
Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008, 2:42 PM

Well sports fans, if this is a hoax, so be it.
To be honest the whole election sounds like one to me.
But IF Obama and McCain really are the candidates we have to chose between here is a well written, if somewhat verbose, letter stating why you should consider McCain over Obama.
    ^_^.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Well worth reading as you consider how you will vote----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:35 AMSubject: Fw: Letter worth reading----- Original Message -----
From: Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 6:57 AMSubject: Fw: Letter worth reading
This is long, but worth taking the time to read.
Letter worth reading

THIS LETTER MAKES MORE SENSE THAN ANYTHING I HAVE SEEN, HEARD, OR READ, CONCERNING THE UPCOMING ELECTION...

IT'S A LETTER FROM A U.S. CITIZEN... WHO LIVES IN ILLINOIS... AND OBVIOUSLY IS A "SELF-THINKER"... NOT JUST A "FOLLOWER"!!!

IF YOU ONLY READ ONE THING, REGARDING THIS ELECTION... LET THIS BE THE ONE THING!! AFTER READING IT, YOU WILL PROBABLY WANT TO FORWARD IT TO OTHER AMERICANS WHO ARE "SELF THINKERS"!!

An impassioned letter from a "nobody".

Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 3:19 PM
Subject: FW: A letter from Illinois

Dear Friends:
               My name is Joe Porter. I live in Champaign, Illinois. I'm 46 years old, a born-again Christian, a husband, a father, a small business owner, a veteran, and a homeowner. I don't consider myself to be either conservative or liberal, and I vote for the person, not Republican or Democrat. I don't believe there are "two Americas " but that every person in this country can be whomever and whatever they want to be if they'll just work to get there and nowhere else on earth can they find such opportunities. I believe our government should help those who are legitimately downtrodden, and should always put the interests of America first.
            The purpose of this message is that I'm concerned about the future of this great nation. I'm worried that the silent majority of honest, hard-working, tax-paying people in this country have been passive for too long. Most folks I know choose not to involve themselves in politics. They go about their daily lives, paying their bills, raising their kids, and doing what they can to maintain the good life. They vote and consider doing so to be a sacred trust. They shake their heads at the political pundits and so-called "news", thinking that what they hear is always spun by whomever is reporting it. They can't understand how elected officials can regularly violate the public trust with pork barrel spending. They don't want government handouts. They want the government to protect them, not raise their taxes for more government programs.
               We are in the unique position in this country of electing our leaders. It's a privilege to do so. I've never found a candidate in any election with whom I agreed on everything. I'll wager that most of us don't even agree with our families or spouses 100% of the time. So when I step into that voting booth, I always try to look at the big picture and cast my vote for the man or woman who is best qualified for the job. I've hired a lot of people in my lifetime, and essentially that's what an election is - a hiring process. Who has the credentials? Whom do I want working for me? Whom can I trust to do the job right?
                I'm concerned that a growing number of voters in this country simply don't get it. They are caught up in a fervor they can't explain, and calling it "change".
            "Change what?", I ask.
            "Well, we're going to change America", they say.
              "In what way?", I query.
              "We want someone new and fresh in the White House", they exclaim.
              "So, someone who's not a politician?", I say.
              "Uh, well, no, we just want a lot of stuff changed, so we're voting for Obama", they state.
               "So the current system, the system of freedom and democracy that has enabled a man to grow up in this great country, get a fine education, raise incredible amounts of money and dominate the news, and win his party's nomination for the White House that system's all wrong?"
            "No, no, that part of the system's okay we just need a lot of change."
            And so it goes. "Change we can believe in."
             Quite frankly, I don't believe that vague proclamations of change hold any promise for me. In recent months, I've been asking virtually everyone I encounter how they're voting. I live in Illinois, so most folks tell me they're voting for Barack Obama. But no one can really tell me why only that he's going to change a lot of stuff "Change, change, change." I have yet to find one single person who can tell me distinctly and convincingly why this man is qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful nation on earth other than the fact that he claims he's going to implement a lot of change.
          We've all seen the emails about Obama's genealogy, his upbringing, his Muslim background, and his church affiliations. Let's ignore this for a moment. Put it all aside. Then ask yourself, "What qualifies this man to be my president? That he's a brilliant orator and talks about change?"
            CHANGE WHAT?
            Friends, I'll be forthright with you I believe the American voters who are supporting Barack Obama don't have a clue what they're doing, as evidenced by the fact that not one of them - NOT ONE of them I've spoken to can spell out his qualifications. Not even the most liberal media can explain why he should be elected. Political experience? Negligible. Foreign relations? Non-existent. Achievements? Name one. Someone who wants to unite the country? If you haven't read his wife's thesis from Princeton, look it up on the web. This is who's lining up to be our next First Lady? The only thing I can glean from Obama's constant harping about change is that we're in for a lot of new taxes.
            For me, the choice is clear. I've looked carefully at the two leading applicants for the job, and I've made my choice.
               Here's a question - "Where were you five and a half years ago? Around Christmas, 2002. You've had five or six birthdays in that time. My son has grown from a sixth grade child to a high school graduate. Five and a half years is a good chunk of time. About 2,000 days. 2,000 nights of sleep. 6,000 meals, give or take."
                John McCain spent that amount of time, from 1967 to 1973, in a North Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp.
                 When offered early release, he refused it. He considered this offer to be a public relations stunt by his captors, and insisted that those held longer than he should be released first. Did you get that part? He was offered his freedom, and he turned it down. A regimen of beatings and torture began.
            Do you possess such strength of character? Locked in a filthy cell in a foreign country, would you turn down your own freedom in favor of your fellow man? I submit that's a quality of character that is rarely found, and for me, this singular act defines John McCain.
            Unlike several presidential candidates in recent years whose military service is questionable or non-existent, you will not find anyone to denigrate the integrity and moral courage of this man. A graduate of Annapolis, during his Naval service he received the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross. His own son is now serving in the Marine Corps in Iraq . Barack Obama is fond of saying "We honor John McCain's service...BUT...", which to me is condescending and offensive - because what I hear is, "Let's forget this man's sacrifice for his country, and his proven leadership abilities, and talk some more about change."
          I don't agree with John McCain on everything - but I am utterly convinced that he is qualified to be our next President, and I trust him to do what's right. I know in my heart that he has the best interests of our country in mind. He doesn't simply want to be President - he wants to lead America, and there's a huge difference. Factually, there is simply no comparison between the two candidates. A man of questionable background and motives who prattles on about change, can't hold a candle to a man who has devoted his life in public service to this nation, retiring from the Navy in1981 and elected to the Senate in1982.
         Perhaps Obama's supporters are taking a stance between old and new. Maybe they don't care about McCain's service or his strength of character, or his unblemished qualifications to be President. Maybe "likeability" is a higher priority for them than "trust". Being a prisoner of war is not what qualifies John McCain to be President of the United States of America - but his demonstrated leadership certainly DOES.
         Dear friends, it is time for us to stand. It is time for thinking Americans to say, "Enough." It is time for people of all parties to stop following the party line. It is time for anyone who wants to keep America first, who wants the right man leading their nation, to start a dialogue with all their friends and neighbors and ask who they're voting for, and why.
          There's a lot of evil in this world. That should be readily apparent to all of us by now. And when faced with that evil as we are now, I want a man who knows the cost of war on his troops and on his citizens. I want a man who puts my family's interests before any foreign country.

