Posts with the tag crisis

Honduras´ Real Situation

Mymi — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:41:57 EDT

As a Honduran citizen, living the current political crisis, want to declare the following.

The United States of America and International Community need to listen Honduran citizens.
Manuel Zelaya former president, violated our laws, he planned to reform some articles of the Constitution to perpetuate and rule the country for the time he desired. As one of the biggest followers of Mr. Chavez, he wanted to build the same road to continuism. He did not obey the orders and placed himself above our Constitution.

We Hondurans don´t sell our country, we will not tolerate this actions. Mr. Chavez cannot threaten our people saying he will act and send his troops to place Mr. Zelaya in the presidency again.
We the mayority of Hondurans support the presidency of Roberto Micheletti who has be named recently, this has been done following our Constitution´s laws.

The UN ,OAS, other organizations and the United States of America as Democracy defenders need to understand Mr. Zelaya´s intentions were not democratic. His intentions are well known, his family was once involved in a masacre and justice was never seen.
He spent more than 600 million lempiras in his illegal poll. He took our people´s money for his own interests. Mr. Zelaya is not a victim, Honduras was the victim when he ruled as president.

We respect our laws, nobody can be above them, he since his early days in presidency did not obey laws.He hasn´t even presented to our nation this years budget, another violation to law.

His intentions are to build a totalitarian regime, he has the support of the extreme left leaders, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega and Evo Morales.
He won the simpathy of the poor, dressing as he did, talking as he did and acting.
His words have never been consistent with his actions. There is an order of arrest from the Interpol and our national police extended for Manuel Zelaya Rosales, for his crimes of abuse of power, treason to the motherland, administrative crimes and misappropriation of funds.

I request to the White House and the American community a deep analysis in our crisis, we can´t support an extreme left accomplice.

THANKYOU

Dear Mr. President

Bob — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 08:53:35 EDT

Dear Mr. President,

I guess that acceleration of an existing trajectory is certainly a form of REAL CHANGE. But I don't know if that is the kind of change that the people who elected you had in mind.

Just to spell it out in idiot-proof terms: you cannot borrow your way out of a crisis of debt. Consuming more than you produce is unsustainable. Spending more than you make is unsustainable. Unsustainable means that at some point there will be a crisis / crash / default. The Piper is always paid, as they say.

You are clearly not an idiot and these simple principles must be as obvious to you as they are to me. So what do you personally gain from pursuing a course that cannot but make the inevitable crash worse and worse; that cannot but cause untold suffering for millions of Americans who are busting their butts to live a common, decent life? Real suffering for real people. Really. Who gains from your acceleration of the existing path toward economic armageddon?

I want to believe, Mr. President. I want to hope. I love your foreign policy rhetoric. I love your willingness to verbally step up to the plate and take responsibility. But there is the talk, and there is the walk. So far, the talk is A+, but the walk is a solid F.

Man up, Mr. President. You cannot solve the very real economic crisis we are facing by continuing down the same path with the same players. CLEAN HOUSE. Get rid of those guys: Summers, Geithner, Bernanke -- the whole Wall St. banking crew who took us here in the first place -- and set a new course altogether. Not an acceleration down the same course; that's the wrong form of change. Turn left, or turn right, or put on the brakes. When you are crashing, the accelerator is not your friend.

Yours sincerely,

Bob Job (has no job)

Iranian Crisis - Blasphemy of Sacred Islam and The Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him)

"Voice for Humanity" — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:39:28 EDT

By Padmini Arhant

The categorical defiance by the theocratic ruler Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the puppet nominee Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the clerics, the Guardian Coucil, The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, the Basij and the entire regimen behind the ruthless authoritarian regime is blasphemous of the sacred religion – Islam, they falsely represent in the Iranian Republic...

More @http://www.padminiarhant.com

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Budgeting

Mysti — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:36:17 EDT

I am not sure if anyone will be able to read this,THE FONT IS REALLY SMALL, especially; people in California; but we are in trouble. especially, our children. Education and Health Care is extremely important, no job, no tax no savings for the future. It is a problem that our state has to take from people whom are struggling to survive as it is. I am sorry but, our children are our future, without health care or education they will just be another number. This is 2009, our Country should have already passed this ridiculously fight over who gets what and when and how it is going to help. I have been an advocate for the disabled population for quite sometime now; and, it is truly sad that even the working disabled, still needing assistance to be able to work, are being cut. Our children's education is also important; without them how are we to grow?, how are we to continue with our Globe?, who is going to proceed with our country? All these questions need to be addressed. Someone is still being stingy and putting money in all the wrong hands. Our health care is ridiculous; with all of the air, water and food tainted our children are growing with health problems. This needs to be corrected. CALIFORNIA HAS A PROBLEM..

Must watch Documentary Flow - For Love of Water Directed by Irena Salina

Peter from Carrollton, TX — Sun, 31 May 2009 19:38:18 EDT

Must watch Documentary Flow - For Love of Water Directed by Irena Salina “Thousands have lived without love, not one without water.” –W.H.Auden

Irena Salina’s award-winning documentary investigation into what experts label the most important political and environmental issue of the 21st Century - The World Water Crisis.

Salina builds a case against the growing privatization of the world’s dwindling fresh water supply with an unflinching focus on politics, pollution, human rights, and the emergence of a domineering world water cartel.

Interviews with scientists and activists intelligently reveal the rapidly building crisis, at both the global and human scale, and the film introduces many of the governmental and corporate culprits behind the water grab, while begging the question “CAN ANYONE REALLY OWN WATER?”

Beyond identifying the problem, FLOW also gives viewers a look at the people and institutions providing practical solutions to the water crisis and those developing new technologies, which are fast becoming blueprints for a successful global and economic turnaround. (Excerpt from main website)

Please visit the official website for more information:
http://www.flowthefilm.com

Click the Fullscreen Button for a larger version.

http://politicalpete.com/forum/index.php

http://politicalpete.com/

AMBICION PARA HACER FRENTE A LA CRISIS

GONZALO GAYO — Tue, 19 May 2009 09:31:19 EDT

Gonzalo Gayo

Va siendo hora de ponerse las pilas ante una crisis que empieza a tener una clara salida del túnel. Va siendo hora de la ambición de progreso en un nuevo tiempo, de la valentía necesaria para apostar por nuevos sectores productivos generadores de empleo y riqueza y de afrontar juntos los esfuerzos necesarios para salir de la crisis.

Ha llegado la hora de estimular con todos los apoyos necesarios la inversión, el consumo interno, la capacidad de generar el empleo y especialmente el autoempleo con más derechos y facilidades para los autónomos.

Es hora de premiar a quienes mantienen firmes sus compromisos sociales como empresarios y a los trabajadores dispuestos a arrimar el hombro. Es la hora de apostar por los grandes acuerdos porque juntos saldremos fortalecidos de una recesión que ha visto desmoronarse el castillo de naipes de la construcción. Una crisis de la que ya hemos pasado lo peor pero que tiene ante si el gran reto y esfuerzo de generar empleo y riqueza tras sufrir la destrucción de un millón de puestos de trabajo.

La España de hoy, la que sufre un 17% de desempleo tras el derrumbe del castillo de naipes de la construcción es la primera potencia europea en agricultura ecológica y figura entre los tres países del mundo que lideran la energía fotovoltaica, solar y eólica, Además de disponer de las empresas más preparadas en el mundo en el desarrollo de las desaladoras que permitirán en el futuro poner en valor nuevas zonas de progreso e el mundo.

Son sin duda sectores de futuro que marcarán el camino en el mundo ya que la economía será cada día más independiente de un petróleo en manos de unos pocos para pasar a una producción más democrática y respetuosa de la energía con las renovables. En esa revolución energética y medioambiental España es líder y sin duda será un nicho de empleo en la medida que sepamos internacionalizar estos sectores emergentes para generar más empleo y riqueza. Es preciso también ahondar en nuevos sectores de la biotecnología, de las ciencias de la información, del desarrollo del mundo rural en una economía que acentúa cada día sus pigmentaciones verdes y que también afectarán al resto de sectores tradicionales en su necesaria evolución y modernización.

En este proceso evolutivo es precisa una clara apuesta de la industria del automóvil por nuevos prototipos de vehículos eléctricos y de hidrógeno. Hemos de pasar de una economía basada en el petróleo a una nueva era en el que las energías renovables permitirán que los consumidores seamos también productores de energía. Los coches eléctricos podrán generar su propia energía y hasta incluso los hogares serán mini factorías energéticas capaces de autoabastecerse.

La agricultura ecológica será un pilar básico en el desarrollo de nuevo empleo y productos por lo que se deberán estudiar el valor añadido con nuevos productos, elaborados o semielaborados a pie de campo, con unidades móviles que limpiaran y envasaran en fresco para en apenas unas horas estar en los puntos de venta de medio mundo. Ya se esta haciendo en Andalucía, donde jóvenes empresarios han puesto en marcha proyectos innovadores que permiten elaborar un sinfín de productos mediante sofisticados traileres a modo de embajadoras e industria móvil que se traslada de campo en campo.

España debe apostar con claridad por el valor añadido en la agricultura ecológica y una gran alianza con la industria alimentaria. Los agricultores deben poner en valor su esfuerzo y los riesgos que asumen en sus cosechas en un comercio justo en el que Bruselas debería ser garante de la renta agrícola como hace en otros sectores.

La crisis nos ofrece la oportunidad de elegir el nuevo rumbo que debe tomar la economía, en un nuevo modelo que de respuestas a los grandes retos que plantea el mundo así como la necesidad de depurar excesos y errores cometidos en el pasado.

Errores de los que cabe aprender y que se sustentan como casi siempre en la especulación y dinero fácil que durante un tiempo han prevalecido en la construcción, materias primas, energía, los mercados financieros de renta variable y en las cadenas distribución de los productos agrícolas. A esa lacra de la especulación, también habrá que ponerle barreras mediante políticas fiscales e incluso la expropiación de aquellos bienes que afecten a derechos de los ciudadanos, como ocurre en el suelo para hacer vivienda.

Las administraciones deben potenciar una fiscalidad que deberá premiar las inversiones generadoras de empleo y riqueza frente aquellas que buscan desesperadamente unas plusvalías especulativas.

Estamos ante un nuevo tiempo, del que se apuntan ya algo más que brotes verdes, siendo estos pilares sobre los que se debe asentar una economía sólida y generadora de empleo y riqueza basada en la independencia energética del petróleo, con alto valor añadido y dirigida en sus productos a las necesidades de las personas.

La nueva economía del siglo XXI aun debe explorar nuevos nichos de empleo en la atención a las personas dependientes, con nuevos servicios a las personas mayores y la aportación de estas con su experiencia en el desarrollo de nuevos jóvenes emprendedores. Una nueva economía en el que el poder local será determinante por su proximidad a los ciudadanos a la hora de articular respuestas a cada reto desde el apoyo del resto de las administraciones.

Queda mucho por hacer, sin duda, pero lo cierto es que estamos en el camino de conseguir que por fin la economía española se impregne de nuevos valores, de sólidos pilares de presente y futuro y de la necesaria cultura de la concertación y el acuerdos para que juntos salgamos de una crisis que empieza a apuntar las nuevas oportunidades que se avecinan en un nuevo tiempo.

Humane Call at the Need of the hour

Unknown user — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:37:48 EDT

Dear fellow beings. Mankind has evolved with different facets and today we the entire human race are calling for peace and prosperity. But somehow as goodness tries to to previal in this very world there is a darker side with hatred and treachery blown to awesome levels.

Yes, I would like to put the issue of the ongoing internal war carried out by the government forces of SriLanka on its very own people. Ultimately what is it the nation trying to achieve through this mass geonicide claiming it to be a war against an organisation supposedly fighting for the independence of their (Ethnic Tamil) race.

The liberation movement by the Tamils have been going on for well beyond 25 years and I trust that atleast 75% of the Tamils in the nation are supportive of this movement till date.

I am not trying to give a clean chit for the liberation organisation but as a global human race we need to understand the point made by the ethnic Tamils of SriLanka in order to get liberated from suppression by the majority Sinhalese. The war has been going on and has reached the worst phase where the nation's military is displaying the brutality unforeseen in any part of the world.

As the truth remains in its form, we the international community and fellow peers are just shying away from the death cries reverberating from the island nation.

When US and its allied forces can liberate Afghanistan and Iraq from the fundamentalist and dictator regime why is it that no serious attempt is being made in this case. I would make a very humble request through this forum and request all fellow beings to raise your voice in unison to enforce a UN paramilitary deployment in the island nation to oversee the rescue activities and culminate the ongoing geonocide.

At this juncture i would like to ask the Lankan government - "Will you dare to shell or bomb Sinhalese settlement in case the so called tamil liberation group is based therein?"

Think you will find an answer after all life is equal and there is nobody above anyone.

Russian crisis is ended

Aljona Mouse — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 04:13:36 EDT

I am publisher of the first Russian regional newspaper THE PERM DAYS.I was publisher before crisis.Now I have no ability to publish.But I have a rare chance to make my business in Internet.So I have a rare possibility to place everything I need to make my business more profitable and bring more information concerning a actual facts about crisis.It is my important enemy.But Crisis is my good friend and my partner.As Obama is the first non-white President making a little revolution in American minds so I could be the first non-usual publisher who will show a real situation about crisis in Russian remote regions.So the crisis is ended.We are ready to be activeWe are already activeOur business is waiting for your offers

Más dinero a quien produce y menos a quien especula

GONZALO GAYO — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:29:58 EDT

El FMI advierte que la crisis económica no podrá resolverse hasta que se solucionen los problemas del sector bancario, y no parece faltarle razón si bien no todos coincidimos con las medidas y hoja de ruta adoptada. Hasta el momento, los paquetes de estímulo de todo el mundo ascienden a un 1,6-1,7% del PIB mundial en tanto en EEUU el conjunto de ayudas puestos sobre la mesa de la administración Obama representan casi el 30% del PIB estadounidense. Y es que gran parte de las medidas que triturará el sistema bancario debería dirigirse en primer lugar a sanear el sistema productivo y estimular la economía domestica.
El sistema bancario y la crisis que sufrimos a nivel global requieren de una catarsis profunda y rápida del sistema financiero, estimulando los procesos de fusiones con ayudas fiscales y en su caso con la intervención del Banco de España en las entidades en riesgo. Esta catarsis del sistema es necesaria para despejar el camino que permita normalizar el funcionamiento futuro del sistema bancario. En este sentido, el modelo que esta aplicando la administración española será sin duda más efectivo que otros en los que se pone casi un cheque en blanco para el sector, como ocurre con la administración Obama. Así pues no es de extrañar que el presidente norteamericano Barack Obama consiguiera el respaldo a medias de los principales banqueros del país para deshacerse de la deuda o los activos tóxicos. Una basura que menguará los recursos públicos disponibles y elevará la deuda norteamericana hasta niveles insospechados sin garantías de que se llegue a tiempo de salvaguardar al sistema productivo de las secuelas colaterales de esta crisis y todo para simplemente dar mas liquidez al sistema cuando hay otros caminos.
Con ayudas de todo tipo que representan casi el 30% del PIB norteamericano, parece que los grandes beneficiarios serán los causantes del terremoto financiero y los especuladores cuando en realidad deberíamos centrar nuestra atención en el giro de 180 grados en la estrategia productiva del sector del automóvil o como alcanzar la necesaria independencia energética del petróleo. Y es que afrontamos un nuevo paradigma, una nueva economía que de respuesta a los retos del futuro en materia energética, en la distribución de la riqueza e incluso en el desarrollo de continentes enteros que han sido condenados a la nada como ocurre en África. No es posible un futuro en el que el 20% de la población en el mundo tenga el 80% de los recursos y la riqueza del planeta.
El esfuerzo que destinan los gobiernos no puede perderse en el enorme agujero de la especulación para tapar agujeros, sino en fortalecer los cimientos de una nueva economía que reclama ayudas para su transformación. De hecho, la misma especulación que arrasó los mercados de renta variable y los balances de las cuentas bancaria ahora se ceba en las subastas de bonos y deuda publica penalizando a países en vías de desarrollo o incluso aquellos cuya fuertes dependencias como ocurre en Finlandia o Austria con primas de escándalo.
La necesidad de identificar a especuladores y paraísos fiscales que distorsionan los mercados y que acaban por arruinar países enteros debería ser objeto de una mayor dedicación por parte de las policías financieras del mundo a fin de proceder a la intervención de dichas cuentas. También es necesario establecer las responsabilidades y penas a quienes han jugado a la tómbola con el dinero ajeno ya que no puede quedar impune la enorme estafa global causada por la avaricia de unos pocos y que pretenden que ahora paguemos todos.
El mensaje clave que debe partir de todos es que estamos juntos en esto y para ello la cumbre del Grupo de los 20 (G-20) de esta semana en Londres debe ser el arranque de una salida de la crisis consensuada, atendiendo a los más necesitados e inyectando liquidez al sistema productivo y las familias tras, incluso sentar en los consejos de administración a representantes públicos en las entidades financieras que han recibido ayudas. No es de recibo que el G 20 haya retirado de la agenda el paro como uno de los temas a abordar mientras se esta inyectando ingentes cantidades de recursos para salvar la cara de unos cuantos ejecutivos bancarios.
La creación de un observatorio mundial del sistema financiero, productivo y empleo, la transformación y remodelación incluida del FMI así como los bancos centrales, una cesta única de divisas, la potenciación de nuevas áreas de desarrollo en África e Iberoamérica, la adopción del hidrogeno y energías renovables como las nuevas fuentes energías del futuro, la necesidad de una alimentación y agricultura ecológica o las necesarias mejoras medioambientales son y serán los nuevos pilares de un desarrollo sostenible y un nuevo tiempo.
Sin embargo, hoy por hoy seguimos hablando de la importancia de que los activos tóxicos de los bancos nos lo comamos entre todos para que los bancos comiencen a prestar dinero de nuevo. Sin embargo, no podemos, ni debemos condicionar un nuevo tiempo a la salida de algunos bancos causantes de esta crisis destinando ingentes cantidades de dinero para tapar agujeros como si no hubiera pasado nada. El esfuerzo y ayuda del sector publico debe destinarse a los bancos que actuaron con cautela y solvencia para evitar los efectos de esta crisis mientras debe penalizarse a aquellos que actúan sin escrúpulos e incluso sus directivos cobran primas tras las ayudas recibidas del gobierno, especialmente importante tras el escándalo de la aseguradora AIG.
Los verdaderos planes de futuro serán las ayudas al sector automotriz, uno de los más afectados por la crisis, para poner en marcha nuevos prototipos en la era del hidrógeno que sustituya a los carburantes y que evitará la quiebra de las grandes corporaciones, si bien surgirán también otras más ágiles a la hora de adaptarse a los nuevos tiempos.
Es también necesario que en este nuevo orden mundial China asuma un nuevo papel de liderazgo y cooperación leal ya que gran parte de la crisis actual mundial se la debemos a su crecimiento sin control, devaluaciones, mano de obra barata, exportaciones sin cuartel e importaciones a cuenta gotas y todas las ayudas posibles con recursos públicos a su sistema productivo. El hundimiento de gran parte de la economía mundial se la debemos a este crecimiento desbocado de China y que provocó el mayor encarecimiento de materias primas en el último siglo y el mayor empobrecimiento de los países mas pobres. No se trata de colocar a China en el ojo del huracán pero si en la necesidad de que forme parte del liderazgo de países para salir de esta crisis desde la unidad, cooperación, lealtad y apertura de sus mercados.
En nuestro país, este fin de semana el Banco de España decidía tomar el control de la Caja Catilla-La Mancha, en dificultades en lo que es la primera medida de este tipo en España desde el inicio de la crisis financiera. El Gobierno de José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero se reunió de forma urgente para estudiar la autorización de esta operación, mediante la aprobación de un decreto ley que garantice la financiación de Caja Castilla-La Mancha. Se trata pues de la primera intervención de una gran entidad financiera española desde el inicio de la crisis y desde que en 1993 el Banco de España asumiera el control del Banco Español de Crédito (Banesto), que adquirió posteriormente en subasta el grupo Santander tras dar por fracasadas las negociaciones para la fusión de Caja Castilla-La Mancha con la andaluza Unicaza. Una intervención que pone en evidencia la seriedad de un sistema financiero español que hoy es la envidia de medio mundo por su solidez y sistemas de control, no descartando la necesidad de depuraciones de aquellos que gestionaron mal.

How our President is doing

Remy from Pompano Beach, FL — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:59:48 EDT

I thank God every day for President Obama. My faith community often makes reference to praying for our leaders so that God may continue to anoint them and bless them with added wisdom to lead, but I find myself praying for President Obama a great deal, not only because I like him but also because he means so well for our country. His decisions and whole being project that. When I talk to people and tell them how much I find myself praying for him, I usually find out that many others are also praying for him. I do not know the president personally as we have never met one-on-on, but the times I have heard him speak confirm for me that he is quite couragious and full of wisdom. He is leading our country during a time of crisis for many of us, and I could not have more confidence in anyone else to lead us during this tough economic time. I appreciate the wisdom that he has been using so far to address our economic concerns. Let's continue to pray for our president who has to make very tough decisions and is often met with fierced apposition. Let's pray, too, for Congress so that all may support our president to lead this great nation. May God bless our President Barack Obama and may God bless the USA.

--Remy Nelson

UN NUEVO IMPULSO PARA CREAR EMPLEO

GONZALO GAYO — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 02:46:10 EDT

España y EEUU deben dar un paso más para empezar a asentar los sólidos cimientos de una recuperación económica. La hemorragia en la destrucción de empleo requerirá no solo grandes esfuerzos de solidaridad sino también un nuevo impulso al desarrollo de nuevos sectores productivos y que también que permita estimular el crecimiento de las empresas que soportan el envite de esta crisis financiera. Al gobierno se le reclama que abra una segunda fase en el intenso ritmo de medidas que viene aplicando. Tras asentar medidas de apoyo a los sectores en crisis, y fortalecido los sistema de cobertura a desempleados es hora de afrontar las condiciones suficientes y necesarias para estimular la creación de empleo y recuperar la confianza empresarial.
Reconvertir el desempleo en una fuerza productiva es el objetivo y para ello es imprescindible medidas que aligeren de carga impositiva y burocrática que conlleva crear una empresa. Abrir un periodo que permita echar a rodar nuevas iniciativas emprendedoras así como premiar fiscalmente a aquellas empresas dispuestas a mantener y crear empleo debe figurar en la agenda de nuevas medidas de estímulo a la economía y el empleo.
España debe poner en marcha un nuevo plan de estímulo fiscal para el 2010, pese a su elevado déficit, porque su economía seguirá débil, según apuntan los organismos internacionales. Esta sugerencia coincide con la decisión de los jefes de Estado y de Gobierno de la Unión Europea de no contemplar más planes de estímulo por el momento, lo que sin duda constituye un error al igual que el intento de aparcar de la cumbre del G 20 en Londres el problema del paro.
Generar confianza es la palabra clave si bien aun estamos inmersos en el análisis de la profundidad del agujero que la especulación ha dejado en los balances de las principales entidades financieras y la nueva la valoración real de activos que debería realizarse y parecen omitir. De hecho, la recesión mundial se ha agravado por la interacción explosiva entre un sector financiero envuelto en la incertidumbre y una economía real que pierde confianza.
Para este año, el FMI prevé que el Producto Interno Bruto (PIB) mundial entre en números rojos por primera vez en 60 años, con una reducción de entre el 0,5 y el 1%. Ante este panorama sombrío la Unión Europea (UE) ha elaborado una hoja de hoja de ruta basada en 20 puntos para la reunión del grupo de los principales países industrializados y emergentes del G-20 que tendrá lugar el próximo 2 de abril en Londres. Una hoja de ruta que vuelve a pecar de la escasa concreción que exigen empresarios y trabajadores para crear empleo y riqueza. De hecho, la palabra agricultura o empleo ni tan siquiera figuran en el esbozo de medidas en tanto se busca con ahínco partidas que favorezcan a las grandes corporaciones financieras, energéticas y en telecomunicaciones. De hecho, se sigue buscando fórmulas mágicas, a golpe de talonario, que en realidad van destinadas a ir apagando incendios incontrolados en esta crisis y empobreciendo a países enteros.
Mientras tanto, Bruselas habla de aportar unos 75.000 millones de euros (102.000 millones de dólares) para duplicar las reservas de capital del FMI y sin embargo poco o nada reflexiona sobre la urgente modificación de este organismo cuyo funcionamiento deja mucho que desear y ha sido origen de profundas crisis financieras en algunos estados, especialmente en Iberoamérica.
La UE pondrá sobre la mesa del G 20 en Londres proyectos para ampliar las conexiones de Internet en las zonas rurales, las redes europeas de gas y electricidad, así como las infraestructuras de fuentes de energía alternativas empezarán en 2009 o 2010 con apenas 5.000 millones de euros cuando precisamente nuestra independencia energética será la clave de la salida de esta recesión mundial y un sector generador intenso de empleo, al igual que en infraestructuras o la agricultura ecológica, acuicultura, alimentación, servicios sociales y para la tercera edad, medio ambiente…
Bruselas anuncia que seguirá atenta a los estados en apuros económicos que podrán recibir créditos de un fondo de emergencia de 50.000 millones de euros, diez veces mas que los destinados a estimular y asentar la economía. De hecho, para afrontar la crisis los burócratas europeos prefieren ponerse el traje de bombero a vestir el de torero y plantar cara a la crisis.
Hasta el punto que Bruselas ni siquiera ha aprobado nuevas iniciativas de cara a la conferencia sobre el cambio climático del próximo diciembre en Copenhague y se mantiene a la espera de iniciativas y negociaciones dando a entender la cortedad de miras de la maquinaria burocrática europea frente al ímpetu desplegado por la administración de Obama en EEUU en apenas dos meses desde su toma de posesión.
Alemania y los grandes del club del euro están más por la labor de seguir a pies juntillas las indicaciones de las grandes corporaciones inyectando ingentes cantidades de dinero público en entidades financieras así como favorecer el mercado de las telecomunicaciones con una regulación menos estricta.
Sin embargo para combatir la crisis económica son necesarios adoptar nuevos planes de estímulo económico que favorezcan la independencia energética, mejora en infraestructuras y logística, acuicultura o la mejora de las condiciones para afrontar una economía global que urge fusiones en el sistema financiero y transformaciones de modelos en el sector de un automóvil que debe apostar por el hidrógeno frente a la caduca era del los carbonos.
El puñetazo en la mesa de Obama ha retumbado en todo el planeta y debería ser tomado como ejemplo, en la apuesta por las nuevas energías y el sistema financiero. Muchos de los responsables de entidades financieras que deberían estar entre rejas por su temeridad al arruinar a países enteros, sin embargo se dedican a cobrar primas, premios y sobresueldos por sus servicios cuando dichas empresas han tenido que ser salvadas de la quiebra con dinero público. El caso de AIG en EEUU con el mayor agujero financiero del mundo ha puesto de manifiesto la podredumbre de un sistema capaz de premiar a los directivos que llevaron a la empresa al borde del precipicio mientras se embolsaban en concepto de primas 218 millones de dólares.
Al menos el ministro de Trabajo, Celestino Corbacho, parece dispuesto a establecer límites para los salarios de los altos directivos de empresas privadas y esperemos también que en las publicas ya que hasta la fecha se echa en falta un plan de austeridad que llegue a la nómina de altos cargos de instituciones publicas, aunque solo sea como ejemplo.
Mientras tanto, los pronósticos siguen augurando borrascas con una contracción de la economía del 3,2% este año, muy superior al 2% que anunció apenas hace dos meses lo que da idea de la desorientación de los gurús mientras apunta para 2010 un crecimiento del 0,1%, inferior al 0,2% vaticinado entonces. Tampoco Estados Unidos se salva de la quema. Según este organismo, su economía sufrirá un crecimiento negativo del 2,6% en 2009 y Japón, antaño una de las economías más pujantes del planeta, afronta el panorama más sombrío con una contracción para este año del 5,8%. Así pues, o empezamos a poner los cimientos de la recuperación real con una sustancial mejora fiscal o seguiremos tirando el dinero y esfuerzos en la fosa de una recesión ganada a pulso por el sistema financiero y que ahora pretenden que paguemos todos, incluido un sector como la agricultura que sigue marcando la tónica del olvido y el silencio de la Unión Europea, también en la cumbre del G 20.
Gonzalo Gayo

X Kingdom faced economic crisis

sadashivan — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:44:41 EDT

Once upon a time some thousand years back a country X faced serious economic crisis resulting financial and banking institution failures, massive unemployment, trade crisis that slashed kingdom revenue. King and his chief minister were worried about moving economy. All solutions they brought were failed rather deepened further. Entire kingdom was sleepless. Worried King ordered the ministries “Perceiving economic down turn I decide to invite all the economists and ministers for their suggestions to overcome the deepening crisis and find solutions. Suitable idea will be rewarded”.