I want a President who's qualified to lead.

I want my country back, and I'm voting for John McCain.
Phone: 760.434.1395
E-mail: ronald.hess@alumni.purdue.edu

An Issue we need to own

Marvin — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:47:14 EDT

We must capture and own this issue of restructuring mortgages. I was able to call a radio talk show and speak to Ron Regan about this very issue and explained why the mortgages should be restructured and the effect it would have on the economy. He was so excited he said I should immediately go to Washington. The fact is the financial markets are under pressure because of the financial sector. The financial sector is in trouble because of the banks and other financial institutions. The banks and other financial institution are in trouble because of the sub prime mortgages mess has created a bubble in real estate values. Too many homes in this economy are over valued and the economy is contracting. I recommended that they infuse capital into the banks by unwinding all of those mortgages and rebate the overage back to the bank. This is only part of the solution but it will work to stablized the Market and the economy. This will have a tremendous effect on the economy and could reverse this economic down. Senator Barack Obama needs to get out in front of this issue. This is the only thing McCain has ever said that is economically correct. I have writing letters to both Sectary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairmen Ben Bernanke with a CC: Senator Barack Obama. This is an important issue because and we need to own.

If you would like a copy of the letter, please email me a m.g.brown@att.net

Obama 08

Ethanol and Mortgages – Global Food Shortage and Food Item Costs

Unknown user — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:04:22 EDT

With the way Ethanol legislation has affected food item prices and the middle class a serious effort should be made by the Republicans and Democrats to reverse the Ethanol legislation or at least create a commission to study this as quickly as possible. It’s about the Economy and requires immediate action. In some countries and in some cases it’s also about starvation and death.

A joint effort with other countries like Canada can also be done to bring down the cost of wheat, reduce the cost of living for the middle class, and eliminate the food shortage. This may help the middle class make ends meet and help them in their capabilities to pay for their mortgages.

The very wealthy and Warren Buffet

Unknown user — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:02:29 EDT

It may not be true but I’ve heard this before and you may have also, like multi-nation corporations the very wealthy do not have one or a single country.

Warren Buffet, the very wealthiest, seems to be trying to help and was also one of the first to say it was a recession even though it did not meet the text book definition of one and was criticized by others. On the other hand some were saying it was just “a rough patch in the road”.

It does not seem to be a rough patch in the road.

I cannot believe I actually heard this on national television

Ian — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:42:19 EDT

Obama Nation, I just walked out of my living room, literally disgusted beyond the ability to verbalize my thoughts after maybe two minutes of watching Fox News.

Barack Obama's tax plan cuts taxes for 95% of people making under $250,000 per year. I'd say that coveres most of us; I know it covers me. Here is the quote I just finished hearing that just left me speechless:

"Those people that Obama plans to give tax breaks to; they don't pay taxes. He's giving them a welfare check."

So, I feel compelled to ask, do you pay taxes? Do you see one quarter of your paycheck taken out of your hands before you even had a chance to think about that money?

That is the attitude the Republican Party has toward anyone that doesn't make a significant amount of money throughout the year. You're clearly an inferoir being incapable of subsisting on anything but the crumbs of the wealthy. No, you contribute nothing to this country. You are not its backbone, you are not its heart, you are not its soul. The only people that matter are the millionaires, the yacht club, the CEOs.

Well, this November, we're going to have a chance to tell the powers that be just what we mean to this country. This is our nation every bit as much as it is theirs, and we don't have to take that kind of disrespect any longer. A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for you. It's a vote to remind Washington that we live here to, and we're doing everything we can to do our part. But the irresponsibilitiy and greed of the wealthy has forced a gigantic bailout package to be heaped on the backs of every American, even those that always pay their mortgages on time, those that spend their weekends working in their communities, those that understand the American ideals of hard work and responsibility.

But no, the economy doesn't affect you. We, the aristocracy, owe you nothing. You are not the ones that buy our products. You are not the ones that laid the groundwork, the infrastructure that has allowed this nation to rise so far. You are worthless. This country does not need you , it does not want you, and damn it, we are going to make sure it will never work for you.

On November 5th, America, it no longer has to be this way. Tell John McCain and his crooked lobbyist campaign managers that we need a change. This race is about you and me.

Come on, America. Yes, we can!

Economists: Dr. Kamran Mofid & Dr. Joseph Stiglitz Explain The Financial Crisis

Hope4Unity — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:38:17 EDT

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. -- Mahatma Gandhi

The Current Financial Crisis: Dishonesty fuelled by Greed

"Over the weekend, John McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more direct, personal attacks on Barack Obama. In the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to change the subject from the central question of this election. Perhaps because the policies McCain supported these past eight years and wants to continue are pretty hard to defend. But it's not just McCain's role in the current crisis that they're avoiding. The backward economic philosophy and culture of corruption that helped create the current crisis are looking more and more like the other major financial crisis of our time." www.barackobama.com

Dr. Kamran Mofid, Economist.

On 10/6/08 Dr. Mofid, an internationally renowned economist, and founder of the Globalisation for the Common Good Initiative, in a letter to his subscribers, wrote the following on the current economic crisis:

In the last couple of weeks, 100s of billions of Dollars, Pounds and Euros of tax payers money have been poured down the drain to bail out a non-functioning, unregulated, unaccountable financial system. The money that we were told was not there to pay for improvements in health, education, housing, transportation, pension, child care,..to name but a few. Moreover, no body has been charged yet: one law for them and another one for the tax payers! The profits were privatised when the going was good and the costs have been socialised, now that the going got tough, heaven on earth for them and hell for the tax payers!

Where are the market forces now, you might ask? Where are all those neo-liberal economists now, singing the praises of the market, deregulation, liberalisation, privatisation, free tade, share/property-owning democracy,..? Where are they now, telling us how to maximise our profits and income, how to minimise our costs and how to exploit the natural resources, all for the sake of maximum economic growth, and then tell us how to externalise the costs and consequences to the tax payer or to the people of Bangladesh for example, when they get flooded.

Where have they gone now? Why are they so quiet now, not sharing their wisdom on the wonders of the market and competition and scarcity with us all! I wonder if all these billions that tax-payers have given will work in rescuing the economy where mammon has taken over? My answer is: it will not, as long as the so-called experts/economists do not admit that without humanity, ethics and justice, economics and business are house of cards built on shifting sands.

Many millions of words have been written on this meltdown, on what went wrong, but not much on why it went wrong. The overwhelming majority agree on the role of one vital element: dishonesty fuelled by greed. We forget at our own peril that honesty and greed are essentially spiritual and moral issues.In the last few weeks the greed of Wall Street and the City (London financial district) has been under the spotlight. The Archbishop of York recently- and in my view correctly- called some of the traders bank robbers. "We find ourselves in a market system which seems to have taken its rules of trade from Alice in Wonderland", the Archbishop remarked. The Archbishop of Canterbury has also criticized "trading of the debts of others without accountability" and compared unfettered belief in the market with fundamentalism. This last word "fundamentalism" used by the Archbishop means a lot to me. It is the fundamentalism of economics, its teaching and MBA programmes that is, in my view, the shifting sand upon which we have built this house of cards, called economic globalisation, which has now come home to roost.

The Chicago Boys school of economic thought has proven to be an Emporer with no clothes! As long as this curse persists, there will be no possibility of reaching the Promised Land: where we can have justice, peace, happiness and contentment.

Debating the American Economy?

Mel — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 18:04:12 EDT

What’s to debate? The facts and the results of those facts are so very clear. In the last 40 years we have had 28 years of Republican Administrations and 12 years of Democratic Administrations. During those 40 years the Republicans who proclaim to be fiscal conservatives have deficit financed every year they held the Whitehouse.

John McCain - War Hero

Unknown user — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 12:43:03 EDT

John McCain is a US War Hero.

What the US needs is an Economics Hero.

Being part of and supporting the previous George Bush administration means that John McCain doesd not qualify as an Economics Hero.

The economy

Marvin — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:12:50 EDT

Senator Barack Obama,

We have them on the ropes, but the fight is not over. The issue is not one of experience, it is one of vision. That is what it will take the lead nation, vision and good judgment, you have demonstrated both. No one contending for the office of the president has experience holding that office. What it takes is Vision. However the worst thing the government can do when the economy is slipping into a recession or depression is reduce government expenditures, which cuts jobs and takes money out of the circular flow. That is a tactic used for slowing down the economy when it is over heating and interest rates are high. To get the economy going, the Government (the nation’s largest employer) must spend money to create jobs and pay for goods and services. This helps to stimulate economic growth. Senator John McCain plan will spell doom for this nations failing economy. Senator John McCain said he doesn’t understand economic and he has proven it once again. Exploit his weakness here should increase our spread.

Keep fighting; I am so proud of you. I know your colors are RED, WHITE and BLUE.

Obama 08

Economics

Tyler Willis — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:22:14 EDT

This is a repost from my personal blog: http://tylerwillis.net/blog/obama-economics/

I, for all intensive purposes, am a Libertarian. The Libertarian Party is running Bob Barr as a candidate for President. Living in California, I also happen to believe that my single vote has very little influence in most presidential elections (and I’m probably right, as long as you ignore any social influence). Therefore, I believe in voting for the person I think is the absolute best choice for the presidency, not the best two party guy who can win it. With all of that said, it would appear possible that I’d be voting for Bob Barr. I’m not. Barring (eh? eh?) some crazy, unforeseeable event, I will be voting for Barack Obama in November. This is my attempt at explaining why.

Disclosure: I will make an attempt to lay this out in a rationale, organized manner, I may fail. Writing concisely about issues I’m passionate about is something I’m working to become better at.

The issues that matter most to me are the economy (Stances:Ob, Mc, Barr) and foreign policy (Stances:Ob, Mc, Barr), and I also value the ability to be an effective leader. The first two are relatively easy to research, but the latter is a bit less concrete, more intuitive. It’s my belief that in these 3 issues, Barack Obama is the best choice for our country, and I’d like to offer my reasons why. In the interest of reading time and space, I’m going to address just the economy in this post, more to come later. Thanks for caring enough to read -Tyler

Economy:

Barack Obama has a clear economic plan that he has presented in speeches and online. It involves tax cuts for the middle class that are specifically aimed at jump starting the economy. In our current economic situation, something like this is needed. The middle class will spend money much more freely than people with larger incomes, which will affect the economy in a quicker fashion.

I do have some fear that Obama’s plan would stifle small business growth and the rate of entrepreneurship, he has helped address these fears with his $500 tax credit to help 1099 contractors offset the extra payroll tax they shoulder. As an independent contractor who made relatively normal (read: way less than 250k) salaries for 15 months out of the last 24, I can attest that a measure like this would have helped me. I’m not sure this break will be enough to encourage small business growth, and I think more can be done on this front. I’m not sure how many of the 20-some million small businesses will be affected by a marginal income tax increase proposed by Obama — my understanding is the company would have to have more than 250k/year in revenue to be affected, I’m assuming that a large percentage of these small businesses are one-man shops and fall under this rate. If you have more than 250k/year in revenue I would assume you’re incorporating and playing the corporate tax game, and not filing under the individual system. I’d love to see some #’s on this though, it could make a huge difference in the health of this plan.

Note: Obama has also suggested eliminating the capital gains taxes for startups and small companies, but I must admit that I’m relatively ignorant on how this might affect the average small business — I will need to learn more about this and may expand on this point at a later date.