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.

Puppet Theatr OBAMERICA «Petrushki In St. Petersburg».

Spiral — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 23:57:21 EST

February 21 09 по February 21 12

Creating UNITY across DIVERSITY!
Through the synthesis of the arts in the Puppet Theater, and social networks to Go Green! Showcases the ground-breaking applications and content addressing the natural environment, promoting environmental sustainability, integrating the principles of environmentally sustainable development into country policies and programmes, reversing the loss of environmental resources including biodiversity, reducing the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and improving the lives of slum dwellers.Vsevolod Meyerhold lifelong dream of reviving with Balagan and PetrushkA. Eisenstein and Kozintsev until 1929, continued the search for new nforms of farce to the cinema. Indispensable and very important part of St. Petersburg culture were famous city festivals and entertainment with their original genre, themes, images, verbal and entertainment, gaming art. Relevant components of this culture was Petrushka A national hero doll. Favorite of many cities, popular throughout the vast space of Russia, St. Petersburg, he had his face was unique, as is North Palmyra. Incarnation freedom, irrepressible energy, the wise people's words and laughter, it is not accidentally turned alien impersonal Soviet reality and hold on for many decades in dusty cabinets museums, stood as a unique rarities. Created by a journalist and poet Irina Dudina actual dome for surprisingly mobile and multi-screens, invented sponsor, the curator of cultural programming fund Shemyakin - Yuri Shevnin used not only for its intended purpose (as theater screen), and at the same time witty, unconventional way advertising. The draft takes into account the charitable, educational and the humanitarian side, the opportunity to engage in creative work of children and contemporary artists. Today, thanks to grant support for puppet theater and Petrushek farce developed since 1999. With the advent of small form in St Petersburg public buildings and advertising sites in shopping malls an opportunity to the evolution of Petrushka and business escorts through various forms of the grotesque and the fusion of modern art. By withdrawing the recommendation of the project «Petrushka In St. Petersburg» A. F. Nekrylova - Professor of the Russian Institute of History of Art, nauthor of the book - «Russian national holidays» The modern theater must absorb all of the specific theater Receptions - pantomime, improvisation, a new mobile architecture, masks, theatr paper, presentation and promotion of contemporary art, science and inventions in all fields. In this case, the P.V. Annenkov in his time, wrote that it was time, finally, understand that the only form that can be Russian theater out of boredom, it is Balagan. This was called the return of the theater to its original, which is a farce. To the essence of farce, you will see that everything is happening here as a particularly wonderful, and not in kind, in the sphere of ordinary life. For example, in balagane costume plays a very different role than that He also plays in a regular theater. Entering the booth furnished is a special ritual, a special parade and mystery. Itself appearance farce, log into it attracts your attention to unusual type of DROPS form education for all. http://projects.tigweb.org/petrushki/

Connecticut Mortgage Crisis

Kim — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:14:16 EST

I am writing with the hope that you may be able to assist me with my mortgage crisis. My mortgage lender is Indymac Federal Bank. I currently have a 30year conventional loan with a 6.8% interest rate. In July of 2008, I applied for a loan modification with Indymac Federal Bank. I applied for the modification because my husband was ill and was unable to work-full time. I was working full time but the payments were a struggle. I was denied the modification because Indymac stated that I did not meet the investor’s guidelines. Indymac would not tell me what those guidelines were or who the investors were. On December 31, 2008, I was laid off from my job. On February 10, 2009, I applied for another loan modification with Indymac. I was denied again. This time Indymac stated that I was denied because I did not have a job and that I did not meet the investor’s guidelines. (I supplied them with my husband’s income and my unemployment compensation). Indymac Federal Bank representatives stated that there is nothing that they can do for me until I gain employment. Indymac refused to work with me and I was denied a loan modification when I was employed and then denied again because of unemployment. Indymac has red-flagged my account with a note that says “the customer will call in when she is employed.” With the economy the way that it is, my job search has been extremely challenging. My mortgage is two months behind and I am on a temporary forbearance payment that ends in March. If I do not gain employment by March and if I am not able to get some type of loan modification, I may lose my home to foreclosure. I have three children and no where else to go. I know that the President is working on a mortgage relief plan that will be effective in March but Indymac representatives stated that I still may not qualify for his plan and that I will not qualify if my mortgage gets behind three months. At this time, I am turning to you for help. Kindly assist me and let me know if you have any suggestions as to how I can keep my home.

God Bless America!

California Budget Deficiency

"Voice for Humanity" — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:07:05 EST

At last, after a prolonged melodramatic stunt by lawmakers the California state budget concluded as a major achievement!

The review of the proposed budget appears to be nothing but analogous to a dish prepared for starved patrons by reluctant chefs deliberately ignoring the recipe provided to them while using the ingredients to serve themselves their own favorite dish.

Does this come as a surprise?

Not in this era of special interests and politicians cozying with one another on the maxim “You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.”

The worst victims of this fundamental fiscal policy are the children and students, the future taxpayers of this economy.

Does this bother any of those advocates involved in merciless slashing of funds to K-12 and college education?

If it did, they would not have propagated such ideology and as for those to allow this to happen simply suggests their complicity to this charade.

Perhaps, the concerned policymakers could not arrive at a decision to balance the budget up until twenty-four hours ago because they were too busy devising a plan to keep them in power and protecting their own families with children attending private schools or schools not hit by severe funding cuts.

What about them targeting social welfare programs affecting the elderly, sick, disabled, unemployed, veterans and other dependents?

Should we assume the lawmakers could not relate to this segment of the population because fortunately for them they do not have or know anyone in vulnerable position, hence the end justifies the means.

The defenders of the disproportionate funding to the criminal justice system in the budget safeguard their interests at the expense of kids kicked off the welfare and students struggling to meet college expense with some winding up in the overcrowded prison system thus making the so-called reformers’ jobs secure.

That’s why these beneficiaries of dysfunctional democracies display their titles and flex muscles to quell dissent by alienating citizens of diverse background during any crisis.

They conveniently forget the fact that people of ethnic origin are also part of the society making significant contributions in every aspect particularly as taxpayers and their role is not limited to being the benefactors and lately campaign donors as well as volunteers during elections and beyond.

Ironically, legislators have successfully defended corporations by granting them generous leeway as they realize that corporations’ profit will serve the lawmakers during election campaign through donations and ordinary citizens whose votes ultimately grant them power are left to fend for themselves in the tough economic times.

As stated earlier on several occasions, the democratic system essentially run by corporations and the power brokers at the state and federal level prioritizing self- interest over national interest and the electorate forced to be accustomed to this general trend.

Who are the real beneficiaries in this budget?

It is certainly not the disadvantaged and bereft population in requirement of present government assistance to enable them to be future providers of the economy. The other interesting factor in both state and federal dramatic unfolding of legislative approvals is spot the lame duck in this game.

During the captivating rule of the previous administration, the former President George W. Bush mischaracterized as the lame duck, though the majority Democrats would have appropriately fit the profile due to unprecedented use of vetoes exercised by the then Chief Executive at the White House on most issues regarded detrimental to the subjects of the kingdom.

One would assume that gaining majority rule in both houses and the executive branch at both state and federal government is a guaranteed victory in legislative matters. It remains a wishful thinking for one while the other regardless of status quo prevails in failed ideology against pragmatism.

Therefore, the lame duck in the game is none other than the electorate at the bottom of the socio-economic scale and the weak representatives lacking courage to fight for the cause and the purpose of their election to power in a democracy.

In essence, ballots cast by ordinary citizens elevate individuals to power and these elected officials preoccupy in strengthening their own position in office with political bargains even if similar measures overrides the promises on the campaign trail.

Either way, the victims are invariably the electorate granting authority to ambitious political minds often negotiating constituent’s future for personal gains.

Is there a hope to break the chain link for ordinary citizens in a democracy?

“Impossible is written in fool’s dictionary." In any active democracy, the people possess power to ensure fulfillment of electoral commitments by political leaders favoring the electorate and not any special interests or themselves.

Unfortunately, in this budget decision the stalemate was unnecessary as it was with the passing of the federal economic stimulus package. Whenever a minority poses a threat to majority on genuine solutions to problems created by failed policies, it is red alert for electorate to eliminate blockades through elections confirming the power and strength of democracy.

How does the budget impact the ordinary electorate living paycheck to paycheck and families dependent on social programs and public school education?

With deep cuts in education including hikes in college tuition fees and social programs, the average Californians penalized with tax increase via sales tax, vehicle license fee and reduction of dependent benefits from $300 to $100.

The thoughtful policymakers in return decided to redirect the hard fought funding to Corporations via undue credits and maintenance of horse race grounds over education and other essential social services.

Diversion of spending cuts from future taxpayers to benefit self serving interest groups definitely speaks volume on priorities by fiscal conservatives.

Not all those vehemently opposed to socialism are entirely objectionable to redistribution of wealth as long as the recipients are their own kind focused on wealth amassment at the expense of struggling majority.

In fact, voter rejection of two-thirds majority approval in state and federal legislative matters will permanently remove gridlocks in a democratic process besides successfully replacing any need for Open Primaries in the state elections.

It is time for the worst affected groups in the current budget proposal to coalesce and act decisively against willful negligence of issues ranging from education, social programs, environment, and energy… by elected representatives especially with options available to balance the budget.

We sure have a budget to justify the role of government despite the huge deficiency and failure to address the needs of the distressed population.

Democracy best served when the governments of the people run by the people and for the people.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

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”

El camino hacia un nuevo tiempo

GONZALO GAYO — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 23:36:54 EST

Gonzalo Gayo

Estamos en el corazón de la catarsis de esta crisis. Una crisis a la que suma una legión de ‘sabios’ y analistas capaces de diagnosticar lo que no supieron predecir. Los mismos que alentaban las oportunidades de negocios en un sin fin de productos financieros hace apenas unos meses ahora son los apóstoles de la madre de todas las crisis, los Nostredamus de un túnel demasiado negro como para alumbrar algo de sensatez.Lo cierto es que esta crisis va a ser más corta de lo que muchos creen aunque intensa y destructiva en empleo y especialmente virulenta con las entidades financieras que jugaron a tómbola de la especulación y perdieron hasta el sombrero, especialmente en EEUU. En esta segunda fase entraremos a partir de marzo, tras la publicación de memorias de resultados de 2008 y en las que no cabe operaciones de maquillaje ya que la falta de transparencia será castigado por los mercados con mayor virulencia que las posibles pérdidas. Mientras tanto, los ‘profetas’ de la economía seguirán en su empeño en bautizar a esta crisis como la mayor que se recuerda desde el 29, o lo nunca visto desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial… si bien empiezan a producirse algunas de las condiciones necesarias para salir de la recesión a la que España se incorpora con tres meses de retraso respecto a Japón, Alemania o los países de la zona Euro.Hemos sido los últimos en entrar en recesión técnica pero también seremos los primeros en salir si somos capaces de aprovechar algunas de las palancas para salir del barrizal.Tenemos en estos momentos la tasa de inflación más baja de los últimos 40 años y de un plumazo hemos eliminado el diferencial con la zona euro lo que sin duda contribuye a mejorar nuestra competitividad. De hecho, los auténticos emprendedores, los que son capaces de creer en sus proyectos y generar empleo, saben que las exportaciones son la estrategia a seguir en el corto plazo mientras dure la autoflagelación en la piel de toro. Por primera vez, en los últimos quince años las exportaciones crecen a un ritmo muy superior a las importaciones, lo cual a medio plazo será empleo seguro. Otro aspecto a tener presente son los tipos de interés, los más bajos que se recuerdan y que posibilita mejora en inversiones, equipamientos e incluso en la contratación, si bien deberá transcurrir unos meses hasta que el sector bancario cumpla con su purga sin pretender que el erario publico ponga la tirita a la hemorragia de algunas cuentas de resultados.En este sentido el ICO debería incrementar su aval y también la posible participación a través de sociedades de capital riesgo en nuevos sectores estratégicos y generadores de empleo.No podemos olvidar también el respiro que da un petróleo a 45 dólares el barril cuando apenas hace un trimestre alcanzaba los 160 dólares, lo que sin duda debería contribuir a generar mayor actividad, pero también a avanzar a pasos agigantados hacia la independencia energética financiando proyectos de energías renovables.La disposición de las empresas a reinvertir beneficios y salir más a los mercados internacionales es sin duda el camino a seguir, siendo un error y hasta la propia tumba la descapitalización de los recursos humanos que muchas pretenden con tal de meter la tijera allí donde no toca.Con tipos de interés y petróleo barato, inflación por los suelos y mejora de las exportaciones tenemos sin duda unas interesantes cartas para afrontar la crisis y tratar de salir fortalecidos aprovechando las nuevas oportunidades y los huecos de mercado que dejaron los que tiraron la toalla.Que les voy a contar a aquellos que peinan canas al frente de empresas, que vieron como hacer frente a tipos de interés de dos dígitos, con lo justo para poder vender en el exterior y unos costes salariales que se disparaban al ritmo de una inflación que marcaba un antes y un después cada fin de mes. Eran otros tiempos, sin duda, pero nunca nos faltó la capacidad de sacrificio y la voluntad de que entre todos haríamos lo posible para salir adelante con tal de dejar para siempre un pasado triste y gris. Y lo logramos. Entramos en la CE, luego en la UE y el euro y ahora somos la octava potencia del mundo y la sexta en volumen de inversión extrajera en España en 2008.Más allá de los Pirineos, de Tarifa o el cabo de Finisterre creen en nosotros e invierten en nuestro país por su estabilidad, por la paz social lograda, por su calidad y formación y por situación geoestratégica privilegiada y hasta nuestros productos triunfan hoy más que antes de la crisis en el exterior.No pretendo levantar el animo, ni tan siquiera señalar a quienes tratan de hundir la autoestima de este país, pero lo cierto es que saldremos de esta crisis fortalecidos si somos capaces de aprender de nuestros errores y hacer una lectura correcta de por dónde camina los nuevos tiempos de la economía española y mundial.En nuestro país hemos puesto en marcha un sin fin de medidas que contribuirán a frenar la hemorragia de desempleo con los 8.000 millones de euros que se destinarán a nuevas obras en los ayuntamientos, con más de 31.000 proyectos aprobados y que comenzarán a plasmarse en abril. También la aceleración de las ejecuciones del PEIT supondrá un nuevo impulso a las infraestructuras, especialmente en el ferrocarril, puertos, aeropuertos y carreteras que mejorarán la competitividad de la economía española, adelantando su disponibilidad al servicio de la economía y de la cohesión territorial. Por su parte, el Plan E, de Estimulo a la Economía y el Empleo, se ha convertido en un auténtico ‘plan marshall’ que debe ser aprovechado por las empresas como una oportunidad para mejorar sus inversiones en modernización y nuevos sectores e actividad. En apenas cinco días, el sector turístico ha solicitado más del 50% de las ayudas previstas para modernizar la planta hotelera en España y sin duda que se aumentara esta línea como otras tantas. El error sin duda es haber puesto el Paln E a recaudo de la banca cuando deberían ser las Cámaras de Comercio, las organizaciones empresariales y hasta los sindicatos las que se implicarán en dar el OK a los proyectos ante el ICO.Las cámaras de comercio, como entes públicos consultivos de las administraciones tienen y deben jugar un importante papel para salir de esta crisis fortalecidos, en estrecha colaboración con el ICO y con las entidades financieras. Por su parte, el sistema financiero debe atender a sus ajustes, afrontar en el breve plazo de tiempo un proceso de fusiones y concentraciones y sanear su situación con ayudas fiscales para quienes hagan los deberes pero no a costa de inyecciones de dinero publico y en la compra de activos sobre valorados.El sistema financiero español es sin duda de los más saneados y quizás de los que más fortalecidos puede salir de esta crisis ya que se pondrán a tiro grandes oportunidades en EE.UU., Japón y Reino Unido, entre otros. En España, tanto el BBVA como el Santander, herederos de los siete grandes de la banca de los ochenta, deben liderar un proceso de acercamiento hacia otras entidades para su absorción o alianzas estratégicas, al igual que en las cajas de ahorro, la Caixa, Caja Madrid o Bancaja-Cam deben hacer lo propio.Una mayor apertura de la economía española al exterior y el necesario apoyo a desarrollo de las energías renovables, implantación del auto eléctrico, una agricultura ecológica e industria alimentaría, la modernización de un turismo sostenible que ponga en valor el medio ambiente, la eficiencia e independencia energética, el uso racional del agua, la construcción al servicio de las necesidades de los ciudadanos y mejora de infraestructuras, todo ello hará posible una recuperación del empleo desde la unidad de esfuerzos de las administraciones y la estrecha colaboración de entidades como las cámaras de comercio, organizaciones agrarias, empresariales y sindicatos.No podemos perder de vista que parte de esta crisis ha sido por el crecimiento artificial de occidente frente a quienes hoy abanderan el crecimiento de sus economías al ritmos cercanos al 10% en China o la India, lo que sin duda pondrá en el mercado nuevas demandas de productos y servicios. No obstante hay que exigir a China que juegue limpio, que su moneda entre en la misma cesta que el dólar y el euro, y que se respete las normas de la OIT. Tampoco podemos olvidar a Africa que tras el muro de esta crisis sufre la condena a la nada y merece la atención del resto de países para potenciar su desarrollo que les permita salir de la pobreza y participar del progreso sostenible en nuevo tiempo. Africa será el granero del mundo y ya hoy empieza a serlo, sorprendentemente como reserva de países como Japón. Habrá un después de esta crisis y será más pronto en la medida en que nos pongamos manos a la obra para abrir un nuevo tiempo mejor de cómo entramos.

Balancing California Budget

"Voice for Humanity" — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:17:08 EST

The golden state is in deep economic crisis, sharing the status quo of the nation.

As per Wikipedia.org - California would have the 7th highest GDP in the world if thought of as a country (not including the US as a whole, if so, it would be 8th).

A great state like California being the epicenter for - besides earthquakes,

Technology

Biotech and stem cell research

Entertainment symbolized by Hollywood

Diverse talent and skill pool making outstanding contributions in various fields.

Yet, the fundamental responsibility of the state government to balance the budget postponed indefinitely due to partisan politics with Republican minority misusing the two-third majority approval against the incumbent Democrats in the legislature.

As a result, the taxpayers of the economy are abandoned and the entire population is at the mercy of the minority rule upholding the conventional ideology against contemporary wisdom.

It is Déjà Vu for those following the federal government struggle to get the economic stimulus bill approved by both Houses of Congress.

The dilemma of balancing the budget with the political parties’ resistance to compromise is a daunting task for any administration. It is beyond comprehension that failed policies and inconvenient principles continue to dominate the center stage at both state and federal level in legislative matters.

California budget deficit currently at $42 billion with unemployment skyrocketing to 9.3% and expected to worsen by the year-end;

Clearly, the economic recession is widespread and taken severe toll on the present and future taxpayers of the economy.
———————————————————————————————————————
Challenges:

How does the state reduce the budget deficit of $42 billion?

Generally, the options would be exploring ways to generate revenues and cutting costs proven liabilities with no income or other benefits to the taxpayers of the economy.

Revenues:

How does the state generate revenues?

Usually, the government revenue sources are taxes paid by individuals and Corporations.

They are in the form of income tax, estate tax, corporate tax, payroll tax, sales tax, customs and excise duty on export and import items as well as fees and charges for any government provided services. If the state has other assets in the form of government bonds and treasury bills, they comprise negotiable instruments to borrow money.

In addition, the government could potentially expect income from investments in industries via quasi contracts, state run institutions, sale and/or leasing of government land to private sectors and trade goods and services with neighboring states or foreign governments. Some states find ways and means to share natural resources with their neighbors within and outside the nation for income.

Then, a federal aid to boost social services, health and educational programs is other channel for financial assistance.

Obviously tax increases is the common strategy for meeting budget shortfall. If income and aid are available from stated sources, then funding expenses is affordable.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Spending or Costs Elimination:

In this category, the lawmakers vehemently opposed to tax increases propose massive cutbacks and reduction in spending by a sweeping shutdown of essential services and programs with dire consequences in the long term.

Ironically, investment in education, health, housing, energy and environment are easy targets as “wasteful spending” for legislators in opposition to tax hikes during budget crisis. Those policy makers fail to understand the importance of protecting and nurturing the beneficiaries of these programs as they contribute to the economy today and tomorrow as taxpayers.

Lately, legislators have taken a swipe at education or investment in public school systems at both state and federal levels. It is tragic that such measures are even contemplated leave alone legislated in the industrialized and advanced nation that should be leading the world in K-12 educational program.

The public school system in the State of California and across the nation is in shambles. The infrastructure and the general classroom environment are in desperate need of face-lift to improve academic performance by students of all socio economic backgrounds.

Every dollar spent in a child is an investment in future.

Complete overhauling is required in areas like classroom size, materials including new Textbooks, enriched curriculum with emphasis in Math and Science, Music and Arts, Sports facilities, recruitment of qualified teaching staff, Teachers’ salary, training and professional development, new energy efficient buildings regardless of districts and zones in every state.

Undoubtedly, education must be a priority with K-12 system being the foundation for young minds entering the academic world. The reason United States is lagging behind in international standards is due to neglect of our school system particularly the early learning stage (K-12) when the opportunity to help every student thrive is available to educators.

Therefore, the state and the federal government are obligated to enhance achievements in educational programs through investments in the state-of-the-art educational system.

Similarly, health, housing, energy and environment are equally important as the taxpayers benefit from adequate health care, proper housing, affordable energy, clean and safe environment.
——————————————————————————————————————
Pragmatic Solutions:

The best option to reconcile California budget is to consider both tax increases and costs reduction as suggested by many analysts and experts on this issue.

According to the analysis by San Jose Mercury News, February 8, 2009

Budget spending outpaced inflation and state’s growth.

Interestingly, the social services and K-12 education received proportionately less funding as compared to the extra spending identified in Criminal Justice, health care and filling the gap for the reduced vehicle license fee in the analysis of actual spending in 2007-2008.

First, action is required to identify the revenue sources via tax increases.

1. Marginal increase in Sales Tax of goods and services including the sales on the cyberspace would provide an even tax distribution for the society.

2. Increasing Vehicle License fee for all is necessary to address the massive deficit. In this context, it is important to raise another explosive issue of undocumented workers in California without drivers’ license or vehicle registrations.

Issuing drivers license and allowing all undocumented workers to register their vehicles would not only generate income for the state, it would also strengthen state and national security with the documentation of all residents in the state.

Subsequently, acquiring vehicle insurance by the undocumented workers would minimize the burden on registered owners in addition to stimulating the economy through insurance industry.

At present any vehicle registration or insurance by undocumented workers carried out in a back alley manner depriving the state due proceeds.

3. Target items for tax increase to reduce health care costs such as tobacco, hard liquor products and items subject to possible health abuse.

4. In the establishment of social standards, tax increases on winnings through gambling and advertisement sales of pornography (assumed to be a multibillion dollar industry) is justified to make way for important social services and programs.

5. Review and revise taxation policy for California Corporations hoarding income in tax havens along with their offshore subsidiaries.

6. Airport tax, Port fees, dutiable goods, customs and excise duty are other sources of revenue.

7. Increase tax on entertainment industry to pay for education, kids welfare, community hospitals, colleges and institutions.

8. Specific environmental protection act by levying heavy penalties on environmental pollution (air, land and sea) through negligence such as oil spilling, carbon emissions and violation of aviation standards.

9. Marginal increase in gasoline tax would enable energy efficient programs such as solar, wind and hydro thermal power.

10. Last but not the least, leasing government land to corporations and scientific institutions, university laboratories or airline industry with enforcement of strict environmental regulations, not excluding sale of government assets no longer useful in the short or long run.
——————————————————————————————————————-------------------------
Costs Reduction:

Criminal Justice System:

A thorough examination of the Criminal Justice system is necessary from the analysis and news reports.

The State must devise a mechanism to reduce prison population through major social reforms at all levels beginning with the juvenile detention center.

Further, the parole system, three strikes law and other misdemeanor charges reassessed and offenders deployed in monitored community services rather than crowding prisons is the ideal strategy to cutback spending.

Health Care:

Healthy Approach to reducing health care costs –

Medicaid for senior citizens and economically disadvantaged population.

Promoting preventive care with immunizations.

Early diagnosis of diseases through annual or bi-annual medical checkups and

Subsidized prescription drugs through tax incentives to pharmaceutical and bio-tech industry are few possibilities to deal with health care crisis.

Counseling services and Therapy for psychological and other mental health problems as a preliminary screening process to ease the substantial costs in this regard.

General well being encouraged through active life combined with healthy diet in schools and other areas of the community.

Vehicle License Fee backfill - To be reinstated as outlined above.

General Government - Electronic record keeping and updating technology would considerably improve efficiency and prohibit excessive spending in administrative services.

Higher Education – Engagement in community development activities in return for student loans is a progressive cost recovery scheme.

Transportation – Cost savings methods and effective transportation means aimed at conservation of time and energy recommended for this expense.

Resources and environment – Best to follow guidelines suggested above for environment.

All other costs and spending not discussed or highlighted must be carefully reviewed and those proven redundant with no benefit to taxpayers or the State eliminated to reconcile the budget.
———————————————————————————————————————

Time for Action by California Legislators

Investment in better education and all of the essential services means building future with healthy, responsible and productive citizens as opposed to increasing prison population demanding major diversion of funding to criminal justice system.