Compare this to Bob Barr: I like that Barr is against the bailout, as I am (although Buffett’s arguments in favor of it may eventually sway me), but I can’t seem to get any specifics out of his campaign. Barr’s website has little information on specific suggestions. I agree with the standard speaking points of the Libertarian Party: less taxes, free markets, cut spending, etc. But it’s hard for me to back a candidate that doesn’t put forth a plan, even if it’s just tactics on withdrawal. The same way you should put together a “get out of Iraq” plan, you should put forth a “get out of mucking around with the economy” plan.

The Libertarian Party as a whole generally has a problem with this. They are one of the largest third parties in US politics (4% of voters, according to Rasmussen which is slightly less biased than the 13% reported by CATO). The party is very broad, tying together an incredible amount of diverse opinons (most elections see Libertarian swing voters splitting between Democrats and Republicans 60/40 or closer) — putting forth specific plans would drive many party members away. So instead they stay vague and promote intellectuals working on these problems from many different approaches. Great for a think tank, shitty for a presidency.

McCain fares OK here. His small business plan makes some suggestions that will encourage growth in that sector, like lowering corporate taxes. His individual taxcuts look less interesting. McCain and Obama both talk about re-energizing the middle class, and it’s clear McCain’s plan doesn’t trump Obama’s on that front (verification from TPC). If McCain wanted to argue that Obama’s plan couldn’t be passed, or if he wanted to push for some form of trickle down economics, I’d listen — but they’ve both picked the same battleground and Obama has verifiably won it.

On top of all this, I’m very suspicious about where the money will come from. John McCain will not be able to decrease the size of government, and he supports an expensive war, yet he doesn’t seem to be securing new money to cover these massive cuts. That scares me.

His Gas and Energy platforms are nothing more than meaningless talking points that are essentially non-sensical (read them here, top of the page and middle of the page below this picture).

McCain’s HOME loan program seems misguided, and the suggestions on his website (strict requirements including a proof of due dilligence on all investments for bailouts on a firm by firm basis “only to prevent systemic risk” (Paraphrased from here) don’t seem to match his actions over the past 10 days.

I’ll confess an ignorance to some of the macro-economic issues at debate here. I’m not well versed enough to know, with relative confidence, which of these policies will fare the best. In situations where this is true, I find I need to take 3 actions.

I have to write out what I know, discover what I don’t know, and try to learn that through research or talking with semi-experts (people that may not be qualified to set policy but that keep up with historical and current thoughts on the topic and are accessible to me).
I have to look at the professionals, the people who are the real experts in the field, and see what their public thoughts are on the matter.
I have to make a rational assesment of the information as I know it today, and try to get close to the right answer. As Warren Buffett has said, “I’d rather be approximately right than perfectly wrong.”

In this process, I have found the information out there on economist blogs to be in favor of Obama, based mainly on the criteria of who he’s getting his advice from. In terms of the pros, Obama has recruited amazing advisors and supporters (Paul Volcker, Warren Buffet, Robert Rupin, Laura Tyson, and a slew of others). McCain hasn’t fared poorly on recruiting pros either; he’s got a revolving list of people with economics degrees who support him on his site, Peter Wallison has done some pretty amazing work at AEI (including foreseeing the current crisis 9 years ago) and Gary Becker is nothing to shake a stick at (and writes half of a fantastic blog). They’re both impressive teams, but on the issue of where are the intellectuals I personally respect more are leaning–they seem to be leaning towards Obama; I think Buffett and especially Volcker lend better insight than Wallison or Becker — this is arguable, but Volcker/Buffett certainly have much more credibility within the finance world than anyone on McCain’s side.

Since both teams are impressive it’s important to note that, Obama seems to actually be listening to his advisors more. His statements on the economy are measured and well thought out — he doesn’t often have to change his stance or re-word things in light of new developments (which McCain has had to often). Obama’s certainly being rewarded in the polls, to quote the Financial Times, “…his instinct to reflect before opening his mouth and his impeccable taste in advisers are both working to his advantage.”

On the economic front, I think Obama wins.

PS: I highly recommed a recent interview with Warren Buffet (60 mins), his take on the crisis is very interesting.

PPS: If you want to donate to Obama’s campaign, please do: My Obama Page

I am a Liberal and This is What I Believe!

John from Muskegon, MI — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:21:38 EDT

I am a liberal; a liberal is what I am. What does this mean? Why is it important?

I am not sure that I can really answer these question effectively, however, I think I can give you an idea of my take on liberalism as it is expressed through my personal philosophy. After all over the past twenty eight years being a liberal in this country has been some weird sort of sin and I guess I am some big kind of sinner!

According to Merriam-Webster a liberal is one who supports the rights of the individual over those of institutions. It means that I will gladly trash an institution (economic, governmental, religious) before I would consider trampling over the rights of another individual. This is important because today in our country we seem to have an array of forces determined to undo the very promise on which this nation was founded.

My family landed on the shores of Delaware, long before this land became a country, having risked life and limb as Quakers seeking religious freedom (lately I have started saying that 300 years later we are still seeking it!).

My Great-Great Grandfather, whose name I share, fought and died in the Civil War to secure and extend the promise of our nation to those who had been unjustly left out and treated as property.

I have become concerned, as one who's family has a long history in this country, that the promise of this nation is being subverted.

For example, it seems the religious right in our nation would like to have us all bending our knee praying to their God, while living hidden lives of desperation as they actively work to bring about their long awaited Armageddon.

Those same forces have been working for the last thirty years or more to destroy the fundamental value proposition that has been our government. By working to take away the social safety nets we wisely put in place as the result of the great depression. Replacing it with the a self-absorbed social darwinism, using catch phrase ideas such as "free markets", "ownership society", "promote risk taking".

These forces would have us believe that we are better off by taking what we can get as individuals to the exclusion of our neighbor.

So, as a liberal, what do I think the role of government should be?

I believe government should work to ensure a level playing field for PEOPLE (human beings).

Government should take responsibility for the execution of public goods, such as building roads, providing quality education, common healthcare and defense(military, local police, fire protection).

Government should provide real regulation within the economic sphere and not regulatory agencies filled with sycophants of the regulated. Even Adam Smith, father of capitalism, recognized the necessity of regulated markets to protect people from the tendency for monopoly with in the market place.

Don't misunderstand, I am no socialist.