There is an urgency to underscore the fact that not all taxpayers necessarily benefit and appreciate the frugal tax savings by preventing tax increases because such action favors the wealthy minority while leaving the majority marginalized in a society.

If the legislators really care for their constituents and the state/nation they pledge to serve, they need to pause and reflect on the realities of depriving majority of the population to decent lifestyle and economic prosperity, the predominant cause of the current sluggish consumer spending.

Often, provision of unemployment and social security benefits, Medicaid, health insurance, food stamps…dismissed as socialized enigma in a Capitalist economy. Unfortunately, a reminder is required that subscribers of these benefits and services ultimately contribute to the success of the capitalist system as consumers of various products and services.

As stated earlier in the blogpost titled Redistribution of Wealth, Oct 31, 2008, www.padminiarhant.com

Promoting economic status as highlighted above…

Eventually, create a fair system of sharing the economic burden by all rather than only by the affluent ones.

Such farsighted and permanent solutions are in direct contradiction to the myth and misnomer of the doctrine against short term tax increases essential to combat severe economic recession.

Socialism, Marxism may well be the nemesis to Capitalism,

Capitalism cannot thrive without consumerism - - That is the fact

California budget crisis must be resolved with no further delay.

It is time for legislators to set the priorities right to fit in with the new millennium goals.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

President Obama Please Intervene: Give Us A Second Chance

2nd CHANCE Home Owner Advocate — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:52:23 EST

President Obama Must Intervene To Save Americans Home Owner in Financial Disaster: Give Us A Second Chance!

Based on the result the Feb. 7, 2009 meeting and Feb. 9, 2009 follow-up meeting about the President Economic Stimulus Plan for Americans. Is there anyone else who would to join us to ask the President to intervene on our behalf for a Second Chance? Suggestion: Americans need a Short and Long Term CREDIT Rating Forgiveness and Incentive Plan. We are asking that in addition for the opportunity to have jobs, please create a special program that has an incentive of CREDIT Rating Forgiveness and Incentive For Second Chance home owners. Can there be a Successful Economic Recovery without a Credit Forgiveness Reform for Americans?

The only way this stimulus plan will fail is if we act as if we do not know that there will be no spending velocity among Americans without President Obama's Intervention for us. Please send me your story.

Why won't this work?

Steve — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 22:29:06 EST

What is wrong with the following proposal? It addresses the housing situation head on AND it will stimulate the economy in areas most affected by the crisis.

1) Use the remaining 350 billion in TARP funds to buy up the REAL troubled assets. That buys out TWO MILLION problem mortgages at an average of $175.000 each. It pumps $350 billion directly into the credit market**. There can be no complaint by the original lender with regard to restructuring a mortgage where that makes sense.

Use stimulus package money to do the following:

2) Identify homes occupied by families as opposed to those that have been abandoned by speculators.

3) If the home is abandoned, take it off the market and contract with local small businesses to manage the property. Maintain the landscape and provide security to avoid/reduce vandalism etc. These activities result in jobs and protect property values in the community.

4) If the home is occupied (by the former owner or renters) make every effort to keep them in the home. Again, contract with local businesses to manage the properties in terms of collecting rent, restructuring mortgages etc. This translates to more jobs and fewer people joining the ranks of the homeless.

5) As conditions improve (probably a few years down the road), start putting houses back on the market in a controlled way using local real estate companies. As was the case in the 80’s S&L crisis, this could recover much of the cost of the program. Again this creates jobs and supports home values in affected communities.

Again my serious question is, "What is wrong with this proposal?".

** CAUTION: Wall street bankers will fight this tooth and nail because they want you to use tax payer dollars to COVER THEIR BAD BETS. They have no interest in resolving the real housing crisis.

TODOS JUNTOS CONTRA LA CRISIS

GONZALO GAYO — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 03:50:05 EST

Corren tiempos en los que están a prueba valores que determinan la valía de los pueblos, más allá del alcance y profundidad de la crisis. La tormenta económica que nos afecta requiere de valentía, solidaridad, muchas dosis de diálogo y acuerdo para que juntos, trabajadores y empresarios, gobierno y oposición, empleados y parados, mujeres y hombres arrimemos el hombro para salir fortalecidos de esta crisis. Esta crisis financiera requiere de medidas que en muchas administraciones se están tomando pero sin duda, lo principal va a ser la unidad y capacidad de esfuerzo de todos para salir de este túnel que nos impone la actual catarsis del sistema financiero. Habrá que trabajar duro, pero también desde la responsabilidad de todos en una crisis que nos viene impuesta por los excesos cometidos durante casi 15 años de un ciclo expansivo que muchos utilizaron para especular hasta poner en jaque la economía mundial. Es por ello necesario apelar a la responsabilidad de Comunidades Autónomas, Ayuntamientos y del Gobierno, de empresarios y trabajadores y de los bancos cuya estabilidad es imprescindible, pero también su papel activo para desbloquear una situación de la que ellos son jueces y parte. Es el momento de apoyar a las empresas y las familias, al sistema productivo, a los agricultores, la industria y una construcción responsable desde la exportación y consumo de productos locales.Frente al pesimismo esta la valentía de saber que saldremos y lo haremos juntos, sin recetas mágicas, sumando esfuerzos y responsabilidades, facilitando el empleo, incrementando las becas, las ayudas al campo, a los ayuntamientos, al sistema productivo sin renunciar al estado de bienestar y convirtiéndolo en punto de encuentro para vencer la crisis. Venceremos a la crisis y saldremos fortalecidos de ella. No les quepa la menor duda, y será antes o después en la medida que juntos arrimemos el hombro, para dejar en el camino a los especuladores que han puesto en jaque los bienes básicos como la energía, alimentos o la vivienda.Hemos superado otras crisis, peores que esta, para salir fortalecidos y entrar en un nuevo tiempo. A ello nos enfrentamos, poniendo a prueba nuestras capacidades y nuestra forma de ser, sacando a relucir nuestro espíritu de lucha como pueblo y como nación. Saldremos de la crisis, y lo haremos en un nuevo tiempo con profundas transformaciones en la energía, en el reparto de la riqueza y en nuevos sectores productivos que generaran más empleo y de calidad desde la innovación y la investigación.Estamos en una crisis que depurará los virus parasitarios que han hecho estremecer los cimientos del sistema financiero y las bolsas del mundo entero, y se iniciara la singladura de un nuevo tiempo más prospero donde cada vez habrá menos pobreza en el mundo y una mayor cooperación entre los pueblos.Hemos sido testigos de otras crisis, e incluso de fraticidas guerras mundiales pero siempre desde la capacidad de sacrificio de los pueblos se supo salir adelante, desde el esfuerzo y la solidaridad de todos, hacia un mundo mejor. En el camino de esta crisis quedarán los especuladores, quienes confundieron la libertad con la avaricia. Caerán los empresarios que solo saben izar las velas cuando sopla el viento a favor y también quedaran aquellos que nunca cesan de chupar de la teta del Estado y a quieres tratan que les envíen el sueldo a casa sin acudir a su empleo o lugar de trabajo. Hoy en la sanidad pública, en el hospital de La Fe en Valencia, un treinta por ciento de la plantilla está de baja a lo largo de todo el año. Una situación que sin duda no soportaría ninguna empresa privada, pero tampoco en la publica.Vivimos los prolegómenos de un nuevo tiempo en el que no es casualidad la figura emergente de Barack Obama, de los nuevos líderes que cambiaran las conflictos bélicos por el dialogo y las palabras, de un tiempo en el que la mujer sera pieza clave en el liderazgo de la sociedad del siglo XXI.No es casualidad que hoy esté el petróleo a 45 dólares cuando hemos alcanzado hace menos de un año los 160 dólares el barril porque el mundo es consciente de que son necesarias otras energías que nos haga ser más independientes y prósperos.Recuperaremos una economía activa, fuerte e innovadora y ahí todos debemos ayudar. Hay que arrimar el hombro para a ayudar y sacar a España de la situación de crisis económica y lo conseguiremos, con optimismo y desde la certeza de que caminamos hacia nuevo tiempo donde se valore el esfuerzo de nuestros agricultores, a los empresarios responsables, a trabajadores comprometidos y a ciudadanos dispuestos a cambiar el rumbo de la historia, en el uso de nuevas energías, de alimentos ecológicos, de exigir la transparencia y eficacia de los recursos públicos en beneficio de todos y una administración al servicio real de los ciudadanos, sin tantos burócratas que hoy son unaa legion desde las administraciones de Bruselas, a Madrid pasando por Valencia.Es hora de que las administraciones se aprieten el cinturón y asuman que no es posible tantos privilegios para quienes ostentan la representatividad de unos ciudadanos que sufren lo peor de la crisis. Es hora y el tiempo de reducir el gasto superfluo, de suprimir tantos asesores, tanto estomago agradecido a la sombra de un poder demasiado complaciente consigo mismo. Es hora de ahorrar en lo innecesario y de gastar en la mejora de infraestructuras, de los servicios públicos y de apoyar sin reservas el esfuerzo de quienes crean empleo o no despiden. Es la hora de sectores como la agricultura, ejemplo como pocos de esfuerzo, respeto del medio ambiente y motor de riqueza y empleo en todos y cada uno de las poblaciones españolas. Es hora de que todos arrimemos el hombro porque juntos seguro que lo conseguiremos antes incluso de lo que algunos creen.GONZALO GAYO

Dear Mr. President - The High Price of Living ...

Patricia from Torrance, CA — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 22:41:21 EST

Dear Mr. President:

Greeting to you from a loyal constitutent. I am very happy to have heard that very real changes will soon be made regarding the Illegal Immigrtion problems. Your cabinet stands firm in drawing measures to correct this very important problem that besets our country; I applaud you and your Team in dealing effectively to reverse this situation.

I was likewise happy to hear that your Stimilus package will soon be implemented, irregardless of the many objections to your program and am, likewise, very happy to know that real help will soon be forthcoming to aid those beset with economic hardships. Thank you very much for your committment and dedication to the people you serve.

I do, however, have a comment to make regarding your Stimulus package. I am wondering how much the package will be of aid against today's very high prices. How much money can we all use and save in the face of rising, out-of-control costs for everything from food, to clothing, to housing being somewhat unaffordable? This is something that I have watched occur over the years, and have always wondered just when it would stop - where is the 'ceiling' for all these high prices?

For instance, I work a mere 2 days a week through a temporary employment firm; the client company where I work has a freeze on hiring, due to the economic situation. Although I am paid substantially, with the costs of my rent, food and transportation, I rarely make ends meet. Most upsetting is when I visit my local supermarket to buy groceries; the amount of groceries I bring home is very minimal and, compared to grocery prices of just 4 or 5 years ago, I pay far too much for far too little! The supermarkets seem to have all consumers gripped in their vice, as they unscrupulously raise and lower prices to suit their own needs, ignoring the needs of the consumers who keep them in business.

We need to fix our economy

"Voice for Humanity" — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:31:26 EST

President Obama and his administration are trying to address this serious economic crisis at home.

It takes the entire nation to get involved in the rescue operation.

Let us come together and do everything possible to revive the economy.

Please standby for some important guidelines and suggestions for economic recovery on www.padminiarhant.com.

Also, focus on resolving California’s budget crisis will be presented on the website shortly.

Meanwhile, please follow through the request from President Obama’s administration to create awareness and collective effort required to survive the crisis.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

———————————————————————————–

Last year, America lost 2.6 million jobs. This week, some of our biggest companies announced plans to cut tens of thousands more.

The economic crisis is deepening, but President Obama and members of Congress have proposed a recovery plan that will put more than 3 million Americans back to work.

You can learn more about how the plan will help your community by organizing an Economic Recovery House Meeting.

Join thousands of people across the country who are coming together to watch a special video about the recovery plan. Invite your friends and neighbors to watch the video with you and have a conversation about your community’s economic situation.

The economic crisis can seem overwhelming and complex, but you can help the people you know connect the recovery plan to their lives and learn more about why it’s so important.

Sign up to host an Economic Recovery House Meeting the weekend of Friday, February 6th.

The President’s plan passed the House of Representatives on Wednesday. But if it’s going to move forward, we need to avoid the usual partisan games.

That’s why supporters are opening their homes to talk with neighbors and friends about how the plan will work — and what it means for their community.

The video will outline the basics of the plan and how it will impact working families. It will also include answers to questions from folks across the country. Invite your friends and family to watch the video, discuss the plan, and help build support for it.

Don’t worry if you’ve never hosted a house meeting before — we’ll make sure you have everything you need to make it a success.

Take the first step right now by signing up to host an Economic Recovery House Meeting:

http://my.barackobama.com/recoveryhost

Time and again, you’ve demonstrated your commitment to change. Now you can help America move in an important new direction.

Please forward this email to your friends and family, and encourage them to get involved as well.

Thank you for your hard work,

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America

Radio Show Update

"Voice for Humanity" — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:01:25 EST

Schedule Update:

January 24, 2009, Air time - 8.00 - 10.00 P.M(PST)

Category: Current Events

Topic: Wall Street Bailout

Discussion:

What should financial institutions do with taxpayers’ bailout?

Why haven’t the financial institutions invested funds to stimulate economy?

What is public demand from them and the legislators?

——————————————————————————————————————-

January 25, 2009, Air Time 2.00 - 4.00P.M (PST) - (5.00 - 7.00P.M EST)

Topic: Free Palestine

Discussion:

1. How can we help to expedite independent state for Palestinians free of Israeli blockade, occupation and aggression?

2. What should the new administration do to be a trustworthy partner and unbiased peace broker in the Middle East conflict?

3. How can we help Israeli population elect a moderate government in early February favoring peace and diplomacy over military action for their national security and sovereignty?

——————————————————————————————————————

January 30, 2009, 120 minutes 2.00P.M - 4.00P.M - Cancelled due to restrictions on segments at frequent intervals.

Category: Current Events

Topic: Economy and Health Care - Please refer to blog post on www.padminiarhant.com for details and I invite you to post comments.

What should the new administration do for you and the economy?

How do we fix the Health Care system?

———————————————————————————-

Podcast live : http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Padmini-A

Guest Call-in-number: (646) 727 -3778

I invite you all to participate in the public forum and share your concerns, ideas and knowledge.

Your comments and thoughts are welcome in the political discourse.

Let us keep democracy alive and help our new President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in rebuilding our nation.

Your participation is a huge encouragement and always appreciated - Thank you again.

Look forward to the session.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

New President

Austin W — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 22:50:34 EST

Today, I watched the inauguration several times. I was so excited to see that Barack had finally become the President of the United States. I watched the big parade afterwards and even took notes on his speech so I could remember it forever.

We finally have a Democrat for President and we need to do something that will help others in the economy we have today. People are losing jobs, stock values, and most of all money. They need our help so try to raise as much money as you can to donate to our newest President. Today, I sent several more invitations and I want to raise at least $50.

…a letter to the official opposition party of Canada…

The Ranting Dream — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:09:52 EST

...I have yet to see a single politician muster the courage to do the right thing and to 'tell the "TRUTH" like it is' - they've chosen to silently side with the 'spin' and let the status-quo be - either they're afraid of consequences to their political careers, or they're simply corrupt, or they're just plain stupid - or all of the above (and beyond) - whatever the reason, while I'm not shocked or surprised at the behavior of the puppet morons in politics, I'm disgusted at their complete lack of integrity and conscience...and to not have a SINGLE one of them telling the 'real' story behind this attack on humanity is just ticking me off...

Proposed New Federal Law to Prevent Future Home Foreclosures

JimBO — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 17:11:05 EST

I propose a new federal law, that protects home buyers from ever losing value in their home by no fault of their own. If a home ever goes under what it was originally purchased for the mortgage company will be required to take a loss and write off the principle. At first I'm sure you are saying no way, this is wrong, and maybe even unAmerican. But what does it mean to be an American? Does it mean that we corrupt and like it that way? Does it mean that we do not look out for one another, and try to pull each other down anyway we can whether or not it's ethical or moral? It seems to me that alot of the times now a days that's exactly what it is. And we allow it to go on and turn the other cheek and just say to ourselves that's just the way it is and nothing can change it. Well not nothing. We can change it if we want to. I have put a little thought into this new law and I think it may very well be the correct solution. Let's think about it for a second. If there was a law that required a mortgage company to write down a principle if a home went under that value originally purchased, do you think maybe banks would make sure they are making good loans? Ummm absolutely. If they don't get the home value right, they will take the loss. Not the buyer. Do you think they will make sure they are not handing out risky loans? Absolutely, we all know what happens now when you have too many foreclosures. Would this create a real estate market that was fair and stable? Yes, a market that is as safe and stable as a FDIC insured savings account and a market that people would want to invest in again. One of the big problems now is that people do not trust the market anymore, and just don't want to take such a risk anymore. The law is simple and straightforward, the banks take the loss. After all they are to blame as well. They are taking the risk of whether or not you are going to pay back the loan. Now things are so bad, no one wants to pay the loan and they are risking their entire companies. Why? They're reputations are now that they cannot be trusted and now no one wants to do business with them.

Now the only problem I forsee with this law is that banks may end up dictating home prices. That's a big maybe.. I think the reason they require 20% or 10% down is just in case you pay to much for a home. So if you put 20% down and the home is worth 20% less well, the bank wouldn't take that loss. That would be on you. But if it goes beyond the 20%, then the law would state the bank would be required to write down the principle of the loan to the home value minus the 20%. This is only fair that the bank would do this. After all you've already lost everything you put down. You took that much risk. The bank should take the rest.

If anyone has any thoughts or ideas for or against proposed law, please add it to this blog.

RESPUESTAS PARA EL CAMBIO

GONZALO GAYO — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:29:31 EST

Las grandes potencias mundiales anuncian que combatirán la crisis a golpe de talonario, cueste lo que cueste, pero se equivocan. No todo vale para salir del túnel si no se hace antes un análisis en profundidad sobre los errores cometidos en los últimos sesenta años y una adecuada proyección de objetivos hacia el nuevo mundo al que nos dirigimos. La falta de una adecuada respuesta por parte de los países más desarrollados a los grandes retos del planeta ha provocado el colapso de un sistema donde en demasiadas ocasiones ha primado la especulación.

El colapso del sistema financiero no es más que el estallido de una enorme burbuja ocasionada por la especulación que afecta a todos los sectores productivos. ¿Cómo es posible que en los últimos años las entidades financieras hicieran gala de más de un 30% de beneficios cuando el precio del dinero no alcanzaba el 4% en la eurozona? ¿Quién podía imaginar que el precio de cuatro paredes y un techo supusieran casi 20 años del sueldo medio de un joven español? ¿Hasta donde podíamos llegar con el precio de barril del petróleo superando los 160 dólares y con el cartel de que se agotan las reservas para lo que queda de siglo? ¿Por qué siguen las autoridades europeas y nacionales mirando a otra parte cuando se quintuplica el precio en el mercado de los productos agrícolas mientras se paga a los productores que hacen el esfuerzo precios miseria? ¿Hasta cuando esta dispuesto el planeta a aguantar los abusos sobre sus recursos naturales, sobre el equilibrio biológico y natural que garantiza la vida? ¿Cuántas muertes de inocentes son necesarias para que la solidaridad de quienes tienen el 80% de la riqueza la repartan con el 80% de la población que no tiene nada, y de la nada no salen más que para morir de hambre o de enfermedades? ¿Y quien alzará una voz que permita escuchar el silencio de 26.000 niños inocentes que mueren al día por falta de agua, alimentos o una simple vacuna?

Ese es el mundo en el que vivimos, el que algunos pretenden perpetuar con planes anti crisis que enterrarán miles de millones para salvar grandes corporaciones financieras y comprar activos sobrevaluados tras las bendiciones de las cumbres de turno. Pero se equivocan. La respuesta a los nuevos tiempos requiere de nuevas políticas, nuevos liderazgos y nuevos comportamientos éticos, incluso a nivel global. No saldremos de esta crisis sin el compromiso y una respuesta a las necesidades energéticas que necesariamente pasan por lograr las máximas cotas de independencia energética. El desarrollo de la energía del hidrógeno, pasando por las alternativas y hasta incluso llegar a la nuclear antes que depender de un petróleo que esclaviza y empobrece a las sociedades y es el principal factor del cambio climático. Además, este nuevo tiempo requiere de una respuesta clara a la mayor tragedia del mundo actual que se llama África, el continente olvidado y condenado a vivir en el hambre, el SIDA y la nada. Una lenta destrucción que contrasta con la codicia de estados y especuladores que compran hoy ingentes cantidades de suelo con los que cultivar los agros combustibles, generar mayores reservas para garantizar sus suministros alimenticios y de papel mientras la mitad del continente se muere de hambre. La ONU ha dado la voz de alerta sobre esta situación en un continente que requiere otras respuestas encaminadas al desarrollo de las personas y de un territorio masacrado por la codicia del llamado mundo desarrollado.

La lucha concertada contra la pobreza y las enfermedades será sin duda una señal de progreso para todos, ya que el desarrollo del llamado tercer mundo será también la garantía de supervivencia del estado de bienestar de los países desarrollados, desde la cooperación. En apenas cincuenta años el mundo en el que vivimos ha multiplicado por cuatro su población y los recursos siguen siendo los mismos, o menos según se mire. El reciclaje será sin duda una necesidad y también uno de los nichos de nuevo empleo, junto al de las energías alternativas, la agricultura ecológica y la cooperación social. Europa debe ser consciente de su enorme responsabilidad a la hora de garantizar una agricultura europea capaz de hacer frente a cualquier crisis alimentaria futura, con garantías de calidad en sus productos para su población y también para atender la demanda creciente. Bruselas debe brindar un apoyo real a los productores y vigilar a quienes utilizan los productos básicos para la especulación. Este nuevo mundo requiere también de respuestas a los enormes problemas del agua y su suministro, desde la solidaridad, el reciclaje continuo y el uso racional, así como una inmigración que demanda mayor cooperación y desarrollo en sus países de origen. La actual crisis es la antesala de un nuevo tiempo, que requiere de nuevas respuestas en las relaciones mundiales, en las alianzas para combatir el terrorismo del hambre o la falta de libertad, de personas y de los pueblos. El presidente electo de EEUU, Barack Obama, es sin duda el inicio de una nueva generación de líderes que deberán dar respuesta a los nuevos retos, siendo conscientes de los errores cometidos en el pasado. Obama ha anunciado un plan para crear 2,5 millones de empleo así como una revolución energética con el aprovechamiento de las energías alternativas y el hidrógeno. También anuncia la retirada de las tropas de Irak en un tiempo máximo de año y medio, entre otras medidas como un plan de salud publica en un país en el que hasta morir es un triste negocio. Obama es consciente también de la importancia del desarrollo de una agricultura por su valor ambiental, de desarrollo local y empleo que permita atender las urgencias alimentarias que se desatan en el mundo y hasta que algún día podamos poner fin a las plagas de hambruna. Son sin duda nuevos tiempos que no solo está en manos de nuestros gobernantes dar respuesta, sino fundamentalmente en nuestros propios comportamientos, en el consumo de agua, de energía, de alimentos saludables, así como la hora de exigir el respeto al medio ambiente e incluso la justicia que merecen nuestros agricultores antes de que sea demasiado tarde.

Gonzalo Gayo

gonzalogayo@gmailcom

Buy Proof of Income online HERE! Making Create Pay Check Stub paystub payroll payslip online

Jo from Aptos, CA — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:27:54 EST

Making Create Pay Check Stub paystub payroll payslip online

http://www.fakepaycheckstub.com
http://obhaven.blogspot.com
http://showproofofincome.blogspot.com
http://showingproofofincome.wordpress.com

Beyond tinkering and bailouts: fixing the mortgage crisis

Richard Careaga — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:14:23 EST

http://tr.im/1cdl

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.

Pray for the USA

Mary from Clifton Park, NY — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:01:32 EST

It's been a long time coming, and a change is gonna come! We must, as Americans, continue to pray for this great nation, and our current President as well as President Elect Barack Obama and his family. We must remember to continue doing our part in making and keeping this country a great nation.

The voters stated profoundly that we, as Americans, will no longer stand for the same old same old. We have a voice in our vote and we will stand together to bring about a change in this Nation. Therefore, if there are "repeat offenders" in your legislative, senate, or congressional seats, VOTE THEM OUT! We will not get anywhere with the same people in office. We hear it everyday...if you think you're going to get a different outcome doing the same thing with the same people in control, you're fooling yourself, wasting your time, and remaining stagnant.

It's time to stir the waters, take a leap of faith, and exercise that FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD! Get involved! Your little bit counts - even if it's just helping to feed a neighbor's child; making sure your neighbors are safe and warm; helping the children in your neighborhood complete their homework; lending a hand to the senior citizen in your community; etc. At least participatie and not stand idly by watching things get worse - that is no longer an option.

This crisis is real and WE BELIEVE that YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE! YES WE CAN!

We will continue to pray and remain involved in whatever needs to be accomplished to bring Americans together, change the economy, and educate our children - the future leaders of this great Nation.

Take care and GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Mary

MCCAIN TESTED AND FAILED

Juli Norwood — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:00:02 EDT

McCain abandoned his fellow ship mates. The very men who scrambled to save the lives of the pilots including McCain were lying on the deck wounded, or dying or dead and John McCain went and hid below deck.

While other crewmen who had no firefighting training or protective gear courageously and valiantly came forward to fight the fires and aid their fallen comrades.

To read the full story of John McCain's Cowardice, Lies, and Incompetent Actions that cost the lives of many men on the USS FORRESTAL see the link below.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/julinorwood/gGgzYv

He was tested and failed miserably.

His actions aboards the USS FORRESTAL during a crisis proved he is unfit to be president!

Juli Norwood

MCCAIN AND THE USS FORRESTAL DISASTOR - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Juli Norwood — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 00:31:51 EDT

There are several accounts out there about John McCain's involvement in causing the disastor or in making the disastor far worse. No one will ever really know the full truth due to a cover up. You see John McCain's father and grandfather were both admirals. Wink Wink ;-)

John McCain's own account of what happened doesn't match other eye witness accounts.

This investigative reporting of what happened that day is done by Mary Hershburger a free lance award winning author.

Mary Hershberger is a historian and the author of “Jane Fonda’s War” and other books. She is a recipient of the Binkley-Stephenson Award, given annually for the best scholarly article in the Journal of American History.

Investigating John McCain’s Tragedy at Sea

By Mary Hershberger

John McCain’s personal account of his life has shaped a powerful political narrative that accords him deference on the full range of policy issues. His first effort at shaping that narrative received a remarkable boost when the May 14, 1973, edition of U.S. News and World Report gave him space for what is perhaps the longest article the magazine had ever run, a 12,000-word piece composed entirely of his unedited and often rambling account of his prisoner-of-war experience. Ever since, McCain has added compelling details at key points in his political career. When his stories are placed beside documented evidence from other sources, significant contradictions often emerge.

One such case involves McCain’s experience in the devastating fire and explosions that killed 134 sailors on the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal during the Vietnam War three months before he was shot down over North Vietnam. McCain has made claims about this accident that differ dramatically from parts of the official Navy report and accounts of reliable eyewitnesses.