Economically, I believe the market place is the most efficient means we know of right now to determine the DISTRIBUTION OF DEMAND for production of private goods. As we progress, private goods and services need a means to fail in favor new goods and service that are better. An example would be the buggy maker failing in favor of the auto maker.

However, I think, as a society we are missing the mark by ignoring the wisdom of Sir Thomas Mun who in the 14th or 15th century wrote that we should produce ourselve what we are able and purchase abroad what we are unable (tariffs/trade barriers are not necessary if this attitude is collectively reinforced by social custom and business taxes). Thus, I believe a society will fail if does not make its own stuff. Just as it may starve if it can't grow it own food.

The idea that money and its rental power(interest) should trump people and their producing power is flawed and short sighted. It is the road of the passive and lazy toward wealth and as we are beginning to experience, will lead to poverty, injustice and eventually enslavement.

Even with this as a personal philosophy, I am always on guard that my thoughts do not become too entrenched and inflexible. The desire to remain fexible overall is the core strength of liberalism over conservativism and ultimately its greatest weakness as we liberals are prone to consider the validity of the conservative argument, whereas that same consideration is not returned (remember the liberal as sinner thing mentioned above).

I think it is time for those of us who are liberal (closet or or otherwise) to make our stand and call out in all caps I AM A LIBERAL AND THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE! It is time to take our nation back and send the tyrannical conservative factions in our country, who would undo the very foundation of our nation, back to the ice age alone.

The Economy, Economic Policies, and the Founding Fathers

Unknown user — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:56:43 EDT

The founding fathers wanted citizens to have the right to bear arms to defend themselves. They may not have foreseen how the economy or economics could affect them or be used to “attack” them and their families.

An independant panel or board of economists with many years of experience and solid track record should have been created, elected and appointed, to provide information and knowledge as to why they consider some Economic Policies better than others. To protect the People of the United States from their lack of information, knowledge, and those who would take advantage of or “attack” them.

As for the Economic Policies of the current Bush administration and its economic advisors that have caused this economic catastrophe, this is unacceptable and I also consider it a crime.

I have seen the words capitalism and socialism used for different reasons lately. You should note that crime has nothing to do with capitalism or socialism.

The Leader of the American War Heroes Makes A Statement

MoorAmerican — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:00:24 EDT

10/1/2008 – 34 Days before Election Day - - - Gospeltales of American War Heroes, recorded for the Library of Congress 2008

1836 - - - Statement by President John Hanson: Leader of the American War Heroes

The Presidential Election of 2008 in the United States of America is a Revolutionary War for CHANGE. The American People will change the nature and culture of national politics for the sake of peace and prosperity by putting their COUNTRY FIRST. For nearly eight years, the American People have endured the worst presidency in the history of the United States of America. Currently the 43rd Presidency is a DEAD DUCK BEING DEVOURED BY GREEDY RATS.

The well informed conclusion is that the 43rd Presidency of the United States of America in GOP Republican National Committee assembled, with lobbyists, and affiliated political associations in the Project for New American Century is THE AXIS OF EVIL. Americans from all walks of life that follow the Republican Party ideologue is THE ONLY ALQAEDA that inflicted irreparable destruction of the American People and the free world. They have shrewdly masked their terrorist cell networks in the American society. They all are nonetheless criminals that are herein charged with war crimes against humanity, whom we the People of America hold solely accountable for the present distress of the United States of America, as well as the free world.

The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle… the organization intends, through issue briefs, research papers, advocacy journalism, conferences, and seminars, to explain what American world leadership entails. It will also strive to rally support for a vigorous and principled policy of American international involvement and to stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world.

PNAC’s Statement of Principles is the core ideology of the national policy for the United States of America which is the root cause of the global distress of every kind. The short list of principals presently operating this organization are as follows: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Vin Weber, George Weigel, Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Chairman; Robert Kagan, Bruce P. Jackson, Mark Gerson, Randy Scheunemann, Ellen Bork, Deputy Director; Gary Schmitt, Senior Fellow; Thomas Donnelly, Senior Fellow; Reuel Marc Gerecht, Senior Fellow, Director of the Middle East Initiative; Timothy Lehmann, Assistant Director; Michael Goldfarb, Research Associate. George W. Bush, Senator John McCain, Governor Sarah Palin, Karl Rove, as well as numerous elected officials in Federal, State, and Local government and media personalities i.e. Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, and FOX NEWS; serve as the leadership of this REPUBLICAN ALQAEDA TRUST… RAT’s! A bunch of GREEDY RAT’s! War Mongering RAT’s!

Be it known to the American People and the global family of sovereign nations that comprise the free world, RAT’s can no longer hide, abide, and operate in the United States of America. RAT’s ARE AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE FREE WORLD.

The names of the RAT’s are being made public so the American voters can govern themselves under the provisions of the United States Constitution when they vote on Election Day, November 4, 2008. In less than 5 weeks, about 34 days from the date of this address, we will eradicate these RAT’s from American politics. We are confident in the resolve of the American people to elect the Trust Executive Administration Mastermind of Senator Barack Obama to be the 44th Presidency of the United States of America in Congress Assembled and give them the constitutional authority to conduct the business of our great nation.

Be very clear, this is a Revolution by the American People. It is the Patriot Act of 2008 for the Love of Country First. The American People do not have any respect of person nor do they owe anybody any apologies. This is a solemn demand to remove all RAT’s from Washington, D.C. along with the lobbyists that control them for special interests. ALL RAT’s are enemies of our nation and the free world.

The American People are a FREE Sovereign Citizenship and DEMAND THE IMMEDIATE RESIGNATION OF ALL RAT’S IN PUBLIC OFFICE. ALL RAT’s running for government office are hereby ORDERED TO PERMANENTLY SUSPEND THEIR CAMPAIGNS AND RENOUNCE THEIR POLITICAL ALLEGIANCE TO THE AXIS OF EVIL, LOBBYISTS, AND ALQAEDA.

The present economic crisis and worldwide distress requires the American people to unite to eradicate the country of war mongering greedy RAT’s. All Citizens of the United States of America eligible to vote are encouraged to register as Democrats or Independents. VOTER REGISTRATION FORMS SHOULD BE CHANGED IMMEDIATELY. The Republican Party in its present form should be dissolved and outlawed. The Republican Party should be removed from ALL VOTER REGISTRATION FORMS. The GOP Republican party brand belongs to the American People. NO RAT HAS ANY LEGAL OR LAWFUL CLAIMS ON THE BRAND. Therefore, to preserve the legacy of the original GOP and to unify the voting electorate, we humbly request the beloved Senator from the Empire State of New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton to be entrusted with the brand and form another Democratic Congressional Caucus based on the five principles of LOVE, TRUTH, FREEDOM, PEACE, and JUSTICE.

We encourage the Democratic leadership, comprised of honorable trustworthy statesmen of admirable integrity to perform this work in the next few days. Your serious attention to this national emergency to secure our country’s future peace and prosperity is greatly appreciated. As always, any intelligence worth communicating, which first reaches me, shall be related with unreserved freedom, candor & punctuality. May Heaven still continue to smile on our efforts!

The Subtle Truth Behind the Financial Crisis

Bill from Mahwah, NJ — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 10:20:58 EDT

The subtle truth behind the financial crisis is that the reason it is so difficult to reach consensus is because of the financial disparity in our society. We have consistently heard how the net savings rate is zero and the middle class has disappeared. There are some people who have worked hard and build their retirement savings by foregoing current consumption, but the vast majority of the population has been either unable or unwilling to save for their future. Everyone was surprised during Katrina to learn how many people are living literally pay check to pay check. If you’re living pay check to pay check you don’t have much concern about what is happening on Wall Street, especially after you’ve heard about the multimillion dollar annual salaries, which exceed your own potential lifelong earnings. That is the reason congress has been overrun with so many “nay” e-mails.

No one has shown that the rescue plan is not for the Wall Street tycoons. Someone has to take the time to give the general population an economics 101 course to explain that the credit markets are not the same as Wall Street and are in fact more important to them than they realize. Besides, the individuals who earned all the exorbitant salaries have already left the scene and are looking for new careers in law. I don’t like the idea anymore than anyone else, but as one of those who has tried to save for his retirement I don’t want to see my savings disappear. What kind of message does this send to the next the generation for their perspective on saving for the future? About the only thing I can say to it right now is thank God we did not turn over Social Security to Wall Street.

Longer term we have to reduce the disparity, without a financially secure middle class a vibrant democracy is impossible. There was a time when a public education enabled the average kid to make a decent living. To some extent, this has been disappearing over the past forty years. Now, it takes two incomes to support a family and if you want to do it alone you must have at least a master’s and often a doctorate degree. But even a great education and innate intelligence are not enough in a world where the internet “cloud” spreads information instantly. Corporate consolidations and the continued improvement of technology have pushed productivity to the point where too few people are needed to produce finished goods. Perhaps a little less efficiency and more employment are what we need to sustain the American Dream.

Obama's latest ads

Meghan from New York, NY — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:14:26 EDT

I get it... you're presidential. Sober. Intelligent. What FDR might have looked like on TV during his fireside chats if only there had been TV.

But here's my fear - you're losing people's interest. I'm not sure saying you'll cut taxes and trickle down doesn't work for 2 minutes is more effective than the exact same 1 minute ad.

How about some zing? Something memorable? Or how about some positive images of what America could look like - a rising sun... people at work... windmills, solar panels, building bridges, kids at school. Please, please play on the America of the past vs. America of the future theme. There HAS to be something more creative you can do.

It's time to move on. Do something different. Show McCain's video pushing us into Iraq after 9/11 and his call to deregulate. Use HIS words against him. It's far more effective than you saying "McCain called for x or y."

Use some humor.

Right now you seem about as interesting as an economics teacher. The problem with sober is that people tune it out. The first direct address ad was fine. The second, fine. Now you've pushed the limit of that method. You don't want voters to tune you out. Speak to them in THEIR language for a little while.

Humor through contradiction.

The miseducation of the American Public

Marie — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:20:12 EDT

I recently had a friend write the following:

To My Bought & Paid For Senators & Congressman,

Voters are obviously outraged over this Wall St. bailout bill. The tweaks to the bill that I've read about this morning (9/30/08) are not going to make the bill any more acceptable to voters. The premise of the bill is flawed to the point of being worthless. It is so flawed that people who know NOTHING about economics or finance know the bill is completely unfair and will not solve our problems. This is what I think voters will support (in order of importance):

1) Law enforcement. Start indicting and arresting large numbers of people who committed wire fraud and others crimes in this epic Ponzi scheme. Rule of law still means something to large numbers of voters.

2)Help middle and working class families. Substantially reduce INTEREST RATES on all mortgages and credit cards. Put a cap on credit card interest rates. That would help millions, reduce foreclosures and kick start the economy.

3)Reestablish regulatory oversight over financial institutions and products. Start monopoly busting. Break up some of these concentrated mergers which are anti-competitive.

4) Help some of the bankrupt financial companies go out of business in an orderly fashion-to calm public fears and the "market".

Put together a plan with those four points, and you will get the vast majority of voters to support you and the rest of the Congress.

My response was provided as follows:

Your Point is well taken [that outrage exist] but misfires on what the bill is about.This is about bailing out the average American from the harm already done by Wall St.

1. FBI investigations are taking place as we speak and write about the plan. Section 127 would have had several agencies working together to get to the bottom of the investigations as a joint effort.

2. Mortgages that are about to re-adjust should find shelter in this bill. Section 124 of the bill was entered to strengthen homeowner eligibility to qualify to revise their mortgage before foreclosure is possible as well as improve tools to prevent a foreclosure.

3. Section 125 establishes a Congressional oversight Panel to review the mistakes made by these financial institutions to submit reform proposals to put necessary regulations in place.

4. The purchase of the banks troubled assets would have added stability to "market" & calmed fears. Some still would have been still sold off but they would be more attractive to a more stable entity making it orderly.

So, I believe most of the public has been miseducated on this issue but that does not surprise me. I am totally surprised that once again the American public has been mislead away from what is in their best interest.

None of the Wall Street" movers" or "shakers" are going to be hurt if we do not pass a measure to increase credit within our monetary system, just the average folks that are working hard for their families and dreams. Therefore, the Outrage is misplaced & serves no fruitful purpose.

Obama is right something has to be done and done soon before we all pay for this bad lesson in economics.

Let me add this:

The easy way out of all of this is to do nothing. Like this drought Georgia has been experiencing, Did we have to go without water to understand we need to conserve? No! All of us pulled together to reduce our consumption and prayed the drought will end soon. Well, our economic situation is the same way. We all can pull together to get something done rather than let the whole system languish into economic choas.