In considering the 1967 catastrophe, it is important to note that the official report concluded that no individual bore responsibility for the fire or its spread. There are a number of conflicting accounts of the Forrestal accident, but here is the story as based on the strongest sources.

The fire started at 10:51 a.m. Saturday, July 29, 1967, as 30-year-old Lt. Cmdr. John McCain sat on the port side of the Forrestal in his A-4 Skyhawk going through preflight checks. To his right was Lt. Cmdr. Fred White, also in an A-4 Skyhawk attack aircraft. A Zuni rocket on another airplane accidentally fired and flew across the flight deck, passing through White’s auxiliary fuel tank and falling into the ocean. Fuel spilled onto the deck from White’s craft and ignited. McCain told his biographer, Robert Timberg, and repeats in his own book, “Faith of My Fathers,” that the rocket hit his own plane and knocked two bombs from it into the burning fuel as he scrambled out of his cockpit and raced to safety across the deck.1

There was, in fact, a single bomb—not two—that dropped to the deck. It exploded 90 seconds after the fire broke out, intensifying the blaze until it raged out of control. White and Thomas Ott, McCain’s parachute rigger, were among the first to be killed instantly or mortally injured, along with most of the firefighting crew. McCain’s plane captain, Robert Zwerlein, was one of those who suffered fatal wounds at this point.

A camera on the deck recorded images showing that the Zuni rocket struck White’s plane. The Navy report later attributed the dropped bomb to White’s plane, although the film footage does not seem to establish this definitively. However, McCain has said many times that the Zuni rocket caused the bomb (two bombs in McCain’s version) to fall from his own craft.

Some of those who were on the Forrestal and other persons familiar with the ordnance told me that because the rocket did not hit McCain’s craft, only actions by the pilot could have caused any bomb to fall from McCain’s Skyhawk. These sources—who spoke under the condition that they not be publicly identified—agree with each other that, if any bomb fell from the McCain airplane, it was because of actions that he took either in error or panic upon seeing the fire on the deck or in his hasty exit from the plane. Two switches in the cockpit of a Skyhawk need to be thrown to drop such a bomb, according to the sources.

Whatever the circumstances of the fire’s origins, McCain did not stay on deck to help fight the blaze as the men around him did. With the firefighting crew virtually wiped out, men untrained in fighting fires had to pick up the fire hoses, rescue the wounded or frantically throw bombs and even planes over the ship’s side to prevent further tragedy. McCain left them behind and went down to the hangar-bay level, where he briefly helped crew members heave some bombs overboard. After that, he went to the pilot’s ready room and watched the fire on a television monitor hooked to a camera trained on the deck.

McCain has never been asked to explain why he claims that the Zuni rocket struck his plane. If a bomb or bombs subsequently fell from McCain’s plane as he has said, it seems to strongly suggests pilot error, and if a bomb or bombs did not fall from his plane, it suggests rash disregard for important facts in his accounts of the accident.

There is plenty more about this story that raises questions about McCain’s truthfulness and judgment. In the first hours after the fire, he apparently did not claim to have been injured. New York Times reporter R.W. Apple, who helicoptered out to the ship the day after the tragedy and sought out McCain as the “son and grandson of two noted admirals,” never mentioned him being wounded, although he reported on him more than on any other crew member. This would be an odd omission on Apple’s part if McCain indeed had been wounded, given that service wounds are usually highlighted in such reports during wartime. McCain’s own father, after seeing his son several weeks later, sent a letter to relatives and friends about the fire saying, “Happily for all of us, he [John] came through without a scratch.”2

A week after the fire, McCain made a statement in which he said that when he was on the hangar deck he noticed that he had a wound on his knee and small shrapnel cuts in his thigh and shoulder. He was not treated in sick bay, however, and he tells a story in “Faith of My Fathers” that seems to be at variance with the facts. He writes that he went to sick bay to have his wounds treated but when he got there, a “kid” who was “anonymous to me because the fire had burned off all of his identifying features” asked him if another pilot in the squadron was OK. When McCain replied that he was, the “kid” said “Thank God” and died before McCain’s eyes. McCain said that experience left him “unable to keep my composure,” and that is why he left sick bay without being treated.

Lt. j.g. Dave Dollarhide witnessed that encounter because he was in sick bay, having broken his hip escaping from his plane, which had been immediately to the left of McCain’s when the blaze started. Dollarhide knew McCain and also the “kid,” a young man whom McCain knew well because he was his own plane captain, Robert Zwerlein, who was terribly burned when the first bomb exploded on the ship. Notwithstanding McCain’s dramatic account of witnessing someone die before his eyes, Zwerlein did not die then but instead was evacuated to the hospital ship USS Repose, where he expired three days later. On the basis of Dollarhide’s account, if McCain left sick bay without being treated it was not because someone died before his eyes.3

McCain’s actions after the fire show a determination to exit the ship as quickly as possible. When New York Times reporter Apple finished gathering his notes on the fire, McCain boarded a helicopter with him and flew to Saigon. Given that fires still burned on the ship and some of his fellow airmen were gravely wounded and dying, McCain’s assertion that he left the carrier for “some welcome R&R” in Saigon has a surreal air. Apple, now dead, said nothing in his news reports about inviting McCain to leave the ship, although he did report talking to him in Saigon later that day. McCain does not mention receiving permission to leave the still-burning ship. Merv Rowland, a commander and chief engineering officer of the Forrestal at the time of the fire, told me that he had not known that McCain left the ship within 30 hours of the fire and that he found this “extraordinary.” Rowland added that only the severely wounded were allowed to leave the ship and that no one, as far as he knew, would have been given permission to fly to Saigon for R&R. McCain’s quick flight off the Forrestal meant that he missed the memorial service for his dead comrades held the following day in the South China Sea.

Not long after McCain left, the Forrestal set off without him on its somber voyage to Subic Bay in the Philippines, where it would undergo initial repairs. He rejoined the ship a week later when it was docked at Subic Bay. There he gave an official statement and asked for a transfer to the aircraft carrier Oriskany.

Apple filed two stories about McCain’s time in Saigon. Apple’s first story said: “Today, hours after the fire that ravaged the flight deck and killed so many of his fellow crewmen, commander McCain sat in Saigon and shook his head. ‘It was such a great ship,’ he said.”4 Apple’s second story was filed three months later, just after McCain was shot down over Hanoi. In that story Apple wrote: “It was almost three months ago that the young, prematurely gray Navy pilot was sitting in a villa in Saigon, sipping a Scotch with friends and recalling the holocaust that he had managed to live through. He was John Sydney [sic—spelling is Sidney] McCain, 3rd, a lieutenant commander. The day before, he had watched from the cockpit of his Skyhawk attack plane as flames suddenly engulfed the flight deck of the Forrestal, on which his squadron was based. ‘It’s a difficult thing to say,’ he remarked after a long time. ‘But now that I’ve seen what the bombs and the napalm did to the people on our ship, I’m not so sure that I want to drop any more of that stuff on North Vietnam.’ ”5

The record suggests that after McCain left the burning Forrestal for the greater ease of Saigon, he saw his Navy career as being in jeopardy. Soon, he went to London, where his father, Adm. John S. McCain Jr., was stationed as commander in chief of the United States Naval Forces in Europe. Sen. McCain has written little about the fire, and his book does not mention any conversations with his father about bombs dropping from his plane on the Forrestal or his leaving the ship. However, it is difficult to imagine that he did not discuss the tragedy and his own personal difficulties because, by McCain’s own account, his father had intervened on his behalf before. After seeing the admiral in London, McCain went to the French Riviera, where he spent his nights gambling at the Palm Beach Casino.6

McCain’s book skips over the weeks after the Forrestal fire, but Timberg says that the young naval officer spent the months of August and September 1967 “unsure of his status.” Following McCain’s application for a transfer to the Oriskany, his orders were delayed, and in September he returned to his home in Jacksonville, Fla. There, an old friend, Chuck Larson, saw a change in McCain: The pilot was discouraged about his future. McCain confided to Larson that he might have to get out of the Navy because, in the words of the Timberg biography, “his past had become a burden” and “whenever he joined a new outfit he was dismayed that his reputation for mayhem had preceded him.”7 Aside from any questions about his Forrestal actions, McCain had, in his short Navy career, crashed two planes and flown a third into power lines in Spain because of, as he put it, “daredevil clowning.”8

The investigation into the Forrestal fire was in the hands of Adm. Thomas Moorer, chief of naval operations and a close friend of McCain’s father. (Their friendship was why Moorer would personally convey the news to Adm. Jack McCain three months later that his son had been shot down in Vietnam.) Moorer gave the investigation to Rear Adm. Forsyth Massey, who handed in his report on Sept. 19, 1967. McCain received orders to report to the Oriskany on Sept. 30.9

During the period when John McCain was shot down over Hanoi on Oct. 26, 1967, less than a month after being assigned to the Oriskany, recent events—the Forrestal fire and his possible role in its growth, misgivings about “dropping more of that stuff” on Vietnam, his decision to leave the stricken ship for some “R&R” in Saigon, anxiety about his naval career—were fresh in his mind. What had been going on in McCain’s life may cast light on some of the decisions he made later as a prisoner of war. While he was a POW, he famously refused to be released early, electing not to leave his comrades behind.

After McCain made his first run for the presidency, in 2000, Gregory Freeman wrote a book on the fire, “Sailors to the End.” Freeman’s 2002 book appears to be mostly reliable, but it ignores key parts of the official report and hews closely to McCain’s claim that the Zuni rocket struck his plane, not Fred White’s, causing the two thousand-pound bombs to drop into the burning fuel.

In addition to following McCain’s misleading narrative of the Zuni rocket accident to the letter, Freeman published an uncredited hand-drawn sketch purporting to show the Forrestal deck just before the fire. In that sketch, the plane in which White died is stripped of White’s name, even though Freeman printed the names of the other pilots near McCain’s plane and told their stories. The only place that White’s name appears is at the back of the book in a list of those who died. In the narrative of “Sailors to the End,” Fred White’s name is conspicuous by its absence.

After erasing White, Freeman’s sketch presents an incorrect line between the original position of the Zuni rocket and McCain’s plane, instead of showing the actual line that the rocket took in striking White’s plane. This sketch alone will cause the unwary reader to believe there is visual evidence to support the claim that the Zuni rocket hit McCain’s plane, not that of White, the pilot lost on the Forrestal and now airbrushed out of history, at least in Freeman’s book.

McCain wrote a glowing blurb for Freeman’s book, drawing and all, calling it a “riveting account.” The presence of his enthusiastic blurb on the book cover raises another issue: Freeman relied heavily on interviews of survivors who were close to the Forrestal events but he never quotes McCain directly or mentions having requested an interview with him. Because his book pushes McCain’s misleading and unsubstantiated account, Freeman should make public whether McCain, or people around him, played a role in the genesis of “Sailors to the End.”

“I’m an old Navy pilot. I know when a crisis calls for all hands on deck,”10 Sen. McCain said recently in explaining why he was temporarily suspending his presidential campaign and calling for postponement of the first debate between himself and Democratic candidate Barack Obama, which eventually occurred as scheduled. At the one time in his life when he was faced with a real crisis on deck, we now know, McCain left the crisis to others and descended to safety below. As to the question of whether the first bomb to explode on the Forrestal dropped from his plane through pilot error, it is not reassuring to hear him describe his attitude as a Navy pilot toward safety procedures. He told reporters during his 2000 presidential campaign that his motto in those days was: “Kick the tires and light the fires [jet engines]. To hell with the checklist. Anybody can be slow.”11

McCain has gone much further than most veterans in using his military experiences for political purposes, but he has not allowed his military records to be released, save for the list of his awards and medals, all of which were given only after he became a prisoner of war. It is appropriate that he release those records before the election. If his actions contributed to the magnitude of the Forrestal disaster and if he left the burning ship under less than honorable circumstances, that information should be available to voters as they choose their next president. At the very least, John McCain should be asked to explain his actions in the summer of 1967 and tell American voters why he has repeatedly given a false account of Robert Zwerlein’s death.

Bibliography

1 John McCain with Mark Salter, “Faith of My Fathers,” 177-181; Robert Timberg, “John McCain: An American Odyssey,” 71-74.

2 R.W. Apple Jr., “Start of Tragedy: Pilot Hears a Blast As He Checks Plane” (New York Times, July 31, 1967) 1; McCain, 181.

3 James Caiella, “Hell 1051,” Foundation Magazine (fall 2003) 52.

4 Apple, ibid.

5 R.W. Apple Jr., “McCain’s Son, Forrestal Survivor, Is Missing in Raid” (New York Times, Oct. 28, 1967) 1.

6 Timberg, 75-76.

7 Ibid.

8 McCain, 155-156, 159, 172.

9 Ibid., 192, 182.

10“Prepared Remarks by John McCain to the Clinton Global Initiative,” Boston Globe, Sept. 25, 2008, online.

11Roger Simon, “Honest John, on the Loose: With McCain, you get the good, the bad, and the angry,” U.S. News & World Report, posted Sept. 19, 1999.

End of article...

I'd like to comment on McCain's refusal to leave his commrades behind when he was a POW. If he had left he would have been automatically deemed a traitor. There are strict rules about what order POWs come home and if he would have left then... it would have labeled him forever a traitor as it was NOT his turn to come home. So NO he wasn't being a hero by staying he was trying to cover his worthless backside!

The article above proves he is a LIAR! He is inept! He abandoned and refused to help the wounded and dying men on the USS FORRESTAL! He did NOT show leadership qualities! He didn't do his duty! He is responsible for loss of life on USS FORRESTAL! He ran to daddy to be bailed out again! Lied about being injured! He likes to embellish his accounts with lies in order to make himself look like a hero!

"McCain left the crisis to others and descended to safety below!"

Real hero's don't toot their own horns! Real hero's don't use their hero status for political gain! Every time I turn around McCain uses his fake hero status campaigning! When he makes an error or mistake he uses it even more. In fact the fake hero status has kept the media at bay. Shame on them for not having the guts to tell the the REAL truth about John McCain!

I have been studying John McCain's POW experiences and have read accounts by senior ranking officers at the prison camp as well as other witnesses and have come to the conclusion that he is indeed a traitor to his country.

I have also studied how he mistreated and abused the POW and MIA families from the Vietnam War and I can safely say I have nothing but complete and utter disgust and contempt for the man. A man whom boasts that he is a war hero for political gain when in reality he is is nothing but a traitor to his country and to his fellow servicemen.

His Military files and POW records MUST be unsealed BEFORE the election! and if there is any justice in this world he should be court martialed as a traitor!

Juli Norwood

Executive experience?

Roberto — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:28:05 EDT

So I see the recent McCain propoganda Ad that talks about Barack not having executive experience and how the next President needs to have that experience to deal with the first crisis they will face, the economy.

It occurs to me that our current President was governor of Texas for 8 years and has been President for nearly 8 years. That is 15-16 years of executive experience and he is clearly unable to handle this crisis (and many others). This leads me to assert that perhaps simply having executive experience has no bearing on how well someone can handle a crisis.

IF we want to ignore that and actually make the HUGE assumption that it makes a difference, how much executive experience does McCain have? The only thing I've been able to find online that MIGHT be construed as executive is that he was the leader of his flight wing.

This is a tired argument with no real merit. Let's talk about real issues and not red herrings.

The Polish Missile Crisis

ted in pdx — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:29:42 EDT

As the subject of the Cuban Missile Crisis has emerged in forums on-line, I responded to a posting on the Washignton Post:

KMichaels wrote:JFK pretty much blew it. His military advisors pretty much had to kick his stupid arse into gear to finally get that moron to do something serious.

In fact, the successful conclusion of the crisis was due to Kennedy's unwillingness to follow the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to attack the missile installations in Cuba. Kennedy correctly ascertained that Kruschev was very likely under a similar kind of pressure from his military advisers, which led to JFK to ignore the second formal communique from the Soviets, and agree to the first one instead. That insight is generally credited with averting the necessity to strike Cuba, an action which would have, very likely, precipitated a nuclear war.

As for testing the next President, it's really not a matter of speculation anyway. Thanks to an incoherent foreign policy towards Russia and the former Soviet republics by the Bush administration, the next crisis is already locked and loaded: We have announced our intention to install defensive missiles in Poland, and Russia has stated flatly that if we do, they will use military means if necessary to remove them.

Fortunately, while Senator McCain was reminding voters that he was strapped into the cockpit of his fighter plane back in 1962 ready to bomb Cuba, Senator Obama was holding a high-level conference on foreign policy and our national security (yesterday) in anticipation of the Poland invasion threat, and several other critical security issues he will face if elected. Fortunately, no one had to 'kick his arse' to organize that meeting, he planned for it quite some time ago.

McCain's Arrogance is Dangerous

SFC B. USA Ret. MSW — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:20:42 EDT

McCain says he will not be challenged by foes because he has been tested. This is such an arrogant and nieve statement. Who does he think he is. I have been to these foriegn countries while serving in the Military for over 20 years. This is not accurate and his over confidence will get Americans hurt. We have servicemembers being killed and/or seriously wounded everyday. Our enemies live by a different philosophy. Many justify their brutal actions within their religious beliefs. It is our arrogance that has eroded our image in the world. We need a real thinker, a skilled communicator, a person that understands and respects other cultures. Otherwise the hatred for us will only increase. I love this Country, but I fear the direction we are going in. Obama has the ability to really change this image. McCain is far too militant. It is foolish for him to think others will fear him. His arrogance will only fuel more anger and determination. We really need to get others to understand this, otherwise we will be fighting in more wars, losing and ruining more lives, and going deeper into debt. Obama can make a real difference.

WHY THE ECONOMY TANKED

GREG KLINE — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:20:53 EDT

S - I - M - P - L - E

DEREGULATION sank Wall Street and our economy.

DEREGULATION has been the exclusive battle cry of REPUBLICANS.

REPUBLICAN DEREGULATION caused our current economic pain.

S - I - M - P - L - E

PRIVATIZATION has stripped and gutted our safety nets.

PRIVATIZATION is an exclusive mantra of REPUBLICANS.

REPUBLICAN PRIVATIZATION is why you can't afford to falter anymore.

* - * - * - *

THE TRUTH IS SIMPLE.

SIMPLE MAKES POWERFUL SOUND-BITES.

MAKE THIS SHORT & SWEET MESSAGE HEARD.

DRIVE IT HOME to every voter you can reach.

M - O - R - E

Privatize means you introduce profit. The point of profit is to give as little as possible for as much as possible. So privatized public services get gutted.

McSame wants to privatize Social Security. Just like Bush. Can you IMAGINE if your Social Security retirement funds had been invested in the stock market as a result of privatization?

McBush has been consistently public about pressing for deregulation, getting government oversight out of the way of business. Well, they got their wish. Pretty scary results, right?

Democrats have always fundamentally believed in regulation of public services, and social safety nets. Democrats CREATED Social Security, and the Minimum Wage. Democratic bedrocks. How much more do you need to know?

The biggest bankruptcy crisis, is that of McBush and Palin's sorry souls.

You want change? Make sure people understand and remember all the years of Republican ranting for deregulation. McCrusty wants to deregulate health care too. He's on record, up till only a month or so ago, touting himself as a deregulator. In fact, think back a couple months. McSame was consistently all about "experience", frequently agreeing with George Bush, sometimes praising him, and voting with him literally over 90% of the time. Bush's popularity and the economy tanked badly. Barack's consistent message of change whooped McSame's message of experience at every turn. So now, in the eleventh hour, SURPRISE! McBush is ALL ABOUT change. Again, how much more do you need to know?

Solution to Foreclosure/Housing/Economic Crisis

Carol — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:59:51 EDT

It may be that in the problem there is a solution.

Millions of properties are currently in or moving into the foreclosure process. Many of these homes have persons renting them who are being forced into the street because the rents they paid to landlords are not being paid to banks. I just viewed a news story yesterday about a police official refusing to evict tenants who have been paying their rent.

Ideally, banks currently owning mortgages would set up a program where rent-to-own becomes the driving force of tenants becoming homeowners. A pool would be established for rent paid by tenants, which would accumulate on the home they occupy. When the minimum down payment amount is reached, the occupant would begin the process to purchase the property.

Less desirable would be for the government to buy these bad mortgages and then they set up this program.

Tenants have already chosen the homes where they live. A portion of the rent paid would be placed in a pool, eventually becoming a down payment for purchase. Homes would be occupied saving them from vandalism as well as deterioration of the surrounding neighborhood. This solution offers access to home ownership for families and individuals who currently do not have the savings required to purchase a home.

Families or individuals would instantly become invested in their neighborhoods or communities. I believe that Americans will quickly step up to the opportunity to own a home with money that they are already spending on rent.

The economy might be restored quicker than waiting for investors to take over these mortgages and then waiting for tenants to occupy them.

poverty and the lower class

Donegal H. — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:51:11 EDT

Am I the only one tired of hearing the candidates talk about the middle class? WHAT ABOUT THE LOWER CLASS? We're in the worst position for this economic crisis, yet we seem to be ignored! Except by McCain, perhaps, who has at least stated a plan for the mortgage problem.

I want to know what Obama plans to do to help the lower class who struggle for financial stability and are struggling even harder now.

Obama came from an average family. Let's hope he hasn't forgotten us.

Cutting Taxes and Public Spending Won't Rescue USA from Crisis

Zarko — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:42:46 EDT

In the last several debates I see a pattern in McCain's attacks where he keeps emphasizing that Obama won't cut taxes (and consistently never says this only applies for the ones making over 250K). Well, DUH! When the times are so bad that they start resembling the Great Depression, let's remember who got us out of there and how.

It wasn't a cut in public spending or taxes that bailed us out, but the New Deal and the increase in government regulation, big government projects and public spending, establishment of Social Security and other civilizational values. So mr rich guy, don't blame Obama for this mess. You and your ill-regulated small government markets got us in here and we need to get this (and you) under control.

America in Crisis - A Time for Renewal

PrayersForAmerica — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:14:45 EDT

by Julie Redstone

The system that we are basing our economic strength on is not working. It is floating in time, waiting for a misstep from which it cannot recover. Therefore, it is not the bail-out that is going to save this economy. It is only a change in values.

The current bail-out of the American credit system and of mortgage lenders within the proliferation of banks, lending institutions, and mortgage companies in this country has not addressed the primary problem contributing to the existing crisis, namely, the system itself which is outmoded and filled with personal aggrandizement and mismanagement at all levels.

The availability of opportunity for mismanagement of funds and also of using these funds for personal gain has been widespread within corporate America, and the system itself promotes this as it promotes the maintenance of a pyramidal economic structure that contains a very few at the top, and many at the bottom struggling to get by.

We need, in America, to experience a renewal of our basic values – a renewal of our desire for equality, freedom, justice, and a way of life that embraces all, making it possible for all to live and prosper, not just the wealthy few. These words are given lip service, today, by both political figures and CEOs, but the generosity of spirit and caring for future generations that lay at the heart of the Founders of this great nation, has, over time, diminished into a kind of self-seeking and self-promotion based on a sense of entitlement to vast incomes, opportunities, and other business perks for the few, while the rest go unnoticed. This is not just the philosophy of the wealthiest in this country, but of those who seek to become wealthy and to follow in their footsteps.

We once cared more about the land, about the natural beauty of this country, about what we would leave to future generations. We once felt ennobled by a noble task – the task of creating a new Republic and of making that Republic into something to be proud of. This nobility of purpose is still at the foundation of America’s spirit, but has become covered over and at times obliterated by the kind of self-seeking and self-aggrandizement that has caused consumers at all levels to overspend, overreach, overinvest, and to ignore or underestimate the consequences of doing so. And it is not just consumers who have held such an attitude. It is the government itself which has placed this nation in debt to the amount of trillions of dollars, with millions of dollars in interest being added to that each day.

America is the largest debtor nation in the world. Foreign governments, especially China, support the national economy and enable it to function. We are trillions of dollars in debt and the debt only grows, it does not diminish. If those who hold our debt were to call it in, this country would not be able to continue functioning, for we have no other collateral to fall back on. We have become an economic system built on sand rather than on substance, and the money that we use as venue is not backed up by true financial resources that would guarantee its stability. We, as an economic system, are riding on credit, not just the mortgage industry, not just the consumers, not just the corporate executives.

Today, we witness a credit system that has stopped working because its underlying premise does not work, namely, that we can go on borrowing and borrowing for whatever we wish to purchase, and we will not have to pay the price for this indulgence. Because we have lived with this illusion for so long, we now begin to find ourselves no longer having a solid foundation on which to stand. This is what leads to the current call for a ‘bail-out’.

We need to renew our vows to ourselves and to those who come after us, to the world that watches what we do, and to those who listen to the speeches that are made and wait to hear something true, and honest, and real.

This system that we are basing our economic strength on is not working. It is floating in time, waiting for a misstep from which it cannot recover. Therefore, it is not the bail-out that is going to save this economy. It is only a change in values which will allow America to once more exist on the solid footing of its own ideals.

This must be our promise to ourselves and to the future – not simply to repair the present damage and address the present crisis – but to address the existing false optimism based on entitlement that has given rise to this crisis. It is only in this way, through a change in the heart of the system, that true stability can be found.

* * *

by Julie Redstone From the Light Omega newsletter

The 10 actionable things Obama can do to solve this Economic crisis. Why Wall Street is the cause of 98% of this Crisis; the cause is NOT simply the subprime fallout

Bula — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 17:27:20 EDT

Dear President Obama,

There are 10 immediate things that MUST be done to rebuild confidence in our financial system and for regular investors:

1. Transparency in the Value of All Assets and Debt obligations for All financial Institutions by publishing on the internet, including offshore ties, Credit Default Swaps, Derivatives, Mortgage Back Securities, Liquidity, Fixed Income products. NO TRANSPARENCY, NO HELP - YOU WILL FAIL.

2. Freeze the Credit Default Swaps Market. Install regulation, and phase out immediately. Freeze any market product that does not have transparency or regulation including derivatives.

3. Credit Availability to Regional Banks for Qualified Business Loan Clients, SO MAIN STREET WORKS.

4. Big Increase in Federal Insurance for Bank Accounts (checking and saving), Money Market, and Investment Accounts held by Brokers. This will stop any panic of withdrawing immediately.

5. Ban Naked Short Selling. Regulate Hedge Funds Immediately with trading rules to protect investors from electronic trading raids, and to provide disclosure and transparency. Unethical trading techniques and nondisclosure has allowed Hedge Funds to create panic in the marketplace by naked shorting or pump and dump schemes for short term gains. Sometimes, these strategies severely impact companies who are looking to raise funds or they create a panic of no confidence. Create rules to PROTECT regular investors.

6. DO NOT use Taxpayer money to buy ANY ILLIQUID or BAD ASSETS that are not substantiated by any tangibility or that are Uncollateralized. US TREASURY must pay cents on the dollar, or at most, the market value, and never pay original values of these assets. Mortgages have property as collateral, so they may be ok, but must be purchased at a huge discount for the benefit of taxpayer money. But refuse uncollateralized debt. BY DOING THIS WE WILL PUT THE TREASURY AT RISK.

7. Reduce the Maximum Leveraging ratio dramaticallyand regulate strongly so that companies who wish to borrow, cannot overborrow. How can you borrow that much more than you are worth?

8. DO NOT ELIMINATE MARK TO MARKET RULE: this is a cry for bankers so they can HIDE what is actually the severity of the assets devaluation.

9. Liquidity for Interbank lending and control of interbank lending rates.

10. ACCOUNTABILITY for all those involved in creating and dealing junk instruments that have put our economy in jeopardy including Credit Default Swaps, etc. Justice must be done. Jailtime and heavy fines must be levied to those that have profited by high compensation.

WHAT CAUSED THIS MESS: EXPLAINED IN 10 POINTS...

1. People bought homes that were once worth 300,000 dollars with little or no money down. Example, $15000 down.

2. Risky mortgages were underwritten for an value of 600,000 (value of property + interest).

3. Products were created by compiling these mortgages, and sold to investment banks and investors worldwide. Lets call them derivatives. As an example, lets combine 100 such mortgages, and call it 1 derivative product.

4. These institutions who bought these risky products valued them at some absurd number. Say 600,000 x 100 = 60 million dollar asset.

5. These banks had the audacity to borrow against these already leveraged assets in ratios that were absurd. Lets take the example of 10 to 1. So they would borrow 600 million using this 60 million dollar derivative product as collateral.

6. To hedge this horrendous leveraging scheme, they bought an insurance product called Credit Default Swaps from peer investment banks basically guaranteeing that if the mortgage or derivative product failed, they would be able to recoup the funds.

7. The problem is that Credit Default Swaps are not regulated so these banks did not keep any collateral to pay out in case there was a failure. They cheated the Federal regulators Credit Default Swaps NOT being an insurance product when it actually is EXACTLY an insurance product.

8. So, people defaulted, and values of homes fell. Then banks had to write down the value of the assets that they bought as derivatives and mortgage back securities. Then the money that these banks borrowed using these bad mortgages as collateral were being called in by lenders. Finally the purchasers of insurance product Credit Default Swaps that insured these bad mortgage products and derivatives also asked for their payout due to failure.

9. The credit mess created by overleveraging very poor assets is valued at 40 Trillion Dollars.

less than 2% of this is the actual value of the bad mortgages. 98% of this credit horror is caused by investment banks, banks, and those that participated in this.

10. People familiar with this horrendous scheme of credit default swaps and overleveraged mortgage products that were high risk saw the opportunity to go directly to markets and intensify short positions in almost every big bank, a move that they knew would benefit them when the credit default swap cancer was exposed. The problem is that this caused a crisis of confidence and lenders as well as depositors wanted to remove their money immediately. This is termed a RUN ON THE BANK. This, along with horrendous credit instruments, caused liquidity crisis that is going to fail many banks and will fail many more.

How does this affect everyone:

1. Any retirement fund, 401k, etc will fall with the market.

2. Banks have hefty losses and do not have the liquidity to lend any money to small businesses. These businesses in turn will not be able to invest in machinery, infrastructure, etc to grow, and it may affect cashflow. Business that require credit will be under pressure and will be forced to lay off people.

What should be done?

Freeze the Credit Default Swaps market immediately.
Have all banks disclose all their assets immediately on the Internet. Those that are insolvent must disclose this to be eligible for any FDIC or SEC aid.
There should be Manadatory Jail time for all the people involved in creating, selling and trading the Credit Default Swaps, which are an insurance product that did not follow any insurance regulations. FBI investigations should be complete throughout all the institutions from Hedgefunds to Investment Banks
We should NOT bailout any CDS related assets, or derivative related assets that were created by financial institutions.
We MUST ONLY help real assets, not leveraged assets. Example, businesses and mortgages directly.
Inject Targetted funds into regional banks with clear instruction to stabilize the bank, and to provide liquidity to their local business clients.
INSURE through the FDIC upto 500,000 dollars that is deposited in banks, and investment accounts so people dont panic.
Insure Money market accounts.
Make it illegal for any institution to leverage over 10:1
Retain the Mark to Market rule since it is a TRUTH TELLER. IF assets have a value that falls to ZERO, than it is the truth, and this rule exposes it.

We must restore trust to the markets through transparency and rigorous regulations. Otherwise, every investor will want to cash out immediately since we trust NOTHING on wall street.

Barack Obama MUST address these specifics ASAP to show he understands the crisis, and is able to solve it.

Depreciation Stop Loss

DC — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 16:14:01 EDT

Dear Senator Obama,

I am in no way shape or form a practiced economist however having operated in the lending world and residential real estate market I do have a theory for a cost free answer to our current economic situation. I am a supporter of your campaign and this is my simple minded attempt to propose a simple change with positive ramifications for all. Property values are at the heart of this situation. Depreciation is an overwhelmingly guilty culprit.

Proposal: Property Depreciation Stop Loss Act of 2008,

Please read the extended post for detail.

Thank you,

Calm in a Crisis

Barbara Reid — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:39:32 EDT

Marc puts his finger on the real reason for the Obama surge. It's not, I think, simply punishing the GOP for the financial meltdown. It's also the public's judgment of which candidate responded better to the events of the last two weeks. McCain seemed unstable, bombastic, temperamental and at times, hysterical. Obama seemed, well, presidential.

Here's what I think matters more than ideology at this point. The American people have lived through a nerve-wracking few years. So many certainties have collapsed. We had 9/11 and then Abu Ghraib. We had the Iraq fiasco and the Katrina catastrophe. Now we have the structure of capitalism on the brink. Americans do not want a president adding to the drama. They want calm and authority and reason.

And that's why the attempt to paint Obama as a flaming radical is so ill-timed.

Obama just proved that he is a careful, calm guy in a crisis. What the voters saw is at odds with what the GOP is now saying. So in that context, it's the GOP that's damaged outside its core believers. (Obama's immensely difficult job if elected president will be to bring those deeply alienated people back into the national fold.)

In the end, temperament matters. And in a country desperate for assurance and poise at the top, Obama is winning that debate. It's no surprise to those of us who've followed him closely for a while. But for most voters, this is a new and first impression of Obama's character. And it's powerful.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/the-calm-factor.html

We Need a Keating Five website! www.Keating5.com

GOPCrashers — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:07:20 EDT

Hi everyone-

It is pretty obvious that the McCain campaign wants to get down and dirty this last month of the election after the "terrorist" namecalling and "elitist" smears. I think the Keating Five scandal needs to be dragged out front and center again, especially in light of the financial crisis that has been brought about by a lack of ethical banking practices.

I own the domain, www.Keating5.com, I bought it last winter when I was volunteering for Ron Paul. Right now I don't have anything up on it. I'll be honest, I am not very talented in terms of getting a website up and running. However if anyone wants to collaborate on a site outlining the Keating Five scandal and/or get the attention of the official Obama campaign to run with it I'd be happy to get some anti-McCain material up.

Send me a message if you are interested!

Economist And Obama's Plan

Nia "Hussein" J. — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 16:18:05 EDT

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=12342127

AS THE financial crisis pushes the economy back to the top of voters’ concerns, Barack Obama is starting to open up a clear lead over John McCain in the opinion polls. But among those who study economics for a living, Mr Obama’s lead is much more commanding. A survey of academic economists by The Economist finds the majority—at times by overwhelming margins—believe Mr Obama has the superior economic plan, a firmer grasp of economics and will appoint better economic advisers.

Our survey is not, by any means, a scientific poll of all economists. We e-mailed a questionnaire to 683 research associates, all we could track down, of the National Bureau of Economic Research, America’s premier association of applied academic economists, though the NBER itself played no role in the survey. A total of 142 responded, of whom 46% identified themselves as Democrats, 10% as Republicans and 44% as neither. This skewed party breakdown may reflect academia’s Democratic tilt, or possibly Democrats’ greater propensity to respond. Still, even if we exclude respondents with a party identification, Mr Obama retains a strong edge—though the McCain campaign should be buoyed by the fact that 530 economists have signed a statement endorsing his plans.

Does their opinion matter? Economics is just one of the many things the next president will have to worry about; voters still seem to prefer Mr McCain on foreign policy. And even on the economy, economists may not have the same priorities as the population at large. Arguably, what a president says about economics on the campaign trail is less important than how he responds to the unexpected challenges that inevitably arise once he is in office.

Yet economists’ opinions should count for something because irrespective of any party affiliation, most of them approach policy decisions with the same basic tool kit. Their assessment of the candidates’ economic credentials and plans represents an informed judgment on how well they will handle difficult trade-offs between efficiency, equity, growth and consensus-building.

Regardless of party affiliation, our respondents generally agree the economy is in bad shape, that the election is important to the course of economic policy and that the housing and financial crisis is the most critical economic issue facing America.

The detailed responses are bad news for Mr McCain (the full data are available here). Eighty per cent of respondents and no fewer than 71% of those who do not cleave to either main party say Mr Obama has a better grasp of economics. Even among Republicans Mr Obama has the edge: 46% versus 23% say Mr Obama has the better grasp of the subject. “I take McCain’s word on this one,” comments James Harrigan at the University of Virginia, a reference to Mr McCain’s infamous confession that he does not know as much about economics as he should. In fairness, Mr McCain’s lower grade may in part reflect greater candour about his weaknesses. Mr Obama’s more tightly managed image leaves fewer opportunities for such unvarnished introspection.

A candidate’s economic expertise may matter rather less if he surrounds himself with clever advisers. Unfortunately for Mr McCain, 81% of all respondents reckon Mr Obama is more likely to do that; among unaffiliated respondents, 71% say so. That is despite praise across party lines for the excellent Doug Holtz-Eakin, Mr McCain’s most prominent economic adviser and a former head of the Congressional Budget Office. “Although I have tended to vote Republican,” one reply says, “the Democrats have a deep pool of talented, moderate economists.”

There is an apparent contradiction between most economists’ support for free trade, low taxes and less intervention in the market and the low marks many give to Mr McCain, who is generally more supportive of those things than Mr Obama. It probably reflects a perception that the Republican Party under George Bush has subverted many of those ideals for ideology and political gain. Indeed, the majority of respondents rate Mr Bush’s economic record as very bad, and Republican respondents are only slightly less critical.

“John McCain has professed disdain for ‘so-called economists’, and for some the feeling has become mutual,” says Erik Brynjolfsson, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School of Management. “Obama’s team is mainstream and non-ideological but extremely talented.”

On our one-to-five scale, economists on average give Mr Obama’s economic programme a 3.3 and Mr McCain’s a 2.2. Mr Obama, says Jonathan Parker, a non-aligned professor at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management, “is a pragmatist not an ideologue. I expect Clintonian economic policies.” If, that is, crushing federal debt does not derail his taxing and spending plans.

On his plans to fix the financial crisis, Mr Obama averages 3.1, a point higher than Mr McCain. Still, some said they didn’t quite know what they were rating—reasonably enough, since neither candidate has produced clear plans of his own.

Where the candidates’ positions are more clearly articulated, Mr Obama scores better on nearly every issue: promoting fiscal discipline, energy policy, reducing the number of people without health insurance, controlling health-care costs, reforming financial regulation and boosting long-run economic growth. Twice as many economists think Mr McCain’s plan would be bad or very bad for long-run growth as Mr Obama’s. Given how much focus Mr McCain has put on his plan’s benefits for growth, this last is quite a repudiation.

Mr McCain gets his highest mark, an average of 3.5 and a clear advantage over Mr Obama, for his position on free trade and globalisation. If Mr Obama “would wake up on free trade”, one respondent says, “I could get behind the plans much more.” Perhaps surprisingly, the economists rated trade low in priority compared with the other issues listed. Only 53% say it is important or very important. Neither candidate scored at all well on dealing with the burgeoning cost of entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security.

The economists also prefer Mr Obama’s tax plans. Republicans and respondents who do not identify with either political party see Mr McCain’s tax policies as more efficient but less equitable. But the former prefer Mr McCain’s plans—43% of Republicans say they are good or very good—and the latter Mr Obama’s. Of non-affiliated respondents, 31% say Mr Obama’s are good or very good.

Either way, according to the economists, it would be difficult to do much worse than George Bush. The respondents give Mr Bush a dismal average of 1.7 on our five-point scale for his economic management. Eighty-two per cent thought Mr Bush’s record was bad or very bad; only 1% thought it was very good.

The Democrats were overwhelmingly negative, but nearly every respondent viewed Mr Bush’s record unfavourably. Half of Republican respondents thought Mr Bush deserves only a 2. “The minimum rating of one severely overestimates the quality of Bush’s economic policies,” says one non-aligned economist.

My Thoughts on the VP Debate

Michelle — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:27:52 EDT

I find it hard to believe that immediately following the debate, the pundits were saying that Sarah Palin had no major gaffes. Really? I caught one major gaffe that made my head turn. Some may think that it was misspeak, a jumbling of her words, but taken as a whole, I think it was not misspeak because it clearly bolstered the McCain/Palin position of tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations in hopes that it trickles down to the middle and working class Americans that need it now. Misspeak it was not; it was McCain/Palin through and through.

When asked about bankruptcy, specifically if Palin would have supported a bill that would make it more difficult for debt-strapped mortgage-holders to declare bankruptcy, to get out from under that debt, a bill John McCain supported, a bill that goes against those very same middle and working class Americans that McCain and Palin are trying to fool into believing that the Republican ticket has their best interests at heart -- Palin said, yes, she would also support that bill.

In that same answer, Palin said:

It is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting Wall Street.

In effect, Palin is blaming Main Streeters, Joe-Six-Pack and Hockey Moms across America, for this toxic mess that is affecting Wall Street. A gaffe? I would think so. A misspeak? I think not. Here's why.

A bit later in the debate Palin said:

We need also to not get ourselves in debt. Let's do what our parents told us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're taking personal responsibility through all of this.

Again, Sarah Palin is going back to putting blame on the American people for our recent economic meltdown, for the sub-prime mortgage lending crisis, but when she realizes that she's spent about 30 seconds blaming the American people, something middle and working class Americans wouldn't be too happy with, she backtracks and says:

It's not the American peoples fault that the economy is hurting like it is, but we have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through this and say never again will we be taken advantage of.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a little too late to be backtracking, especially when it comes from Sarah Palin, a member of the ticket that would rather help the super wealthy and large corporations with tax cuts than give tax cuts to those that need it most, middle and working class Americans who have been hard-hit by this economic downturn. So, no, it wasn't misspeak -- she meant what she said which is why her party wants to reward big corporations and the super wealthy with tax cuts -- the McCain/Palin ticket thinks that's fair b/c in their minds, middle and working class Americans have lived beyond their means and gotten us into this mess, so if the economic prosperity trickles down from the top to them over the long term, fine, if not, well, McCain/Palin think they got what they deserved for living above their means in the first place.

I liked Biden's response to Palin throwing blame onto the backbone of the American people.

Those people who say don't go into debt, they can barely pay to fill up their gas tank.

Yes, Sarah Palin can say to middle and working class Americans -- don't go into debt, don't live outside your means, but when you can't afford to pay for gas and the groceries you need to feed your kids keep getting more and more expensive and your son needs to go to the doctor because he's had a cough for 5 days that just won't go away -- well, in this economy, a credit card sometimes is your only answer and debt is the only thing that keeps you and your family surviving these tough times. Our wages have been stagnant and costs for major necessities like gas, heating oil, groceries, have continued to rise; this may not be a big deal for people like Sarah Palin and McCain who are at the top 5% of Americans in terms of wealth, but for someone who is trying to make ends meet with $40,000 and 3 kids, well, you can see why a credit card is sometimes their only saving grace.

So when Palin made these comments, they resonated with me, because a comment like that coming from Obama or Biden, candidates that have always been about giving tax cuts to those making $250,000 or less, not big corporations and the super wealthy, who have been about affordable healthcare and really bolstering the middle and working class, the backbone of America, then it's misspeak. When it comes from a candidate whose ticket has never put country first, has never favored helping those with the least before extending more of a helping hand to those with the most, then it's not misspeak, it's a gaffe. And it's only a gaffe b/c Palin broke character; for a moment, she showed the true colors of the Republican ticket to middle and working class Americans, for a moment, she let on that, despite how much she and McCain have tried to fool them, it's true, they are not on their side.

The economic crisis – a sociological perspective

Emma — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:20:56 EDT

The world is coming to an end. At least the world as we know it. Wall Street will never be the same and the world’s perception of America will never be what it was. But this is the way of life, the ever changing maze of the Universe. What I find far more interesting is the human element in all of this. This crisis is a perfect example of the age old rivalry between the individual and the collective.

It can be strangely difficult to fully grasp the contradiction that all of us, as separate individuals, are also part of an entity called the collective. An entity seemingly with a mind of its own which can exert a power over our individual needs and desires far beyond our control. It decides what we eat, what we wear, which sport or cultural activity we engage in. Try as you might, and many do try, we are all victims to the collective will of the social context we live in.

All sociologists will tell you that, when placed in a group, individuals can be made to do things they would never consider doing if they were on their own. This phenomenon, when fully embraced, is a very unpleasant realization of the limitations we have over our own psyche but it’s also a healthy insight into the complex structure that we call society.

Here is the ultimate paradox; while we all need to be a part of something beyond ourselves to survive, we always resent the notion of not being in control of our lives and usually find rather ingenious ways to reject the society that helps keep us fed, clothed and safe. We complain about our neighbors, gossip about our coworkers, we angrily protest our government and its powers. But deep down we know that without all of that which we so happily criticize we would be running wild, hungry, cold and probably insane. All mammals need some form of social structure, humans more than most. But as we ourselves aren’t always ourselves in this social structure, we fear it perhaps more than anything else, and rightfully so.

Take the market for instance. Can a Market fall? Can it be depressed and panic? Yes it can because the Market is a group of people and all that each human can feel, so can the group. Except these human feelings that this entity can experience is always multiplied by the amount of individuals that this entity consists of. Consequently a group as large as the Market, consisting of billions of individuals, feels things so deeply and profoundly that even the smallest form of emotional outburst can easily shatter our very existents for years to come. This is what the pundits fear. That’s why this so called bailout is so necessary. Not to fatten the pockets of Wall Street suits, but to sooth the Market and reassure it that all will be well. If the Market looses faith and falls into a state of panic, the consequences can become too severe to bear.

But the average American has difficulties with this concept. To most Americans the individual is the strongest element in society. They haven’t really experienced the full force of the collective as an angry, thrashing entity beyond themselves. Here in Europe we have. We have seen armies swarm across our backyard, we have felt the storm of revolution sweep across our lands and we have felt the protective shield of socialism. We understand the collective entity perhaps better than most, the good as well as the bad, and the downright horrifying.

America has by and large been spared the wrath of the collective entity. They have also kept its protective powers at bay. To Americans the government is an alien thing, set up by others to infringe on their rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. To me Americans appear spoiled and naïve, apparently incapable of understanding the concept of consequences. After all they voted for the imbecile in the White House, not once but twice, and now no one wants to own up to that disaster. This imbecile has done so much to wreck not just America but the world and no one takes responsibility! Not the republicans that voted for him, nor the democrats who didn’t fight it hard enough. Now that imbecile and his administration have, for some incomprehensible reason, allowed the media to use the word bailout to describe this economic rescue package. Naturally no sane individual wants to bail out some fat rat on Wall Street! The power of perception should never be underestimated. Not that Bush Jr has enough brain to understand any of that of course. I guess all we can do is hope that the Senate can browbeat their lower standing colleagues in Congress to go along with the plan. Clearly their President is utterly useless, as always.

The Real Economic Story

Elliot from Stamford, CT — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:52:35 EDT

The economic problem we face right now is hard to understand. Things that are hard to understand are hard to support (the same reason racisim exists). The less we know about things, the more fearful we are, but the problem we face is that nobody is EXPLAINING THE PROBLEM! Most of us are just begin told that there IS a problem and that we MUST support it.

So not being one of the economic gurus that say they "know" the answer, let me explain the problem from my understanding (and Barack, if you're listening, this is exactly how you need to explain it to the general public):

Republicans GENERALLY believe in a free market society (you have to be fair and not say that all of them do) - one where rules are not as important as allowing companies to compete and make money without intervention. The less regulation, the better the economy. Unfortunately for all of us, they have just been proven wrong.

The problem started years ago, it didn't just happen yesterday. Through the last 8 years, the constant removal of regulations by the Republicans went largely un-opposed, mostly because they ran the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the government for 6 out of the last 8 years. The Democrats and the US Citizens were told in large part that "Everything is ok" this whole time. Then the Democrats were elected into majority in the House and Senate. Immediately they began opposing the Republican rule because they knew that the economy was NOT ok. They now had a majority, so they went to work to try to correct some of the damage (without a majority, they just got shot down on whatever they said). Barack Obama for example alerted us to this crisis a LONG time ago, but nobody listened. We were given our Republican cookie and told to go to our rooms.

Anyway, to put it simply - the lack of regulation (rules) allowed banks, primarily mortgage banks to loan money to people - a LOT of money. The problem is that they made these loans so that an average middle class borrower was setup to fail. The banks thought it was ok, because, hey, look at all the profits! One day a middle class family is paying $1000 a month, the next month they are asked to pay $3000. There is no way a middle class family can sustain such an increase on a monthly basis, yet the lack of regulation allowed the banks to do it anyway. When the house of cards began to fall and the banks began to see more and more people abandon their loans because they were made to become unaffordable, the forclosure rates in this country skyrocketed.

Now the "crisis" is this - the banks loaned so much money, which is not getting payed back after all the foreclosures, they are now literally running out of money. So the banks are coming to the US government saying, "we need more money". The President says "Sure! we'll give you plenty of money - with no strings even!" The Democrats said "NO WAY! We're not giving you anything without being sure we'll get it back - I mean, look at your track record with the deficit!"

The 'problem" is this - normal business pay their employees with the use of credit. For example, if a plumber takes on a job to install a furnace, they take a downpayment for the furnace and will be paid in full at the END of the job. During the process, the plumber's employer will borrow money from the bank to pay his workers. When the customer pays at the end of the job, the plumber pays the bank back.

So many small businesses, like plumbers, like a construction company - even auto makers are going to the bank and the bank is saying "we have no money to give you". Therefore their workers will not get paid. If this goes on long enough, not only will the banks fails, but so will the businesses that rely on credit to pay their employees. No businesses mean no jobs. No money in the bank means no more loans - auto loans, home loans, student loans, you name it. If there is no money to loan, there is no money to loan.

The "solution" is this - the money has to come from somewhere. The government is the only one that will give this money to the banks. Everyone with bad credit knows that nobody will give you money if you have a bad track record. The banks themselves in the global economy now have "bad credit" in that sense. So this is almost "welfare for banks", however the goal of the bill cannot be for the banks to survive and for their CEOs to make profits, but it IS for the banks to be able to continue to loan money so businesses and regular citizens can survive, however this time, with strict rules.

Barack Obama outlined MOST of the items we need in this bill, for example - we want the money back. We can't get everything we should have because the Democrats do not have enough of a majority to overrule them, so we must compromise on some things After the assets are purchased (the foreclosures and bad mortgages), home prices should rise again and when they do, the loans will be sold back, most likely for a profit. The banks will discount the purchase price, just the same as damaged goods in a retail store are marked down. We the people should benefit from the profit at the sale. The bank CEOs should not benefit from an influx in cash. We should protect the homeowners that are left to ensure that they stay in their homes and prevent further foreclosures due to these bad loans. Most importantly though, we need to have strict oversight on the process - we can't trust the people who took advantage of our citizens that they will just do the "right thing" when they have been bathing in our mney the last 8 years.

So in summary, we MUST do it because the banks are the source of all credit. Credit allows people to buy homes, go to college, buy a car and even pay employees. If we don't have credit, we will have to abandon everything related to credit because there will be one. Imagine have to pay for a home, college or a car in cash! Imagine having to wait for months to get a paycheck, rather than getting paid once a week! It just won't work - especially for middle class families. Just remember that Democrats have to compromise with the party that allowed this to happen, so we won't get everything necessary to make this bill completely safe, but it will work the way we need it to. From there, once Barack is elected, he can always make changes to make it safer. If McCain is elected, this will get worse and the money will be wasted. So we need to support the bill, but it is just as important to elect Barack Obama so that someone who really understands what is going on is in charge in Washington to oversee it.

Barack, we need you more than ever!!!

We Need a Deal, but a Fair Deal

Surrealist.org — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:49:41 EDT

Last night on TV, Paul Krugman rattled off a reasonable framework for a good plan to help the American economy. When our legislators come up with a good plan, it will pass.
Rep. Marcy Kaptur has a viable solution. Caught her talk on YouTube today. Watch it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds&eurl

Float all the Boats... a Recipe for the Financial Crisis

Jack Sokol — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:55:13 EDT

I am not an economist, but it seems like the Financial Bailout might be the wrong medicine for the problem.

The problem lies with the insolvency with millions of mortgages. Making the mortgages solvent will insure the value of the securities they are supposed to back. If we don't address the real problem, the securities will have no inherent value, and homeowners will still go into default and lose their homes.

The solution is very simple: Refinance as many of the failing mortgages as possible.

The problem of fraud with the appraisal process needs to be dealt with!

Refinancing needs to be at the current house value or on terms that forgive the excess debt brought on by appraisal fraud and over inflated values due to improper lending practices.

Only the Government can force banks to revalue properties. Terms of the bailout may mean the governement assists banks in dealing with the bad debt.

This needs to be no-fault however, since this was a systemic problem. It needs to be solution oriented, and not punitive.

The problem of fraud in the lending process needs to be dealt with as well. People need to be given terms they can afford to pay. The price of the mortgage needs to be adjusted to the actual housing value.

Banks need help and direction writing the terms of mortgages.

This assumes a couple of things.

Borrowers must either be US citizens or legal residents of the US.

This must be for a primary residence.

Borrowers need to be able to prove they can pay for the mortgage at more affordable terms. If the borrower has no income or ability to work, etc. then obviously they can't qualify.

Refinancing could refinance possible credit card debt up to 10% of the loan value, or $25,000 maximum. (a reasonable figure?)

I called this the Stakeholder Project as it would enable borrowers to start converting debt into equity. This is the soundest way to prop up the economy. As homeowners contribute far more value to the econmy than renters. When they become stakeholders, they take ownership, and responsiblity for their actions, their community and their world.

The goverment would need to back low interest fixed rate loans. In some cases the loans would need to be on extended terms.

This would only be given to all people facing foreclosure or bankruptcy. In other words, I wouldn't qualify. Since I have an affordable mortgage.

Once the hemorraging in the economy, the problem of excess housing inventory needs to be dealth with as well. Qualified potential homeowners could possibly be helped as well, in order to utilitze the overstock in the nations housing inventory.

Some areas don't need help, but some areas have a lot of vacancies. Those are the areas that need assistance finding buyers, assuming the economy in the area will support it.

There are a lot of questions I have, about how this would play out versus other proposed scenarios. My motivation and thought is simple. Prevent the most suffering possible and stablize the economy. Troubled mortgages are the heart of the problem and need to be addressed.