A message from Kelly:

A big thank you!By Kelly - Sep 28th, 2008 at 12:22 pm EDT Also listed in: Chattooga County (GA) Democrats | NW Georgia for Obama '08 | Rome for Obama Thanks to everyone who came out to Hope in the park and helped in any way. The turn out was small. Considering 3 other big events happening at the same time and gas prices, I am pleased. We registered a few voters and gave out a lot of information about our candidates.

BAILOUT RAGE SPINNING GLOBAL ECONOMIC MELTDOWN

MoorAmerican — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:33:58 EDT

9/30/2008 – 35 Days before Election Day --- Gospeltales of American War Heroes, recorded for the Library of Congress 2008

0839 - - - Al Quada Republican Trickette Leader John McCain speaks out on failed vote for Financial Rescue Bill… Expresses confidence they will pass bipartisan legislation that is better than the bill that was defeated… Spinning again the blame and politicizing the crisis.

0845 - - - President of Al Quada Republican Trickettes Leadership George Bush makes a statement on financial crisis… reporter says “he looks like a beaten dog”… “seems like a commentator rather than a leader”… Mass media trickette cell operatives keep spinning the politicized chaos of the financial crisis and economic melt down to hide the fact they are intentionally destroying the American economy which significantly impedes the capacity of the 44th Presidency of the United States of America in Congress Assembled. They are creating a game changer for the incompetent Vice President candidate, Sarah Palin, the incumbent Governor of Alaska for the Al Quada Republican Trickette ticket, an executive of state corruption… An expert of energy company bribery and kick backs… Same bill will be pushed back through again for another vote later in the week. Markets could be at risk for another record decline and loss of wealth… Chuck Todd and Rehema Ellis reports about Bailout Rage.

…John Hanson calls Ralph into his chambers and gave him another note for Mr. John Alson. As Ralph turns to leave with the note John Hanson asks if the Financial Prosperity plan ready. He assures the President that its ready, just needs a few more provisions that Mr. John Alson is adding to lawfully tighten up the plan… Ralph says, {It will be ready before they pass the Financial Rescue Bill in the Congress later this week.} Hanson says, {May Heaven still continue to smile on our efforts!}

Al Quada Republican Trickettes Are Spinning The Chaos

MoorAmerican — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 08:13:50 EDT

9/30/2008 – 35 Days before Election Day --- Gospeltales of American War Heroes, recorded for the Library of Congress 2008
0700 - - - The Pantheon of American War Heroes listened attentively at MSNBC – Morning Joe…
Al Quada Republican Trickettes Party Vote Against Financial Rescue Bill - - - Markets Lose $1.2 Trillion: 777 point Drop and the Congress goes home for Jewish holiday recess… Andrea Mitchell reports on Morning Joe - - - Newt Gingrich, another trickette cell operative and future Al Quada Republican presidential candidate for 2012, undercut the bipartisan initiative whereby the house had 67% of the republican party conference vote against the bill. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. The trickettes objective was to sink the United States economy into a deep recession and possibly a great depression which lasts at least 3 years of the 44th Presidency of the United States of America. None of the policies would be possible and the Democrats would lose the congressional majority to govern effectively. In 2011 – 2012 the Al Quada Republican Tricksters would take over the country to resume the failed policies of PNAC.
Rep. Clyburn reports that they delivered the votes – 140… Democrats only agreed to 118 votes. The Al Quada Republican trickettes lied and intentionally defeated the Financial Rescue Bill to crash the global markets and then blame the Democrats for not passing the bill. The trickettes said they were short and only could deliver 70 to 80 votes. Now we know they out right lied. It is nothing less than a TERRORIST ATTACK AGAINST THE WEALTH OF AMERICA… MASS MEDIA REPORTERS SPIN BLAME FOR FAILED VOTE ON CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS AND BARACK OBAMA because they are representing “safe districts”…

Joe Scarborough and company are probably a republican trickette media operative of Al Quada.

John Hanson said, "NO DOUBT"

Metabolic Econ101

Kelson Philo — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:36:57 EDT

Well, in what was a surprise to a great many people, including me, the House actually voted down the bailout plan. Voted it down due to overwhelming constituent pressure. Pressure from folks on both sides of the political divide. How often in the recent past have we seen this much of the citizenry so motivated?

The Food Chain Theory of Economics

Robert Warden — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:02:37 EDT

The Food Chain Theory of Economics

Once again, despite my lack of formal training in economics, or perhaps because of it, I have my own creative and radical ideas about economics. Actually, this one is an analogy which is a continuation of the analogy I made last time.

The economy may be seen as working much like the food chain which is so well understood by ecologists. As you are probably aware, the primary producers of the food chain are plants. They convert sunlight and minerals into organic matter. They also recycle both plant and animal wastes, converting them back into living matter. Animals begin with protozoans, single celled animal-like creatures such as amoebas which surround and ingest other single celled organisms. From that point, animals vary in size and diet. Basically, animals are divided into herbivores (plant eaters), plankton feeders, omnivores (eaters of both plants and other animals), and carnivores (meat eaters). With the exception of plankton feeders, larger animals tend to feed on larger food items.

Now I will analogize this information to the economy.

Plants/Algae: Machines, Technology, anything which can be used to help us produce goods other than by hand

Protozoans: People who are virtually unseen to the more advantaged, such as illegal immigrants, people living in virtual slavery, or sweatshop workers

Herbivores: People who use technology for productive purposes, such as factory workers and repair persons

Plankton Feeders: People who profit by the cheap labor of others; remember, these are some of the largest creatures such as whales

Omnivores: People who use technology for both their own benefit and those of others; these are the traditional middle class citizens who both support the economy and benefit from society's and government's protections in a mutually beneficial relationship

Carnivores: People who prey on the middle class, such as large business owners and executives including the financial institution executives involved in the current economic crisis

Parasites: People who intentionally take advantage of other individuals, such as con artists and people who commit welfare or disability fraud

I know that this is not a perfect analogy, but it makes a number of important and relevant points. First of all, the environment can only support a relatively small number of carnivores and plankton feeders. These are the fat cats who have been growing larger and larger in the past few decades, what I refer to as corporatists. There actually is a role for these economic carnivorous Tigers in the economy. They function to coordinate economic activity and make important economic decisions, but they should not be allowed to become too large or powerful. Some of them in fact, may need to be "caged" if you know what I mean. However, human beings deserve better than to be protozoans. The fewer human economic protozoans, or the plankton feeders who profit by their labor, the better. The fewer parasites, the better, as well.