We cannot blame the homeowners, as they did nothing more than try to realize the dream of owning their own home. Unfortunately teaser rate loans, Adjustable Rate Mortgage's and other short term loan instruments were sold under false pretenses.

There are many details here of course that would be required to insure fairness, and prevent fraud, however, I think this could be done with the right leadership, imagination and vision, which Barack Obama is imminently qualified to provide.

Bottom-up-Bailout Ideas

Raymond from Morgan Hill, CA — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:48:25 EDT

~40% of Americans own homes worth less than their mortgage, and that number will rise to about 55% through 2010 according several economic forecasts. $700Bn is a lot of money, but not quite enough, and could be used more effectively if it funded the source of the problem--house prices, and provided funding and liquidity to things that matter, like consumers and families that are Fk@d by the current crisis. Assuming the average American home is currently worth $250K (down 25% from purchase), and the original loan-to-value was 90% (or $281,250), then the average American homeowner has $31,250 of negative equity. Thus, if our government bought out the negative equity of every US homeowner (assume 30 million), it would cost $937.5Bn. Imagine if every American homeowner received $31,250 to pay down their negative equity and reduce the value of their mortgage payments?

Here is what it looks like:

--Assume everyone reduces the principal value of their loans by $31,250 with a nice check from the government solely to be used to pay down negative equity as determined by mortgage value (including second mortgages if relevant), less newly-appraised value of home.

--Assume everyone with negative equity re-finances into new, 30 Yr. fixed loans at 6.3%.

--New payments would be $1,547/month

--Assume average current payments of 1,834/Mo @8% rate for sub-prime

--Assume the government takes a pro-rata equity stake in the house in exchange for bailout funding, which amounts to 12.5% in this example.

This plan would save average American homeowners $287/month, or $103Bn a year for the 30M families, allow banks to write-off and fund the negative equity of their debt, set a clear price for the bailout, set a clear price for distressed homes, and IMMEDIATELY add liquidity back to the system and help consumers start consuming again--thus stimulating the economy. Thus, the true net cost to the government, and taxpayers would be:

$937.5Bn initial up-front funding of negative equity

Less: $103.3Bn of net annual homeowners savings thanks to reduced mortgage payments

Less: Government equity value of homes. Assuming homes increase in value just 5% over the next five years, and people pay the government back after they sell, the government could earn back about $381Bn.

Total Net Cost to government:: $453Bn.

Basic Mechanics:

--Approve true cost of total consumer bailout: About $937.5Bn

--Work with banks to contact every homeowner that is underwater on their home or currently/imminently in default.

--Apprraise new values of homes and document current value of mortgages

--Send out checks to fund negative equity in the homes with equity stake agreements, as well as re-finance agreements.

--Execute and enjoy ;)

Sounds a lot simplier, more effective and faster than starting with the top down approach of valuing the toxic securitized mortgages, sending money to banks that are not likely to lend it out anytime soon, and hoping for an economic recovery, all the while the consumers are still strapped with their underwater homes and payments they can barely afford.

The Bailout/Rescue and What is Needed

Matthew Lenell — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:36:56 EDT

The problem with the bailout is that it is a band-aid where a tournequet is necessary. The current financial crisis is directly due to the inability for homeowners to pay their mortgages and defaulting. No amount of bailout money will protect the Wall Street financial sector if something doesn't happen to keep people in their homes instead of walking away or willingly go into foreclosure.

Staunch conservatives often state that the people knew what they were getting into when they get these mortgages. I beg to differ. While I purchased well under my means, I was told by my loan officer that I could afford a lot more. We almost bit considering that the difference of $50,000 in my area is the difference between a new or newer house with a lot more ammenities in a much better neighborhood with a better school. As a parent, if I was thinking solely about the well being of my child I would have jumped at the chance to own such a house. Doing so, however, would have put us in over our heads. As for the 100% financing, our loan officer urged us to take advantage of it. We had money to put down, but she said we should keep it and/or put it into the house. After all, housing prices never go down and even if the market slowed we would still come out ahead. Why should we put it into the mortgage when we could use it to make our house nicer? We took the 100% financing. Mind you, I was my own realtor and had 17 years in the business and still I took the chance. The potential risk seemed minimal.

We won't get hit as bad as those who took the shorter-term, super low rate adjustable-rate mortgages that are currently sinking the financial sector. Nonetheless, our house is worth about $20,000 to $35,000 less now than we bought it for. We won't be able to refinance that adjustable rate mortgage. Those people not as savvy who took the 100% financing on a 5-year adjustable rate and the larger mortgage will soon see their mortgages skyrocket in 2009 and 2010. If you think that we are in trouble now, $700 billion won't cover nearly what will be needed over the next two years if we don't do something to keep these people from going under.

What can be done? We cannot reward the very stupid and deliberately greedy house flippers. They took the risk and should lose their investment. We can, however, spread out the damage from the honest owner-occupied homeowners. If the government institutes, as part of the bailout package, a freeze in the adjustable rate for five years after the note is due to adjust will give these people time to sell the house and get out from under the debt. There does need to be a caveat, however. If they prove over the course of the freeze that they can make their payment on time every month they can be qualified at the end of the five years to convert their mortgage, along with the home equity loan, to a conventional loan with a higher, but fixed rate. If they make even one payment over 30 days late, they are ineligible and must put the home on the market beginning that month at current market price as determined by a certified appraiser. At the end of the 5 years, if they are unable to sell the house they must leave immediately and then the government can step in to take over the mortgage and sell the house. They must make payments throughout the extension period or they lose the rate freeze regardless.

To be honest, the mortgage industry is more to blame than the homeowners and they should be held accountable. I don't like the bailout plan that helps the banks that caused the problem. As one of those who could have fallen for the worst situation because I was intentionally sold on the benefits of the greater mortgage will lead to a better life for my family, I know the blame lies almost exclusively in the loan origination market for the benefit of getting two fees for two loans. We need to help those who were deceived into taking these loans if we want to curb this crisis, not stick a bandaid on the current crisis.

Your Urgent Help Needed

Ian — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:01:20 EDT

Dear American:

I need to ask you to support an urgent secret business relationship with a transfer of funds of great magnitude.

I am Ministry of the Treasury of the Republic of America. My country has had crisis that has caused the need for large transfer of funds of 700 billion dollars US. If you would assist me in this transfer, it would be most profitable to you.

I am working with Mr. Phil Gram, lobbyist for UBS, who will be my replacement as Ministry of the Treasury in January. As a Senator, you may know him as the leader of the American banking deregulation movement in the 1990s. This transactin is 100% safe.

This is a matter of great urgency. We need a blank check. We need the funds as quickly as possible. We cannot directly transfer these funds in the names of our close friends because we are constantly under surveillance. My family lawyer advised me that I should look for a reliable and trustworthy person who will act as a next of kin so the funds can be transferred.

Please reply with all of your bank account, IRA and college fund account numbers and those of your children and grandchildren to wallstreetbailout@treasury.gov so that we may transfer your commission for this transaction. After I receive that information, I will respond with detailed information about safeguards that will be used to protect the funds.

Yours Faithfully Minister of Treasury Paulson

►►►SEE THE VOTE TALLY HERE! “Welfare for Wall Street” — The 2008 Middle-Class Subsidy of Millionaires — HAS FAILED!

Isadore Olivia Pine — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:14:17 EDT

Please be sure to check my website at http://thesaucywench.com for a complete VOTE TALLY of the U.S. House of Representatives WALL STREET BAILOUT BILL.

I have color coded and enhanced those congresspeople who disgraced their office by voting for this Middle-Class subsidy of Wall Street Investment Banks.

IF YOUR REPRESENTATIVE VOTED "YES" FOR THIS SPECIOUS EXERCISE IN WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION, WRITE THEM AND TELL THEM THAT YOU'LL BE VOTING THEM OUT OF OFFICE ON NOVEMBER 4.

REPUBLICANS.
DEMOCRATS.
INDEPENDENTS.

It makes NO DIFFERENCE to me: ANYONE who allowed themselves to be baited by Paulson Bernanke et al. IS NOT FIT TO SERVE THEIR OFFICE. PERIOD.

Show me a bread line . . . and we can talk; UNTIL THEN, LET CITIBANK AND JP MORGAN et al. GO SHOPPING.

Never Never NEVER must the market be socialized in this fashion until disaster has IN FACT hit.

IT HASN'T.
And it won't because the banks WILL go shopping and absorb the losers (WAMU, Wachovia, Lehman et al.)

VISIT MY WEBSITE NOW, AND PRINT OUT THIS LIST.

This -- THIS, my friends -- is the ONLY VOTING GUIDE YOU NEED THIS NOVEMBER.

Anyone who would shift what little money the Middle Class has yet remaining after 8 years of Bush spending NEEDS TO GO. THAT __INCLUDES__ DEMOCRATS.

God Bless and hop on over to http://thesaucywench.com to see just who feels it is acceptable to PLAY WITH YOUR MONEY.

Isadore Olivia Pine
http://thesaucywench.com

Al Quada Republican Trickettes Strike Again To Cause Market "PNAC" and Economic Chaos

MoorAmerican — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:11:04 EDT

Republican Presidential Election Politics Over Financial Crisis... Trickettes are at it AGAIN!

ENOUGH! All republicans in congress should vote for the buy-in bill presented for a vote TODAY... NO COMMENTS ARE APPRECIATED NOR DOES ANYONE CARE TO HEAR FROM THEM EXCEPT THEY VOTED FOR THE BILL. They all can have a press conference to resign their offices and order KARL ROVE TO ANSWER THE CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA. All republicans throughout the country - - - at the top of the trickettes ticket and at the bottom, must be voted out of the government. The republican party should be removed from all voter registration forms: forms should be immediately CHANGED to allow voters to register as Democrats or Independent. The republican party brand should be removed entirely for gross political malpractice, corruption, racketeering, and war crimes --- All high crimes and misdeameanors against the American people and humanity must be addressed with a "permanent" campaign to remove these "Al Quada" operatives from American political culture. They are evil people, like their lobbyists network. They are the axis of evil. They are the homeland terrorists that WE THE PEOPLE KNOW ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY. They have violated the PATRIOTS ACT and we demand JUSTICE.

The Trickettes Leader in the first presidential debate admitted that the Dick Sarah Palin McCain Bush Cheney Administration conducted torture -- -- KARL ROVE has no status in the society that makes him immune from answering a congressional subpeona --- FOX NEWS IS A MEDIA BASE CAMP FOR ALQUAEDA... An American Terrorist Cell. The trickettes showed destruction - terrorists acts at the RNC Convention... This is the only AXIS OF EVIL THAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH NOW. America is not about preemptive war, invasion and permanent occupation of sovereign nations like Iraq and Afghanistan. We are not a war mongering nation --- the republicans are. They are the axis of evil... KATRINA WAS A TERRORIST ACT BY PRESIDENTIAL INACTION AND INCOMPETENCE... It was a birthday photo op for Bush and McCain, while Americans were swimming for their lives, dying from heat exhaustion, and disgraced as citizens - being called refugees! It is one of the greatest terrorist acts against the American society in the nations history.

YES WE DID FIND THEM. AMERICAN HOMELAND TERRORISTS. THEY CAUSED THIS FINANCIAL CRISIS BECAUSE IT IS THEIR PROFITEERING POLICY IN THE COURSE OF DESTROYING AMERICA. YES THEY ARE --- REPUBLICANS --- DICK SARAH PALIN MCCAIN BUSH CHENEY ADMINISTRATION ARE CRIMINALS OF THE WORST KIND.

Let the world community know that WE HAVE THEM... An American Terrorist Cell at the Highest Level --- the 43rd Presidency of the United States of America in the Republican Party Assembled. EIGHT YEARS OF A PERMANENT CAMPAIGN --- SCARE TACTICS... FOX NEWS - PROJECT FOR NEW AMERICAN CENTURY FLEECING OF AMERICA... $700 BILLION DOLLAR BUY-IN, but it doesn't cover up their CRIMES.

BE IT KNOWN TO THE WORLD, THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY - AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF LOBBY PUPPETS AND TRICKSTERS ARE CAUGHT. Russia knows it. Iran knows it. Iraq knows it. China knows it. The TALIBAN KNOWS IT... That's why the trickettes want to continue these wars indefinitely. The American military is being used in an Alliance with other nations to conduct the CENTRAL ASIAN DRUG TRADE FOR THE TALIBAN AND ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS ----- Poppy production in Afghanistan is over 80% of the world supply. Where's the destination of the drugs? - American youth... American children... American Home foreclosure victims - sedate the tragedy of being hood winked and bamboozled.

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION OF 2008 IS AN ALL OUT FULL SCALE WAR.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 Draft

Tim Pham — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:30:46 EDT

I've just got done reading through the summary and have submitted the following email to the campaign in hopes that they can answer my questions and help enhance my understanding. While I bring up a number of issues, over all I am happy with the changes. Although, I would like more information on the penalties of not following through with this bill.

I've just read through the 'final_bill_section-by-section.pdf' available on the house.gov website that concerns the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and wanted to know Senator Obama's position on these issues.

In Section 104:

The Financial Stability Oversight Board is mentioned and states that the Secretary of the Treasury is member of that board. Should the person that "takes point" on this crisis be on the board that oversees the performance of their job?

Sideline Observations--The First Presidential Debate

Wordman — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:09:24 EDT

I guess a good starting point is a comment on Senator McCain's vaudevillian pre-debate political theatrics. As Senator Obama reached out to explore a joint, bi-partisan statement encouraging their colleagues to work together with a sense of urgency to address the Wall Street crisis, McCain and his campaign staff calculated how best to use the crisis to their political advantage. The "campaign suspension" never actually occurred and McCain proceeded to interject Presidential politics into an already volatile situation resulting in discord and division.
And what did we learn from the debate itself? One could view it as a micrososm of the candidates' differing political styles. McCain communicated a disdain for his opponent as he took every opportunity to attack and belittle Obama. Senator Obama, on the other hand, presented a calm, confident demeanor demonstrating his firm grasp of the relevant facts and voicing cogent arguments for how best to move the country forward in addressing serious financial and foreign policy issues. Much has been made of the fact that Obama "agreed with" McCain on numerous points. From my vantage point, he was merely exhibiting the bi-partisan, collaborative approach which is his forte and which is so desperately needed if we are going to be able to break the Washington gridlock which has stymied our political representatives and frustrated the citizens whose values and issues they purport to champion.
And a final point or two...Why did the moderator and Senator Obama give McCain a pass on the issues of torture? He had maintained a principled stand throughout most of the Republican primary debates and then reversed himself last February by voting against a bill to curtail the CIA's use of harsh interrogation tactics. And does anyone honestly believe that a provocative, saber-rattling President McCain who has "looked into the eyes of Putin and seen 3 letters--KGB" would be able to deal effectively with a resurgent Russia or that after joking about "bomb-bombing Iran" he is the leader to deal with that nation and the overall complexities of a Mideast foreign policy.
My overall takeaway from the debate--Senator Obama held his own, counter-punched effectively and exuded a Presidential calmness and breadth of knowledge of national and international issues and an understanding of the importance of of reviving and enhancing collaborative relationships with key allies. Senator McCain, on the other hand, appeared petulant, demeaning, provocative and dangerously out-of-touch and ill-equipped to deal with with the complex foreign policy and financial issues we face.

McCain's Double-Whammy

Tim — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 12:38:03 EDT

I hate to pile on after McCain's crushing defeat in the debate Friday night but I can't resist.

In an attempt to show courage and to appear presidential John McCain attempted to stop the debate and flew to Washington DC to negotiate a resolution to the crisis. What McCain appeared to not understand was that the negotiation was already in progress and in fact both sides were very close to an agreement. According to a Washington Post article the bipartisan deal was as good as signed.

Upon arrival, McCain headed over to the minority leader John Boehner's office for a quick strategy session then, according to reports isolated himself in his senate office until heading to the whitehouse the joint meeting with the president.

For some unknown and bizzare reason, McCain and Boehner then upended the carefully negotiated agreement falling back on the old reliable extreme anti-regulation conservative position. Then as the clock was ticking and the conventional wisdom was that he was going to weasel out of the debate, McCain reversed his earlier position and decided to do the debate after all.

With McCain out of the way, it appears that the congressional leaders got back to work and have once again come to an understanding on a resolution. For the good of the country John, please stay as far away from these negotiations as possible. I realize you want to appear unconventional but this is a very serious crisis requiring serious leadership.

I suggest you focus more energy on double-checking your vice presidential candidate. It sounds like she's advocating positions for Barack Obama now. Tell her, "thanks but no thanks" our side is doing just fine without her help. Perhaps the two of you should help each other prepare for the upcoming debates instead of focussing on doing any actual policy or governing - you're no good at it and you kinda get in the way.

Time for Personal Action

Greg from Avon by the Sea, NJ — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:01:46 EDT

It’s been a crazy couple of weeks – and I’ve personally gone through a draining and gut-wrenching time. As I’m sure you know, our financial system came within hours of collapsing. Frankly, at my age, the implications of a Great Depression-style financial meltdown are quite different than they might have been in my younger days (there’s a lot less string on the rope now!). Without getting into the ugly details, I twisted and turned and traded in anticipation of market moves with the hope that my family’s financial security could be protected as we all stared into the abyss of some of the worst-case economic scenarios imaginable.

I am sharing this because the experience created a “tipping point” in my personal life... [SEE EXTENDED POST]

Financial Crisis fixins

Bruce Eggum — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 09:46:10 EDT

The Financial Crisis could ruin US. Please read this Canadian authors explanation of the banking industry control over US. Than please send the note below to your Congressional members. 10 They’re building a box ... http://www.rudemacedon.ca/dlp/box/box-intro.html Banketeering http://www.rudemacedon.ca/lgi/banketeering.html ---------------------------------------------------------------- My dear Congressional members; Please read this and take action. This financial crisis can be remedied. This Canadian author has done a great service to all of us who need to understand the “financial crisis”. Here you can see where the money is, why there is a crisis. This is the “system” of the United States, and must be changed immediately. It can be changed immediately. End the Federal Reserve and let Congress decide how money is made and distributed, for the people. The con-man will give you all kinds of justifications as to why he stole your money and house, but you know they’re all lies - he just stole it. And once you finish this, I think you’re going to be understanding some pretty high-up people in our country have been lying to you for quite a while too. And steal- ing a LOT of money. There’s just nowhere else to go once you understand some things they’ve been pretty careful to see that you never learned about before. 10 They’re building a box ... http://www.rudemacedon.ca/dlp/box/box-intro.html Banketeering http://www.rudemacedon.ca/lgi/banketeering.html The first and biggest and most important truth they are hiding here, that they never tell you about the [US] Canadian money supply system, from which everything else in the multi-layered scam arises like a cancer spreading to every organ and system in the body, is one very simple fact - the government of Canada [USA] actually creates only about 1-2% of the money supply of Canada through the bank notes and coins that most people use every day, the stuff you get from the ATM machine and pay for your Tim Horton’s double-double with. The rest of the money in Canada [USA] - about 98% - is created by private banks from, essentially, thin air, in the form of loans - they accept an application, type some numbers into their computer, and voila, new ‘money’. And of course on all that money they create as loans, they charge inter- est, as banks do. And not just once, but year after year after year. Yea, don’t rush on, let that sink in for a minute. 98% of the Canadian money supply is created by private banks, as loans. And they get paid money on all of that. Private banks get paid interest on 98% of the Canadian money supply. Every year. -------------------------------------------------------------

Whose Crisis?

John from Midpines, CA — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:54:37 EDT

Given the Bush Administration’s rush to bailout Wall Street to the tune of 700 billion on a frantic timeline, with John McCain dropping everything to “help” get a bailout package passed immediately, you’d think that the mortgage banker meltdown is the only crisis facing our country.

Tell the 47 million Americans (including over 9 million children) without health care coverage -- and everyone else paying skyrocketing insurance premiums for less care -- that there is not an urgent health care crisis. We’ve had a national debate for 50 years about joining the rest of the industrialized world in providing health care for all, but what’s the rush?

Explain the need for patience to the parents of the ten million children worldwide who die every year of treatable or preventable diseases.

No doubt the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs, their homes, or their retirement savings understand the need to put CEOs first. As do the quarter of U.S. families with children less than six years old who live in poverty.

To all the new mothers in this country who are forced to return to work shortly after giving birth, because the U.S. is one of only four countries in the world (along with Lesotho, Swaziland and Papau New Guinea) that does not provide a paid maternity leave program: I’m sure you understand prioritizing bankers over babies.

We’ve been warned by the world’s top climate scientists that we have just a few short years to stabilize carbon emissions, or face catastrophic climate change, altering life as we know it on the planet. Have you seen an emergency summit in Washington to solve this crisis by chance?

Remember the lightning speed by which the Bush Administration responded to the Katrina calamity? The families that languished in contaminated trailers for years must be eternally grateful for the rapid response to their crisis.

Remember the bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis? There are 77,000 deteriorated bridges and 33,000 deteriorating schools in need of urgent repair. Why worry?

Or what about the national debt? The banker bailout would increase it to 11.3 Trillion, with a T. That we are increasingly dependent on creditors like the Chinese Central Bank so that we can have our wars and tax cuts too is a problem for our kids and grandkids. It’s their crisis.

Then there is the explosion of violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan, after 5 years of death and destruction in Iraq, creating 2 million refugees.

I’d like someone to explain to me why all these crises afflicting people and the planet are just the way it is, business as usual, problems to be put off until another year, while Wall Street banks led by CEOs who are still being paid tens of millions per year need to have their losing bets bought back by our tax dollars at inflated prices by this Monday.

It doesn’t have to be this way. It’s time for not just change, but some really big changes. Starting now. Call Congress and tell them what you think about the bank bailout and the crises you want addressed: 202-224-3121. Another world is still possible.

Cant you see what is wrong with this picture? No?

Richard from Fort Morgan, CO — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 08:55:11 EDT

Well let me paint one for you.

How about the fact that while looking out for their own interests, our Government officials have helped the wealthy run our economy into the dirt. When our economy needs stimulating what does our Government do? They give us some measly stimulous check, A bandaid to hide the real progressive growing problem. The other thing they do is print more money. Look we are all Americans and we need to open our eyes to the truth. Why are you all believing a bunch of wealthy people telling you a pack of lies about the fall of our economy. It takes money to stimulate an economy. It takes money to pay a mortgage. It takes money to pay off debt. Well who has all the money? For the past 30 years or more the wealthy has gotten extreamly wealthy, while the cost of living has driven the middle class and the lower class poorer and into debt. Where do the wealthy spend all of their money? Among the wealthy. So why are the poor in this country suffering for what the wealthy have created. If wages in this country had kept up with the cost of living we wouldn't be in this mess. We at Struggling American Workers Coalition say let those that created this problem, pay for this problem. How about our wealthy polititions who for the past 30 years have helped the wealthy take more and more from the middle and lower class by raising the cost of living while fighting us for every nickle in wages. How about the wealthy, whos greed has gotten us further in debt. If the Government really wants to help the economy, let them drive down the cost of living while freezing the American wage. Put that wealthy money back into the economy where it belongs. Our tax dollars belong to all Americans, so why make all of us pay for what the few have done.
If you find any truth to this come and support us at; http://www.sawcoalition.org

PLEASE MR. OBAMA, FIGHT AGAINST FORECLOSURES

Mary Schweitzer — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:28:08 EDT

I was concerned to read this morning that the compromise worked out (before McCain came in and played his little game) did NOT include the restructuring of mortgages so that there are as few forclosures as possible.

This MUST be a part of ANY plan - particularly a plan by a Democrat. Forget all the talk about people flipping houses or getting big homes in McNeighborhoods that they could not afford. Talk to anybody who has been through the mortgage crisis in Cleveland. It is a nightmare, and will cause even more shocks to society, community - AND the economy.

This is the time for the Senator to remember his days as a community activist and not behave as if he is embarassed by it.

Many people can stay in their homes if the mortgages are restructured to fixed rates, and it will save communities as well. Think of the children involved, if nothing else.

If the Democrats push a bill that does not include mortgage relief - and then people are kicked out of their homes, we will be blamed for it.

Finally, if there is such a thing as a Democratic Party, the Party of FDR, we must not kick families when they are down. I know many people who have shaky second mortgages because of the high cost of medical expenses due to an unexpected bout of cancer, for example. There are many who have faithfully paid their monthly bills, but cannot afford the ballooning up of the monthly cost. We need to keep them in their homes.

In the S&L crisis of the 1980s (albeit much smaller), this is precisely what we did - we renegotiated mortgages to keep people in their homes.

Please, Senator Obama, please do not let the Republicans trap you into a position you do not want to be in. It is the Republicans who have broken faith - so the Democrats must come back with their own counter offer - which MUST include protecting homeowners.

We are all so tired of Democrats being more Republican than the Republicans. This must be a deal-breaker issue, and let the Republicans take the blame.

Sincerely, Mary M. Schweitzer, Ph.D. (economic historian)

October Surprise: The Wall Street Bailout Facts

omega — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:13:47 EDT

October Surprise: The Wall Street Bailout Facts
By Jim Moore, Editor, TennTimes.org

Virtually no one likes the bailout proposal being crammed down our throats by President Bush, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Secretary, who insist on calling it a "rescue plan."

Is it truly necessary to avoid a sudden and catastrophic world economic collapse ... or is it a bailout for millionaires who have stolen billions from the American shareholders, homeowners and taxpayers?

In truth, it is both. Frighteningly, it also appears to be the dreaded "October Surprise" in this year's election (unless we get the double-blow with an attack on Iran, as other governments such as Denmark have announced within the past few weeks).

The economic crisis gives George Bush the excuse he needs to declare a national emergency and suspend the elections without the input of Congress or the American people, thanks to the so-called "War on Terror" legislation.

Find more at www.tenntimes.org.

The commentary that should have been posted

Patrick — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:52:50 EDT

With all the uncertainty of this latest financial misadventure, Gail Collins wrote a good essay, Bring on the Rubber Chicken. Normally they'll print my comments, but for some reason this one didn't make the cut. Of course they'd already marked this one about the Republican use of the term Exceptionalism to describe America and Americans as an editors' choice, how many of my missives can they post in one day before I should be consided a columnist too? [grin].

So then, my comment to Ms. Collins' essay:

It's the game of "chicken" where the rubber is supposed to meet the road. Bush looked like the deer-in-the-headlights, doped up on too much Valium to have much response toward the oncoming train. A statement of leadership that has not inspired confidence, nor trust.

And it's the lack of trust and confidence (though this "bailout" seems more like a confidence scheme, with the taxpayers the recipients of the bill for the Ponzi-esque largesse); that allegedly is at the heart of this "crisis." The dotcom bust on steriods.

The fleecing of America has taken on new proportions. Gone are the days of even meeting basic sensibilities, "a chicken in every pot." Now there's not even the pot to cook the bird in! Or perhaps, to keep in a vein so fowl, for too many people, our goose has been cooked, and all the ducks that they're trying to line up in a row to solve this are all facing outwards, giving us the good view of their backsides, a "D.A."! Which we could probably use even more than the bailout, an independent prosecutor to go after the crooks, bringing those responsible to justice. And while the chicken littles of Bernanke and Paulson are squawking: "the sky is falling, the sky is falling," trading continues for yet another day. I've hope that most of this can be worked out by the market itself, with more regulatory oversight than an open hand into my wallet!