The basis of a good economy and progressive society should be a strong middle class, productive herbivores and versatile omnivores who live productive lives and enjoy the fruits of their labor. In turn, the productivity of the middle class depends on a combination of their hands-on labor, and their use of technology. By nurturing technology, we essentially become technology farmers who help the economy grow. But remember, farming is hard work. To put the current financial institution bailout issue into context, the proposed bailout represents throwing more meat to the Tigers and Wolves in the hopes that if these already bloated creatures are fed more, they will take care of the rest of us better. This is the same sort of reverse logic seen in Reaganomics, the idea of the "trickle down economy" -- somehow, rich conservatives argue, disingenuously, that if take off all restraints on their feeding, and allow them to grow to humongous proportions, they will start nurturing the rest of us better. How rediculous! It is middle class workers, particularly teachers and scientists, who nurture the economy. Feeding the rich more money only results in more manure and urine which trickles down on the rest of us. That is the real trickle down economy that has been dumped upon the public. Now we need to cut those fat cat carnivores down to size, and make fertilizer out of all the manure and urine we find lying around us..

Foreign Policy - Advantage McCain?

Prof R — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:44:36 EDT

Last night I gathered with some friends over dinner and the debate. As the candidates spoke about the economic crisis, I felt bad for Senator McCain - he looked out of his element, and frankly like he was about to cry. If I had played the role he has played in deregulating the banking industry and stock market, I'd probably cry, too. But that wasn't the focus of the debate. When the foreign policy debate was done, I shocked my fellow Democrats by doffing my cap to the old hawk.
McCain changed visibly as the debate intensified. What I saw was a man who has been on the most important foreign policy committees since the Spanish-American war. The depth and breadth of his knowledge and experience are stunning, and for the most part he presented that knowledge with remarkable clarity and force. A one-term Senator, even one with Obama's foreign policy experience, just can't compete with that.
But it didn't make me waver in my vote one iota. Why not? The easy answer is, of course, judgement. Obama drove that home again and again last night. But it goes beyond that, to what the commander-in-chief's role really is, especially in the nation's darkest hours.
McCain's depth and breadth of knowledge is easily matched by other Senators and lifelong government folks - including, by the way, Joe Biden. You need that knowledge in your advisors - the NSA, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense. So Obama will have that in the VP slot, and can stock the other posts with equally knowledgeable folks. But knowledge isn't enough. Not many people knew more about the international arena than Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. Look how well that turned out.
Ronald Reagan, on the other hand, entered office with not a ton more than the knowledge that Communism is Bad and Democracy and Capitalism are Good. Even Democrats have to admit that in the foreign policy arena, Reagan was pretty successful.
Now, it's dangerous to compare a relatively inexperienced politician with Ronald Reagan, but let's also recall that upon taking office, Reagan actually had less foreign policy experience than Obama. What Reagan did have was an ability to inspire hope and confidence in a large segment of the American public and amongst our allies during fairly difficult and scary times. Sound familiar?
Unless you flat out hate him, you can't look at Obama's travels through the middle east, Africa, and Europe and be unimpressed. Foreign leaders, particularly in Europe where our allies are alienated but much needed, love him and seem very willing to work with him. Like Roosevelt, Kennedy and Reagan, he had hundreds of thousands of Europeans cheering and waving American flags - and pro-American populations elect pro-American governments. After Bush invaded Iraq and gave Europe the finger, those Europeans elected people who were unwilling to work with America on a whole host of issues, particularly in the foreign policy arena. Support for America became a political liability across the pond.
People and leaders in Africa, of course, adore him. Why does that matter? Because those impoverished African nations are prime breeding grounds for anti-Americanism and terrorist recruitment.
None of our presidential candidates are really able to scare those terrorist groups in the Middle East the way Reagan scared the Soviets. People who are willing to strap bombs to themselves and give their lives to wipe out innocent men, women, and children, are not cowed by angry posturing and ramped up defense spending in the US. If anything, they seem to get a sick jolt from it. "Bring it on", said Bush. And bring it on they did. The leaders of some of those middle eastern countries that may be willing to work rationally with us seem more willing to deal with those who don't posture angrily. And frankly, though probably not very importantly, that middle name of Obama's just might be a bit of an advantage in bending their ears.
But beyond that, Obama does what Roosevelt, Kennedy and Reagan did best. He inspires. Now that Reagan is dead and gone, conservatives easily dismiss hope and inspiration as misplaced sentimentalism, even as they used to praise Reagan as "the great communicator" and wax poetic about his visions of a shining city on a hill. In sharp contrast, John McCain scares the bejeebers out of people, here at home and abroad. His hawkishness is resented in nearly every corner of the globe. He is seen in foreign policy terms as the second coming of Bush, albeit a smart version of Bush. Even if McCain's military strategy is superior to Obama's (which I don't believe it is - and apparently more retired generals agree with him than McCain - if that counts for anything), what is needed most desperately right now is successful diplomacy. If Iraq has taught us anything, and I hope it has, it's that we have come to understand that we don't have the manpower or money to go it alone again.
And finally, there is the Palin factor. Not to be crass, but McCain is 3 years from the average life expectancy, and his body has been brutalized by five years of torture, 20 years of smoking, various surgeries, and nearly every type of skin cancer known to science. The odds of her taking office are higher than most VPs in history. After watching the 3 interviews the Alaska governor has been allowed by her campaign, it is clear why they are so desperate to keep her from anyone who would ask tough questions. The lack of understanding, clear vision and flexibility of thought shown in the Couric interview alone terrifies me. And that was Katie Couric - not exactly like staring down Putin, whose head, she seems to think, might come flying over Alaska.

more homework for Barack...

Alan Falk — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 01:49:07 EDT

refute the arguments in this video....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

all of the economic policies and votes described are reasons i would NOT vote for you if Roe v. Wade were not going to be at risk.

affordable housing screws up the economy and has been counterproductive to reaching any of its intended goals.

if you want people in homes, EDUCATE THEM and lower taxes on businesses so they can afford to make a profit hiring Americans.