# # #

If ever there are more and more reasons becoming apparent why Barack Obama must be the next President, as Connie Corleone-Rizzi expressed with bombastic outburst to Michael in The Godfather, "Read the papers, read the papers!

As for the debate, all Senator Obama has to do is echo Ronald Reagan's question to the people during his debate with Jimmy Carter in 1980, "are you better off now, than you were four years ago?"

Put Country First

Jack St.Mary — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:00:33 EDT

The "original maverick' has done it again. In trying desperately to do something to stop his downward momentum and falling poll numbers he has decided to politicize the current financial crisis at the expense of all voters nationwide. This selfish act is proof that McCain is in this for his own purposes, and not as some maverick riding in to save the day for the rest of us.

The gimmick of calling a suspension of his campaign, postponing the first debate, and flying back to Washington to solve the crisis, is blatant political maneuvering and nothing else. His campaign has shown an ineptitude so far on how best to, well, campaign. The American people are not going to buy this fraudulent attempt to grab some headlines.

Senator Obama is right in saying a president must be able to multi-task and he will go on with the debate while also going to Washington and doing all he can in an appropriate manner. Appropriate is the key word here and McCain and his camp know little about that.

Presidential candidates are not the ones to guide or steer this predicament. They are the standard bearers for their party and should leave the negotiations and bill creating to the congressional leaders appointed by their peers to serve on the committees dedicated to solving this crisis. The Banking committee, Ways and Means, etc. are fully capable of leading the battle and McCain and Obama need not instill themselves disproportionally into the very complicated and sensitive NON-PARTISAN effort to avert an economic burn out.

Barack Obama knows this instinctlively, and while he is on top of the issue and fully involved, he is leaving the grunt work to Senator Dodd, Reid, and others, as it should be. John McCain risks being in the way, and will do more harm than good if he tries to interfere more than called for. His only mission should be to persuade those reluctant Republicans to at least vow to support what the majority decides and not hold up a possible solution. In other words try to be non-partisan and as mcCains camp says "Put Country First".

Oh, God! I thought I was finished for today... Opinions?

EMK — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:56:03 EDT

... But then, I'm watching the CBS Evening News and one of the proposals is for the government to buy stocks from some of the companies they're going to bailout? Wouldn't that be a BAD INVESTMENT for an AVERAGE INDIVIDUAL?

Wouldn't it make more financial sense to just buy back the Fed?

"Watch your rights!" (StahrT)

EMK

How could this be?

luckyone08 — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:38:50 EDT

I just don't get it. All these companies are falling. What does congress suggest? Throw 700 billion dollars at the problem.There is the basic problem with that. You want to give bonuses to the CEO's and throw money around. In my view, there is no more money for bonuses. The people in charge should be held accountable for losing so much money. Everyone makes it sound like we are talking about a couple thousand dollars. I can't hardly grasp people losing 700 million dollars!!! You want to bail out these companies by buying up their bad debt. The people who has all of these bad loans still don't have the money or the jobs to pay these loans. There is still no money to collect. The jobs are gone over seas. Then I find out companies are getting tax breaks to have their companies overseas!!! What is wrong with this picture? I may be a factory worker from Ohio but I am not stupid. I can see some big problems with all of this. This crisis should not be put on the shoulders of the average American people. We need answers. NOT a band-aid.

Who should the government really bailout?

Aaron Edgell — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:45:20 EDT

The recent crisis on Wall Street has produced fear around the country as well as around the world. The crisis has caused millions of Americans to wonder whether or not their financial future is safe as they once believed it was. This situation that the U.S. finds itself in is the single worst financial meltdown since the depression of 1929. Matters are impacted even further because of the increased globalization of the world and all of its individual economies. The reverberations of this crisis will be felt around the world for some time to come, if something is not done to alleviate the situation.

The answer that the government has come up with is to buy out the failed mortgages of millions of Americans across the country. The government wants to pay the lending institutions that hold these devaluating mortgages, 700 billion dollars, to let the government take possession of the mortgages. In turn, this will put money back into these institutions and hopefully the banks will be more willing to lend money. In theory, this is what is needed to stimulate the economy and get the U.S. back on financial track.

One interesting area that has been discussed is the fact that some congressional leaders are pushing to give some type of help to individuals, as well as to the institutions in question. Congressional fear is that the help given to the banks will not work its way down to the individuals who are at the root of the problem. A solution is needed that takes into account both the institutions and individuals.

The government wants to give the money hoping that it will stimulate the economy, while others would like to see it help people who will put money back into the economy.

A partial solution—Help college students, who have graduated and have outstanding college loans, pay off their loans in total. This is a good risk because the students have already proven that they are success minded and have an established plan for their lives. These graduates are our future mortgage holders, business owners and even national or world leaders. They are also affected by the financial crisis to the point that they are unable to pay back the loans in the same timely manner as once envisioned. According to www.clevelandfed.org the student loan market peaked in 2006, with $75 billion in new student loans being issued. This amounts to more than 10% of what the government proposes as a bailout to financial institutions and it is for only one year. At the current pace, these student loans will surpass the proposed bailout in less than ten years. If these figures are not enough, http://usgovinfo.about.com states that over a lifetime, graduates with a Bachelors degree earn $2.1 million and those with a Master degree earn $2.5 million. There is not a bank in the world that would turn away from a return on that kind of investment, when you consider that most people’s education cost less than $100,000.

If these loans are paid, this will free up a portion of their income that they can in turn contribute back into making our economy healthy again. This will enable these students to purchase homes and invest in businesses sooner rather than later. This is a win-win plan because the homes and businesses that are bought will have a slightly elevated interest rate attached to them. This extra interest will be returned to the government to repay the money that was paid to satisfy the student’s loan debt. Rather than working on a 10 year repayment schedule, these new loans would be on a 20-30 year period. This period would allow the graduates to pay off both loans at the same time, as the increased interest rate will not be felt as much as payments on a 10 year loan.

What if the graduate never purchases anything that requires a loan? Steps would be taken to encourage these new graduates to invest in their future by taking out a loan on a business or property. Maybe preference would be given to graduates who work in specific careers and find themselves in this situation or maybe these loans would be low interest for the first three years. Another way might be to allow them to make purchases without requiring a down payment. The options are plenty. It’s just a matter of finding the plan that fits the individual.

The best part of this whole idea is: While these graduates are building their futures, they are also satisfying an old debt AND rebuilding the economy in the U.S.

This plan would be regulated so as to insure that not just anyone is getting this money. These would truly be deserving individuals who are maybe 3-4 months behind on their loan payments but otherwise a decent risk. The focus of this program should be to help as many aspects of society as it can all at the same time. Let’s rebuild the economy, build the lives of our citizens that have proved their motivation (graduates), contribute to the welfare of our schools, and maybe even assist the new economist that will keep a financial crisis from happening again.

Below are some very basic examples of payments with different interest rates and different terms of the loans.

On a $50,000 student loan, an extra $149.59 per month would pay off the loan at .5%, over 30 years.

$218.97 extra would pay off the loan, at same interest, in 20 years.

This does not take into account any interest previously on the loan.

On a $150,000 home loan, $899.33 per month would pay the loan off in 30 years at 6%.

The same loan could be paid off in 20 years for $1074.65 per month.

If combined, the two loans equaling $200,000 could be paid off at 6.5% in 30 years, for $1264.14 per month.

If paid off in 20 years, the same two loans would equal $1491.15 per month.

As stated above, these are very basic figures, but it gives an idea of what the borrower and lender can expect from these loans. The interest and term of the loan could both be manipulated to get the best result for everyone concerned.

Congressional leaders have the right idea, however now is the time to focus on individuals and not just reward the failed lending practices of large institutions.

Let’s not pass up the opportunity to help success-minded people improve their lot in life.

McCain suspends campaign 9/24/08

Bob A. — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:43:46 EDT

A President has to be able to handle more than one priority at a time - in fact, a President has to be able to handle more than one crisis at a time.

Why duck a debate which could air important ideas about how to deal with the financial mess, and provide immediate feedback from the observers and the public on acceptable actions?

McCain has announced that one crisis will require all of his time right now. When a crisis happens during the next four years, we can't afford to have a President who single-threads. With a President fully engaged in only one area, who, then, would be leading the rest of the important government issues?

HOW BUSH SPECIFICALLY CAUSED THE WALL STREET CRISIS

GREG KLINE — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:33:03 EDT

THE WALL STREET CRISIS IN A NUTSHELL
Written by Brasscheck

This story is about a five minute read, but if you have any interest in what's going on in the financial markets, I think you'll find it a more useful analysis than you're likely to find anywhere else. Along with the video link at the end, you'll REALLY know what's going on, better than most people on earth, including financial news reporters.

A SHORT EXPLANATION OF HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE

Today's banking crisis is the THIRD trillion dollar plus US-caused financial meltdown in the last twenty years. Each one of these crises came into being through the same basic mechanism: The fraudulent over-valuing of financial assets by Wall Street, with a "wink and a nod" (and sometimes a lot more) from the White House and Congress.

The fraudulently valued assets stimulate the economy, impart the illusion of health, and then inevitably, the fraud goes too far, and the whole house of card comes painfully crashing back to Earth.

The three trillion dollar plus frauds were:

Fraud #1: The so-called "Savings & Loan Crisis" of the late 80s

Fraud #2: The so-called "Tech Bubble" of the late 90s

Fraud #3: The so-called "Credit (Sub-prime mortgage) Crisis" of today

HOW THE SCAM WORKS

The mechanism of these frauds is simplicity itself.

You take a shaky financial asset, blow up its value, and then sell as much of it as you can.

In the "Savings & Loan Crisis," the instrument was "Junk Bonds".

In the "Tech Bubble", it was Internet Stocks.

In the "Credit Crisis", it was individual mortgages collected into pools, and then re-sold to investors.

In each case, normal, well established "bread and butter" financial principles, were consciously thrown away by Wall Street, with no hint of protest from federal regulators.

THE "SAVINGS & LOAN CRISIS" DISSECTED

Junk bonds caused the Saving & Loan crisis, which resulted in the US taking over the assets of hundreds of banks, and selling them back over time to the marketplace at fire-sale prices.

Junk bonds, which caused the "Savings & Loan Crisis", were shaky bonds that were pumped up by deliberate misrepresentation, and what I call "Staged Dealing."

Bonds get their value from two things: the amount of interest they pay, and how safe they are.

"Junk" bonds have to pay higher interest because they are less safe. Therefore, until the "Savings & Loan Crisis", savings and loan banks banks were not allowed by law to buy them and call
them assets.

Reagan/Bush changed all this, and then a group of Wall Street fraudsters used the new loophole to kick off an orgy of junk bond creation, and junk bond selling, to banks and insurance
companies.

The crooks would deal the junk bonds back and forth amongst themselves, thereby establishing their "value", and then they'd sell them to outsiders. The bonds then became "assets" which could be borrowed against, and leveraged to buy even more bonds.

When the bonds failed, the banks failed, and in stepped the US government to "fix" the problem that it created, at a cost of at least one trillion dollars to US tax payers.

THE "TECH BUBBLE" DISSECTED

The instrument of fraud in the "Tech Bubble" was Internet stocks, "start-ups" in particular.

A stock gets its value from the underlying company's sales, its growth, and its overall prospects for the future.

Pre-tech bubble, companies used to have to prove themselves by being in existence for several years before they could be sold on major exchanges. That standard was thrown away during the tech bubble.

To pump up their values, the companies engaged in "Staged Dealing" just like the junk bond crooks.

Company #1 would "sell" 20 million dollars in banner ads to Company #2, which would in turn "sell" 20 million in banner ads to Company #1.

In fact, nobody sold anybody anything. Company #2 ran ads for Company #1 and billed it for them. Company #1 ran ads for Company #2 and billed for an equal amount.

These should have been called "media trades", not sales, but Wall Street was happy to claim them as legitimate cash sales, and then use the sales numbers to fraudulently value these companies, many of them totally worthless, in the hundreds of millions, and sometimes even the billions.

THE CREDIT (SUB-PRIME MORTGAGE) CRISIS DISSECTED

By now, you see how the scheme works. It's not complicated at all.

You take nearly worthless pieces of paper (junk bonds, stock of start-up Internet companies, etc.) and declare them to be good as gold.

Then you create as many junk bonds and Internet start-up stocks as you can, and sell them as fast as you can.

In the case of our current crisis, the instrument of fraud was so-called sub-prime mortgages.

Previously, sub-prime mortgages had very little trading value. Only people in the sub-prime industry itself dealt in them, and for good reason. They're tricky to value, and packed with financial
peril.

But Wall Street changed all that. Wall Street said: "If we take LOTS of these mortgages, and group
them into large pools, and then slice and dice the pools in various ways, we can sell the slices to banks and other investors as AAA paper."

It sounds crazy, doesn't it?

If the underlying pieces of paper are garbage, how does assembling a whole bunch of garbage into one place make it better? It doesn't, of course. This is a principle even a three year old
child can understand.

But greed and the need to pump up a shaky economy for propaganda purposes, are two very strong motivators.

Banks created these mortgage pools, sold them to each other, and they, by virtue of these "Staged Sales", declared them valuable.

Do you recognize the pattern now?

If you do, then you are now smarter than all the assembled jerks who do financial reporting, because they apparently can't, or won't.

This is the THIRD trillion-dollar plus fraud driven financial meltdown in twenty years, and apparently no one in the financial news media can see how it happened.

BUT THERE'S MORE

Junk bonds were mass manufactured as fast as the crooks could invent them. Ditto for Internet stocks. But how did hundreds of billions of dollars worth of "toxic" mortgages suddenly come into being?

Why did the mortgage industry change its lending standards so radically, and so suddenly, to make their creation possible?

And why did real estate lending regulators in all 50 states (because real estate lending is a STATE-level issue, not federal) go along with it?

Here's where it gets very interesting.

The fact is, state-level lending regulators were VERY concerned about what was going on. They've been concerned for years. They not only expressed their concern clearly, they also took SERIOUS
concerted legal action to stop lenders from making these bad real estate loans to their citizens.

Most of the sub-prime loans so much in the news today, were designed to screw the people who borrowed the money, and can rightly be called "predatory" loans.

Guess who stopped the states from enforcing their own time-proven real estate lending laws, and thus created the raw material that made the current "Credit Crisis" possible?

It's the trillion dollar question, and if you're a US taxpayer, you're going to pay for this fraud, so you might as well know who did it to you.

His initials are GWB. You know him well.

But perhaps more interesting, is the name of the person who single-handedly rallied state attorneys general, and then fellow governors, to fight the creation of these loans, and who
in the process became Public Enemy #1 to the Bush Administration.

His name is E Spitzer.

If you follow "silly" US political scandals, you recognized his name instantly, and FINALLY understand why he was swiftly assassinated politically, earlier this year. Had he remained, he would have been in a position to remind everyone who made the current meltdown possible. He was silenced so effectively, that no one can mention his name in connection with today's crisis, without risking ridicule, or worse.

The crisis this fraud has created is *exponentially* bigger than the S & L and Tech Bubble combined. It's not going to be resolved by a quick "patch up".

On that cheerful note, here's the big story everyone missed this year and now you'll finally know what REALLY happened and why:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/291.html

P.S. If you find Brasscheck TV valuable, please share our e-mail and videos with friends and colleagues. That's how we grow. Thanks.

Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115

Liars, and the Lying Lies They Are Telling You

Paisano — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:19:26 EDT

http://yourmortgageoryourlife.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/liars-and-the-lying-lies-they-are-telling-you/

Excerpt:

"Like a lot of folks who are completely flabbergasted by the Government's repeated efforts to whitewash and gloss-over the all of the gross negligence, malpractice and criminality of this - The Worst Financial and Constitutional Crisis in Our Nation's History - I decided last night i would look up some of what the guys and gals at the Federal Reserve, Treasury, SEC, and FDIC were up to between 1997 and 2007, and how they could have not seen any of this coming until apparently this week.

I say apparently because the bureaucrats and sycophants are all maintaining that this whole fiasco is as big a surprise to them as it is to Mom-and-Pop getting foreclosed upon in their Golden Years.

I know they are lying, and you know they are lying.

So once again we will play the cat and mouse game of "who knew what and when" as the Crooks all disappear into retirement with their $Trillions of stolen loot, the Politicians will blowhard and achieve little, and the whole thing will fade away from the headlines with time and the advantage of a short American attention span.

But for now, while every is watching and mad as hell, I am going to try my best to do my little part in exposing the hypocrisy and bald-faced lies being spewed around Washington DC and the mainstream press. I was on-line all morning and found so much material that I had to abandon my original post and choose just one document to focus on today - the 2002 Annual FDIC Report..."

We should be careful in supporting the Bush bailout proposal

aaacamb — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:39:25 EDT

I rarely read Paul Krugman's op-eds in the NYT but after reading today's since it is on the bailout, I am very concerned about the interest of taxpayers being lost in the anxiety to avoid the "impending meltdown". If the bailout's goal is to address investor confidence (to avoid precipitating market losses) by providing the massive bank account of the US govt as a source of funds that could ultimately buy distressed securities then that is simply insufficient for multiple reasons. The objectives must include

minimizing losses to the govt, and if possible, maximizing any profits to be made
disallow institutions rescued by the government from profiting directly from the rescue - all potential sources of capital must be exhausted before government money is used to rescue a firm - that includes excessive compensation for managers as well as outrageous bonuses. Afterall the objective of the bailout is to prevent a collapse of the market that drives the economy (credit being the major issue this tim)
minimizing the impact on the govt's bank account given that this account is greatly in arrears anyways (thanks to our friendly, compassionate and (socially-only) conservative president). The national debt today stands at $9 trillion and change. We are in dangerous territory and our global solvency is at the hands of nations that we are not exactly on the best of terms with. Ultimately the hand at the US wheel is what ultimately determines the long-term confidence in the US by our fellow nations and we must not forget their financial interests tied into our economy
At the same time, as Paul K says, we must lose any pridefulness and seek global participation in righting the boat

Barack and co. must carefully scrutinize the proposal and comment on it without getting bogged down in partisanship. Not only will that inspire confidence in our capabilities but such involvement is perceived as necessary given Barack and Joe's roles as senators. Remaining true to the objectives of saving the nation's skin as much as possible will take away from our opponents the ability to make false claims about our campaign's interests.

Loan Titans Paid McCain Adviser Nearly $2 Million

Chris — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:11:19 EDT

The McCain campaign has decided that the New York Times is not real journalism. The stinging article below may be why...

September 22, 2008Loan Titans Paid McCain Adviser Nearly $2 Million By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and CHARLES DUHIGG

Senator John McCain’s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say.

Mr. McCain, the Republican candidate for president, has recently begun campaigning as a critic of the two companies and the lobbying army that helped them evade greater regulation as they began buying riskier mortgages with implicit federal backing. He and his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama, have donors and advisers who are tied to the companies.

But last week the McCain campaign stepped up a running battle of guilt by association when it began broadcasting commercials trying to link Mr. Obama directly to the government bailout of the mortgage giants this month by charging that he takes advice from Fannie Mae’s former chief executive, Franklin Raines, an assertion both Mr. Raines and the Obama campaign dispute.

Incensed by the advertisements, several current and former executives of the companies came forward to discuss the role that Rick Davis, Mr. McCain’s campaign manager and longtime adviser, played in helping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac beat back regulatory challenges when he served as president of their advocacy group, the Homeownership Alliance, formed in the summer of 2000. Some who came forward were Democrats, but Republicans, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed their descriptions.

“The value that he brought to the relationship was the closeness to Senator McCain and the possibility that Senator McCain was going to run for president again,” said Robert McCarson, a former spokesman for Fannie Mae, who said that while he worked there from 2000 to 2002, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together paid Mr. Davis’s firm $35,000 a month. Mr. Davis “didn’t really do anything,” Mr. McCarson, a Democrat, said.

Mr. Davis’s role with the group has bubbled up as an issue in the campaign, but the extent of his compensation and the details of his role have not been reported previously.

Mr. McCain was never a leading critic or defender of the mortgage giants, although several former executives of the companies said Mr. Davis did draw Mr. McCain to a 2004 awards banquet that the companies’ Homeownership Alliance held in a Senate office building. The organization printed a photograph of Mr. McCain at the event in its 2004 annual report, bolstering its clout and credibility. The event honored several other elected officials, including at least two Democrats, Gov. Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania and Representative Artur Davis of Alabama.

In an interview Sunday night with CNBC and The New York Times, Mr. McCain noted that Mr. Davis was no longer working on behalf of the mortgage giants. He said Mr. Davis “has had nothing to do with it since, and I’ll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.”

Asked about the reports of Mr. Davis’s role, a spokesman for Mr. McCain said that during the time when Mr. Davis ran the Homeownership Alliance, the senator had backed legislation to increase oversight of the mortgage companies’ accounting and executive compensation. The legislation, however, did not seek to change their anomalous structure as private companies with federal support.

The spokesman, Tucker Bounds, also noted that the Homeownership Alliance included nonprofit organizations like Habitat for Humanity and the Urban League. “It’s not controversial to promote homeownership and minority homeownership,” Mr. Bounds said. More than a half-dozen current and former executives, however, said the Homeownership Alliance was set up mainly to defend Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by promoting their role in the housing market, and the two companies paid almost the entire cost of the group’s operations.

“They were financed largely, possibly exclusively, by Fannie and Freddie,” said William R. Maloni, a Democrat who is a former head of industry relations for Fannie Mae. “We thought it would be helpful to have someone who was a broadly recognized Republican to be the face of the organization, and that person became Rick Davis.” Mr. Maloni added, “Rick, for that purpose, turned out to be quite good.” (Several executives said Mr. Davis’s compensation was not unusual for the companies’ well-connected consultants.)

The federal bailout of the two mortgage giants has become an emblem of what critics say is the outdated or inadequate regulatory system that allowed the financial system to slide into crisis this summer.

At the time that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac recruited Mr. Davis to run the Homeownership Alliance in 2000, they were under new pressure from private industry rivals and deregulation-minded Republicans who argued that the two companies’ federal sponsorship gave them an unfair advantage and put taxpayers at risk. Critics of the companies had formed their own Washington-based advocacy group, FM Watch. They were pushing for regulations that would deter the companies from expanding into new areas, including riskier and more profitable mortgages.

Mr. Davis had recently returned to his lobbying firm from running Mr. McCain’s unexpectedly strong 2000 Republican primary campaign, which elevated Mr. McCain’s profile as a legislator and Mr. Davis’s as a lobbyist.

“You can say what you want about free-market distortions, but people like the system because it gets them into houses cheap,” Mr. Davis said to Institutional Investor magazine in 2000, adding that he would run the advocacy group out of his Alexandria, Va., lobbying firm.

The organization also hired Public Strategies, a communications firm that included former Bush adviser Mark McKinnon. Mr. Davis wrote letters and gave speeches for the group. In April 2001, he sent out a press release headlined, “It’s Tax Day — Do You Know Where Your Deductions Are? For Most Americans, They’re in Your Home.”

But by the end of 2005, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were recovering from accounting problems and re-examining costs, former executives said. The companies decided the Homeownership Alliance had outlived its usefulness, and it disappeared.

John Harwood contributed reporting.

Obama Could Win Today!

Disaffected Citizen — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:58:12 EDT

Obama could win the election today.

All that would be required would be standing up for change.

The Paulson deal congress is considering is a huge handout from the middle class to the rich.

All Obama has to do is stand up to the GOP and denounce this deal for what it is:

The handout of nearly a trillion in (middle class) tax payer money to the wealthy. That Paulson used to be CEO for these jokers makes it a slam dunk. He could support the bail out only if it is done with CHANGE from what we have today:

http://thewell-armedlamb.blogspot.com/2008/09/compare-obamas-generalities-with-naders.html

Somehow I think he will disapoint me though, just as he did with FISA.

McCain - the "Deregulation Senator"

Michelle — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:14:26 EDT

Our economic crisis last week, a result of the failures of Lehman Brothers and AIG, definitely focused America on the economy and forced McCain and Obama to do so as well.

McCain Flip-Flops on AIG
On the AIG meltdown, McCain said on September 16th that “we cannot have the taxpayers bail out AIG or anybody else” and the next morning, after our government had gone ahead and approved an $85 billion government takeover of AIG, McCain shifted his position, saying that “on the bailout itself, [he] didn't want to do that, but there were literally millions of people whose retirement, whose investments, whose insurance were at risk here, and they were going to have their lives destroyed because of the greed and excess and corruption.'' There were just as many people the day before that would have had their “lives destroyed,” but McCain wasn’t interested in reaching out to help them then. No, it wasn’t until our government had decided to bailout AIG and help the American people that McCain flip-flopped his position and jumped on board, blaming “greed and excess and corruption” for AIG’s meltdown.

McCain and Palin, at rallies throughout last week, blamed this “greed” for our current economic situation and demanded that there be greater “transparency and accountability” in Wall Street. What McCain and Palin aren’t telling Americans is that the deregulation McCain has pushed for the past two decades in the Senate, the deregulation that Bush has backed during his eight-year tenure supported by a Republican-led Congress for 6 out of the past 8 years, is what is most to blame for this economic collapse we have recently experienced. Yes, it is this deregulation that has led to the subprime mortgage crisis, the downfall of Bear Stearns, the failures of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Lehman Brothers, AIG and, perhaps, the downfall of Morgan Stanley and Washington Mutual as well. Not surprising that McCain is choosing to hide his history as a major advocate of this deregulation from the American people.

The Proof is in the Article
Thanks to an article that came out last week, McCain cannot hide the fact that he has been an avid supporter of deregulation in our banking and insurance industries. An article published in Contingencies Magazine, produced by the American Association of Actuaries, was thrust into the limelight, after showing clear proof of McCain’s intense support of deregulation in the banking and insurance industries.

This article, intended to highlight McCain’s healthcare plan, has truly backfired on the Arizona Senator. In the article, he wrote:

"Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation." (Contingencies Magazine)

Little did McCain realize that this article would be published on the eve of an economic meltdown resulting from this same deregulation and “vigorous nationwide competition” that he touts in this article.

As Obama said:

“[McCain] wants to run health care like they've been running Wall Street. I know some folks on Main Street who aren't going to think that's such a good idea." (Washington Post, Sept. 21, 2008)

Practicing What He Preaches – Holding McCain Accountable
McCain has repeatedly said this past week that the McCain-Palin administration will “bring transparency and accountability to Wall Street.” (Kansas City Star, Sept. 15, 2008) Because of McCain’s calls for “transparency and accountability” on Wall Street, I find it important to hold McCain accountable for what he is not telling the American people. “[E]ight years ago, [Phil]Gramm, then a Republican senator chairing the Senate banking committee, slipped a 262-page bill into a gargantuan, must-pass spending measure. Gramm's legislation, written with the help of financial industry lobbyists, essentially removed newfangled financial products called swaps from any regulation. Credit default swaps are basically insurance policies that cover the losses on investments, and they have been at the heart of the subprime meltdown because they have enabled large financial institutions to turn risky loans into risky securities that could be packaged and sold to other institutions.” It is this bill that has been blamed for the subprime lending crisis, the crisis that destroyed our housing market, led to our record high foreclosure rate and jump-started our downward spiraling economy. (Mother Jones, Sept. 15, 2008)

Gramm was also responsible for the “Enron Loophole” which prevented federal government oversight of Enron's electronic energy trading. “Such favors proved very expensive to consumers but profitable to the Gramms. Enron CEO Ken Lay chaired Gramm's 1992 re-election campaign, and wife Wendy Gramm spent years on the Enron board, earning as much as $1.8 million, according to Public Citizen, a consumer advocate.” (Houston Chronicle, Sept. 18, 2008)

Despite Gramm’s clear hand in our subprime mortgage crisis and the fact that Gramm’s bill was directly responsible for the Enron Loophole that resulted in the notorious Enron disaster, McCain chose Gramm to be chairman of his campaign and a top economic adviser until Gramm went so far as to dismiss Americans worried about the economy as “whiners” at which point McCain supposedly dumped Gramm.(Mother Jones, Sept. 15, 2008) Last month Gramm attended a meeting of McCain's top supporters in Aspen and at a dinner that day, McCain pointed out Gramm and showered him with praise. As early as last week, Ron Paul revealed that Gramm, now an exec for Swiss banking giant UBS, had contacted him in order to get Paul to support McCain, but Paul dismissed Gramm, the man responsible for initiating the Enron Loophole and our subprime lending crisis all with the drafting of a single bill.

For a man demanding “transparency” and “accountability” from Wall Street, it seems to me McCain should be “transparent” and “accountable” to the American people. You would think that the Americans who have lost their homes as a result of our subprime mortgage crisis would have a different feeling about McCain if they knew how closely he was tied to the man who engineered the problem that led them to lose their homes. At the very least, McCain’s claims that he will help the American people is called into question by his sense of judgment in choosing to refer to Gramm on issues of the economy – when Gramm has done so much to bring about the economic decline that is forcing Americans to struggle and when he has been so callous as to call average American families struggling to make ends meet in our fledgling economy “whiners,” at the very minimum, McCain should distance himself from Gramm to prove that he is on the side of American middle and working-class families. Yet, he hasn’t even taken that small step to stand up for the average American.

As Lynn Turner, a former chief SEC accountant said, "If McCain gets in, we'll have more of the same deregulatory mess. I like John McCain, but given what I know about Phil Gramm, I wouldn't vote for McCain." If the American people knew about Phil Gramm and knew about McCain’s ties to Phil Gramm, I have a feeling most of them would feel exactly the same way. I suppose this explain why this isn’t a topic of conversation by McCain and Palin at their rallies or interviews. (Mother Jones, July/August)

Small Government = Bigger Government
McCain and Palin have continuously touted the Republican belief that America benefits most from smaller government, less regulation and states handling their own matters without excessive federal oversight. Yet, it is this continued deregulation that has caused our banking and insurance industries to slowly unravel. It is this deregulation that has forced our government to take over AIG, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae; the push for excessive deregulation of these industries backfired and left us with even more government control and regulation. And if McCain wants to apply the same deregulation to our American healthcare system, how can we expect it to fare any better? If there is a saving grace to this economic crisis coming weeks before the election, it is that we have been alerted to how this deregulation has endangered our finance, banking and insurance industries and, if McCain is elected, how our healthcare system will face a similar peril.

Principles First, Plans Second...

Nia "Hussein" J. — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:12:40 EDT

Principles First, Plans Second by: Texas Gray WolfSun Sep 21, 2008 at 23:48:03 PM EDT

Obama did exactly the right thing in proposing principles for a plan to bail out the financial industry rather than a plan, both politically and Presidentially. Presidents set agendas and principles and have staffs to draw up the nuts and bolts (or: you don't think FDR crafted all that legislation personally, do you?). Obama's not going to take the lead on crafting a plan in the Senate, can't, and shouldn't. That's a job that's going to require the full attention of the people involved. It's also not what you expect a president to do either. Presidents set principles, goals, objectives, criteria, agendas, that sort of thing. Presidents should be overseers, not wonks (a bit of wonkiness, good; too much, bad). Presidents are not Senators. Acting as a Senator now is a necessary but not sufficient part of Obama's campaign for the Presidency; being Presidential is much more valuable.

I don't think that voters want a specific plan from Obama right now. They don't want to (and won't) read through legislation. Voters want leadership. This is step one of leadership (step two is standing by it and using his position to promote his principles and hold Congress, or at minimum Democrats, to them). McCain (and anyone else Obama didn't mention, in laying out the principles) is now in the "follower" position, unless they start from a different set of principles and win the fight over whose principles are better (and even in that case, Obama's still taken the leadership position by switching the debate from plans to principles).

Texas Gray Wolf :: Principles First, Plans Second Had Obama just proposed a concrete, specific, here's-the-nuts-and-bolts plan, voters would tune out or listen to a soundbite analysis of the plan. But they'll look carefully at a set of principles. They want whatever plan is proposed to conform to a set of principles that protects them and works for them. That's what Obama's proposed. Voters want to know what the plan will do for them*. They don't want to know the nuts and bolts of how it will do it for them. They do want to know that there are nuts and bolts and that those nuts and bolts are the right ones (i.e. there needs to be credibility in the resulting plan). This is the framework for deciding if the nuts and bolts are the right ones.

Each principle is concise and easily explained and defended. Together they provide an enormous amount of justification to Democrats (and Republicans too) who want to oppose the current bailout plan, and tools with which to attack those who do not oppose the current plan. I'm just waiting for Obama, for instance, to respond to an attack by saying "so, you're opposed to protecting the American taxpayer?", "so, you want to kick taxpayers out of their homes even after we've spent government money covering their mortgage?", "so, you're still opposed to regulation, even after the lack of regulation has brought us to this point", etc.

These are very hard principles to attack openly. A plan can be attacked; any detailed plan is going to contain one or two things you can attack on. It's inevitable; no one writes perfect laws and there really is no bailout that will be universally accepted. But it's very hard to attack the principles Obama's proposing; they're all intuitively the right thing to do even for conservatives. If you propose plan first and back-fill your principles you look weak. Proposing principles first is a position of strength.

What Obama's proposed lays out a framework: what will the plan do for people? What will it not do? Without that, you wind up with "Obama's Wonky Plan" vs "McCain's Wonky Plan" and voters go to sleep or decide based on soundbite analysis of the plan. There's no context for making a decision. The details of this stuff is way, way over the heads of most voters -- heck, it's way over the heads of most National Merit Scholars. On the other hand, everyone gets "protect the taxpayers". It's obvious. It gives Obama grounds to attack the current plan and any bad McCain plan. It puts McCain in the position where he either has to attack Obama's principles or look like a complete follower.

If you're worried about the "indecisiveness" ploy (which I think is going nowhere fast, despite Palin harping on it), pretty much what Obama needs to do to counter that is to say firmly that YES we need a bailout but YES it must follow these principles. That's not indecisiveness and it's not voting 'present'. It also allows Obama to hit back: do you support the administration plan? If not, what's your plan? Does it meet the Obama principles? If not, why not? Proposing a plan doesn't allow you to criticize their plan directly -- you'd have to go to a wonky point-by-point comparison.

If any of the principles is going to be attacked, my money is on the one about keeping taxpayers in their homes. But I think opposing that is a losing position -- I just can't see the American public as a whole saying "hell yeah, corporations deserve billions but taxpayers should get nothing even though the government has covered their bad debt" in such a transparently obvious manner.

Plus there's an enormous economic plus to letting homeowners stay in their homes. If you take the home and sell it in foreclosure, you drive prices down. That creates a continuing spiral of collapses and (possibly) leads to the everyone-moves-one-house-over effect (where people who were bottom-up on a $500,000 house can now afford to buy the $200,000 house that used to be the same $500,000 house). You can make the counterargument that it lets people with means buy houses at fire-sale prices and clean up, but that's saying it rewards the rich -- it's a non-starter. In fact, if you oppose that principle, that's one of the pivots -- that you're directly hurting people who are already hurting and rewarding the rich.

Principles set the ground rules for discussion. They're extremely powerful. McCain's immediately in a box; he either needs to oppose Obama's principles (each of which is fairly hard to oppose) or he has to look like he's following Obama's leadership on the issue. It's a no-win situation unless he can build traction around one of Obama's principles being wrong.

What he has proposed is infinitely more valuable than a plan. He's used his position -- his leadership -- to frame the debate in a way that will tend to force a good plan or force the other side to be honest about pushing a bad plan. It's hard (not impossible, give the bad guys credit, but really hard) to craft a bad plan that conforms to all of Obama's principles. It's also hard to craft a good plan that violates any of them. And articulating principles first gives Congressional Democrats a very straightforward touchstone to reject the administration plan, even prior to proposing their own, and not look like a bunch of obstructionists.

Politically it's brilliant, and it's also the right thing to do for a President.

New Bail Out, Enough is Enough! Keating Five...

Waiting For The World To Change — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:38:54 EDT

With yet another tax payer bail out, the Keating Five scandal is now relevant. McCain economic judgment and continued support of deregulation after the S & L scandal which he directly benefited from financially, IS VALID. The American people deserve to know the whole story and the whole truth. Why is the media not covering? Tax payers are tired of being on the hook for lobbyist agendas and ideology. McCain did not learn then when tax payers had to foot billions in losses from S & L scandal. If these billions in losses did not deter his support for deregulation then, neither will the current crisis now. McCain never has and NEVER been, and NEVER will be truly for regulation. He is currently lying to the American people about his support for regulation.

McCains 20 years of economic ideology is the cornerstone for the current crisis. He believes "the economy is fundamentally strong” 24 hrs before we are on the brink of total collapse. You talk about out of touch. I equate this to George W. Bush’s "Mission Accomplished" speech; and years later we still losing valuable lives in Iraq. Incompetence, Appeasement and more Lies. Do your home work. McCain’s public record on deregulation does not lie. Hammer the message home! RESEARCH THE KEATING FIVE SCANDAL! Be informed and inform others.

So I ask, not as red or blue states, but as Americans. Will we finally put away our fears and shallowness; and stand together to put the incumbent party in it's place? Or will we allow our fears and differences to distract us from the real issues facing our great country? Will we embrace a party that has lost it's bearings, marginalized it’s own citizens, and has driven us to the brink of total economic failure and embarassment. We need to unite and send a clear message that the American people will not stand for such recklessness and disempowerment. Enough is Enough! We the people control our own fate and the state of our great union. The power is in the people and the politics we address. God Bless America!

Executive Power Grab in Banking Bail-Out Bill

Vince from Boston, MA — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 20:35:48 EDT

All,

I need all your help to get the word out on THE most unscrupulous thing this administration has ever proposed.

The proposed bailout plan by the Republican's has a number of Poison Pills attached to it.

Some language from the proposed Bill:

(a) Authority to Purchase.--The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them;

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue obligations; and

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

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

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/20/153952/268/395/603713

Its clear that those who drafted this proposed trillion dollar bailout are not acting in good faith.

We need Barack and his economic advisors to reject this proposed bailout and come up with terms that are

fair to the American Taxpayer "US" who will become the primary stakeholders.

Imagine they want us to give Treasury Secretary Paulson absolute power over the bailout with No oversight.

Its Outrageous ...The potential for abuse is literally on a scale we have never seen.

This Smacks of politics as usual ... They want the Democrats to VETO this bill so that they can spin it that the Democrats are holding up any kind of relief over this Financial Crisis.

Please email everyone about this issue.

Email Form to the Financial Services house committee here.

http://financialservices.house.gov/contact.html

Obama/Biden '08 ..... Hope and a new direction.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/vince

"This country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless

we make it a good place for all of us to live in." -Theodore Roosevelt

Lets foil this scheme before it impacts our election.

-Vince ;-}

Mortage Crisis Not Borrowers Faults!

Jeanette — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:05:19 EDT

Those in the media and many in Washington like to place the mortgage crisis blame on the "working class" people who acquired loans through what any sane economist knows to be a Classism Loan labeled Sub-Prime. Here is what the loan banks were not telling the borrower at the other side of their table: Sub-Prime is a discriminatory name and practice for you, the working class, and we're forced by the government to give you a loan, but what I'm going to do is throw your loan in a Russian Roulette POOL and sell it so it can resell again and again raising the payments higher and higher until your mortgage payments are impossible to meet, and I don't care. I'm going to treat you like a hot potato even though you were able to afford the original mortgage. I don't care because I'm a Republican and my goal is to make as much money off the only resource we have left.... the people. That's what sub-prime really means! Instead of being truthful what they do is try and make you feel guilty by labeling you risky. "Risky?" you ask yourself. "How can a mortgage of 675.00 be risky to me while I've been paying 800.00 in rent?" Your upset, but you take the loan because the system is set up to prevent you from acquiring a 5% loan. Too bad you didn't know your 9 percent loan was going to go up up up until your mortgage reached a whopping 1400.00 per month and sometimes more! Thanks to McCain's deregulation no one stopped the bond companies that took it off the bank hands from creating the mortgage crisis.

The mess we're in.

Kevin ":: g+s+ ::" Winterfield — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:52:10 EDT

We are in the middle of the Katrina of economic hurricanes. Bush/McCain and gang saw it coming, but they just let it happen. God, do we need a change. They have led our nation like it was the Titanic - straight into this financial iceberg.

Make no mistake about it: This crisis is very serious. We are on the verge of a depression - yes, I said it, a depression. Many of us already can check out our home values on Zillow (http://www.zillow.com/) to see just how far our home values have fallen in just the last month. Others of us can look at our 401(k) accounts and see the massive losses there. Others are being foreclosed upon. Others are unable to afford gas. And sadly, others can't afford food. Yes, this is the real America we are living in now. Not the land of prosperity. Instead, we see our country as the land of greed and division.

From the start we said that Obama was about uniting our country and that our opponents were about dividing us up - into the haves and the have nots. And, now we see this coming to bare. Unfortunately, many Americans, myself included, are at serious risk to their well-being. Our livelihoods may just be going down the drain.

Right now, as Obama said today, this is not about politics. This is not about partisanship (as McCain is trying to make it). This is not even just about Wall Street - and saving the asses of those wealthy bastards that ran this country into the toilet. This is about Main Street - and what we mean by Main Street is you, me. Us.

Obama was right from the very beginning. He is right today. He has not wavered from his stance. In the slog of a politics of distraction, Obama has stood tall - stood calm, fought back as needed - and today, we, all of us, see that he was right.

It's time for us to work together now, throw down politics, and make damn sure that the people who got us into this are punished and the little people, called the middle class and the working class, are not taken, once again, for granted. Because we are about to, all of us, take on possibly 1 trillion dollars in debt in order to save our country. And when we do this, we, not McCain, will be the true American heroes this time around.

-k g+s+ :: come together now :: !!

Socialism for Speculators and Subsidies for the Rich and Powerful

Michael Wells — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:47:10 EDT

By bailing out financial companies prior to bankruptcy, the Fed is really saying "the tax payer must subsidize the failures of rich and crooked executives." These executives took record compensation packages while their companies collapsed. Why aren't they being called on to pony up some of the loot they have effectively stolen? Why did the SEC not even enforce the regulations that are already on the books? The markets are rallying on the prospect that the taxpayer will now guarantee the reckless speculation of Wall Street. We must stop this madness! I will not vote for anyone that supports this socialism for speculators. I think anyone (democratic or republican) that supports it should be recalled from office. The fact that it is even being considered is disgusting.
www.bankingwhistleblower@inbox.com

How Marx Went Wrong

Ronald from Minneapolis, MN — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:26:02 EDT

I'm currently revising this as an op-ed submission to as many papers as I can manage. I think Barack needs to be out there, hammering home this point, RIGHT NOW. When the financial crisis hit this week, some of the pundits in the media said that this was going to be a race to see who could connect with the American people on the economic issue. Plans and policies are important, but most Americans don't understand the details of the arguments going on here.

I'm trying to sum up the nature of the regulation / deregulation argument, and what regulation means, both economically and historically. I think if Barack goes out and gives people a message something like this, spends just a couple minutes in FDR's role of teacher-in-chief, he can win a LOT of supporters by making the issues clear as day.

Please read, review, and share. I think this is absolutely the way we need to frame this debate.

Celebrating Capitalism's Death? Not So Fast...

Steve Brant — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:30:11 EDT

Welcome to our brave new post-Capitalistic world.

Today our leaders in Washington announced (all the details to come later) that the Federal Government is going to rescue the financial system from total collapse.

You can read the story as reported by The NY Times here and, of course, more details of this plan will come out in the hours and days ahead. But I want to address the very first part of The NY Times' report: the reaction of the markets around the world...

Stocks shot wildly upward Friday morning after the federal government moved to try to restore confidence in the financial markets.
The Dow Jones industrial average rose more than 400 points only moments after the opening, and later settled up more than 300 points. The broader Standard & Poor's 500 was up nearly 3.5 percent. Markets in Europe and Asia also traded significantly higher, with stocks in London and Paris up more than 8 percent.

There is a celebration going on. This doesn't surprise me. But I'd like to raise the following point from the world of Systems Thinking:

Just because you stop something old that is bad, doesn't mean you will automatically start something new that's good.

Our government has stopped something it considers to be bad. It saw the collapse of the economic system coming. The action it has taken has - and this is me talking, not our government, of course - ended Capitalism here in America.

Actually, its not just me talking. Here's a report from The NY Times on what financial leaders in the rest of the world think about what we are doing here. They know America is no longer a Capitalistic society either. From this September 18th report...

"I fear the government has passed the point of no return," said Ron Chernow, a leading American financial historian. "We have the irony of a free-market administration doing things that the most liberal Democratic administration would never have been doing in its wildest dreams."
The bailout package for A.I.G., on top of earlier government support for Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, has stunned even European policy makers accustomed to government intervention -- even as they acknowledge the shock of the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

"For opponents of free markets in Europe and elsewhere, this is a wonderful opportunity to invoke the American example," said Mario Monti, the former antitrust chief at the European Commission. "They will say that even the standard-bearer of the market economy, the United States, negates its fundamental principles in its behavior."

Mr. Monti said that past financial crises in Asia, Russia and Mexico brought government to the fore, "but this is the first time it's in the heart of capitalism, which is enormously more damaging in terms of the credibility of the market economy."

We no longer have a "market economy" here in America. Capitalism is dead.

But what are the people on Wall Street and other financial centers celebrating? The end of something bad. But - I assert - not the start of something new that is good.

Our government literally sees that the Titanic is sinking. And it is using its extraordinary power to raise the Titanic out of the ocean, shake all the water out of it (literally bailing it out), and place it back in the ocean hoping it will then sail on.

But the Titanic cannot sail on.

That's because the Titanic that is our global economic system is fundamentally flawed. It is based on a belief that we are still sailing in a zero-sum world, a world of scarcity, a world where there will always be too many people chasing too few resources. The sustainability scientists... and those schooled in advance social and managerial sciences as well... know this is no longer true. They know an abundance-based world is what we live in now, from an objective reality point of view. They know that the only thing in the way of that becoming the reality we all live in is the design of our political-economic system.. because it is still a scarcity-based design.

The American government's effort is very impressive in scope... but not in sophistication. It is an 800 pound gorilla approach, involving a huge willingness to throw money at the problem. But, intellectually speaking, it is "the blind leading the blind". It is "experts in the past" attempting to solve a problem whose root cause they cannot see. None of them has ever even heard of - as best I can tell - that scarcity is an objectively obsolete way to view the world. None of them has ever seen what is at the foundation of the work of people such as William McDonough, Amory Lovins, or the late Buckminster Fuller.

It is a tragedy in the making, because they are missing a huge opportunity to truly do the right thing... to take a sophisticated - rather than 800 pound gorilla - approach to this crisis.

A sophisticated approach.... one led by people who know how to work with the fact that the present is different from the past - ie. designers - would address the fundamental fact that our economy is based on a zero-sum mental model in a global reality that is actually an abundance-based world waiting to be born.

As a designer myself, I saw this situation when there was a smaller - but still very visible - challenge to the stability of the global economic system. This was in October of 1998. At that time, BusinessWeek published an editorial called "The Age of Uncertainty". In that October 26, 1998 editorial, BusinessWeek said:

In the blink of a summer's eye, the psychology in America has changed totally. People suddenly don't know what to think about the economy, their investments, or their future. Before July, the U.S. had economic nirvana. Now confusion reigns. Volatility dominates markets. Hedge funds blow up. Deflation looms. The Asian contagion spreads. Russia defaults. The dollar plummets. CEOs worry. And Washington fiddles with impeachment. Yet the economy still feels pretty strong. So what is really going on out there?

In response to that editorial, I wrote a letter which BusinessWeek published on November 16, 1998. Here's what I wrote back then:

IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY, ALL PARTS NEED TO PROSPER
'So, what is really going on out there?'' you ask, in ''The age of uncertainty'' (Editorials, Oct. 26). For a more complete answer, look to the principles of systems thinking. A ''confluence of events'' is not the only thing masking the true fundamentals of the global economy, creating this ''fog'' you refer to. The ''fog'' is being created by the tendency to see globalization from a perspective grounded in our history of living in a world of separate, independent nations. The world's economy has become one interdependent system, yet we continue to view it through independent eyes.

What's really going on, from a systems perspective, is that a new, single, global system is struggling to be seen for what it is--a system that can prosper only if all of its parts prosper. It is a single system, one that innately knows that either all of it will make it or none of it will. That's the way healthy systems work. The business world will prosper beyond its wildest imagination once it cuts through this fog and stops viewing the future through ''past-focused eyes.''

I still believe everything I wrote almost ten years ago.

The business world will prosper beyond its wildest imagination once it sees the future for what it can be. Some businesses will have to change more than others to take advantage of this new opportunity, but that's what the best businesses do, right? (Weapons manufacturers will have to change the most, as war is finally seen as the obsolete "international development tool" that it is. But that's okay. The skills of those corporations can easily be used to study, analyze, and produce constructive solutions - especially highly scientific ones - to our sustainable development challenges.)

This business world mindset is why the business strategy book "Blue Ocean Strategy" has been a global best seller since its release in 2005... because business leaders are always looking for the "blue ocean" of "no competition"... the economic landscape where they can operate first.. offering new products and services that do and offer things that no other business is selling.

Well, there is a huge blue ocean available to all the world's businesses now. It is the post-scarcity, post-zero sum Capitalism world that is waiting out there.... just waiting for us to reach out for it.

I hope at least some of our business and political leaders are in enough of a shock that they will look for new ideas and new answers such as those I am talking about here.

We don't have to settle for 800 pound gorilla thinking. We can innovate our way out of this crisis, with our eyes completely open to the true nature of the challenge we face... open to understanding the root cause of the challenge we face. And by understanding the root cause of the crisis we are in - that we literally see fighting as the "first principle" of living when cooperation and collaboration should be the first principle - we can design our way to a better future... to an economic system that will provide all businesses - and all the people on Earth - with more prosperity than they ever believed possible.

We must not just stop something old that is bad. We must start something good that is new.

McCain playing games with our livelihood - he is strangling us.

Kevin ":: g+s+ ::" Winterfield — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:14:07 EDT

Obama is right.

This is not time to play politics with the livelihood of middle class/working class folks like us. McCain wants to use the economic crisis he helped create as a political issue and attack, attack, attack. He doesn't give a crap about us, he cares about only one person: McCain.

Senator McCain: STOP MESSING WITH MY LIVELIHOOD! YOU ARE STRANGLING ME!

-k g+s+ :: take action now :: !!

Thinking our way out of current critical messes

Jean Latz from Arlington Heights, IL — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:13:39 EDT

When you stop to think about it, probably no single person on Earth can cut through the tangles of the financial mess we seem to be in.

I have heard it stated that the global economy in all its interconnectedness has become so complex that no one really knows anymore which actions will be helpful and which will trigger a cascade of unintended consequences that lead to disaster.

Like most people, I don't think in terms of short sells and insuring defaults and insuring the insurers of the defaulters. My guess is that few of us even knew what AIG was before we woke up a morning or two ago to discover that if something wasn't done to save keep it from going under, it really could be the end of the world as we know it – and we wouldn't be just fine.

The Phil Gramm Factor

Stephanie Williams — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:41:23 EDT

Foreclosure Phil

NEWS: Years before Phil Gramm was a McCain campaign adviser and a lobbyist for a Swiss bank at the center of the housing credit crisis, he pulled a sly maneuver in the Senate that helped create today's subprime meltdown.

MotherJones Magazine Jul/Aug '08

It's the Loan Officers, Stupid...

RealestState — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:17:40 EDT

This is the first blog that i've ever written, so be gentle if you're responding to it.

As I watch the news and read articles online and other blogs, I can't help but to point out something that seems to be the most overlooked catalyst and probable solution to the housing crisis and the overall economy. It's called...

It’s the loan officer, stupid…

Serious economists acknowledge that the catalyst for the crisis that we are experiencing is a direct consequence of an unscrupulous mortgage industry. Unfortunately most are too far removed from the day-to-day activities to recognize the underlying conflict of interest in the manner in which individuals obtain mortgage loans.

As a former mortgage broker, I can confidently tell you that the problem is obvious and a probable solution is simpler than most people think.

The problem.

Loan officers make no profit by offering potential borrowers the best possible mortgage loan that qualify for. Consequently, neither do their supervisors, whether through a mortgage broker or directly from a banking institution. These loan officers are ENCOURAGED, by management, personal greed or economic survival, to convince the borrower to accept higher/adjustable rates and other sub-prime loan terms. Over 90% of the time, the loan officer can offer a better mortgage than the one actually portrayed. The entire concept of “Yield Spread Premium” is the most obvious example a system designed to take advantage of its consumers by mortgage brokers on the behalf of banks. Using this formula, only the most deceptive individuals exceed, a recipe for disaster.

So as lending standards decreased a couple of years ago, promoting 100% financing and low to no documentation loan programs, the same deceptive individuals acted like child predators at Disneyland.

The solution.

A new government regulation that mandates the inclusion of a mortgage representative that ACTUALLY works for the consumer/borrower. This representative does not receive any compensation from the issuer of the mortgage or any other party involved in the purchase or refinance of an individual(s) home.

To get a good idea of how this new mortgage representative operates, take a look at home inspectors. They are certified individuals hired by the buyers to properly inspect the home before the buyer completes the purchase costing anywhere from $300-$500. Often times saving the consumer thousands of dollars by identifying property concerns overlooked by realtors, homeowners and the consumers themselves. This same model can be applied to a mortgage inspector.

The mortgage inspector will evaluate the loan terms, notify the borrower of all potential concerns, thus allowing an educated decision as it pertains to the financing of their home.

Although this is a simplified description of the solution, I believe that it is the ground-up approach that should be included in any economic plan that is comprehensive and serious about avoiding a repeat of the current crisis, simultaneously protecting consumers and creating more jobs.

Tell me what you think...

New Icon for World

linktech Ralph — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:22:45 EDT

New worldwide icon;US-A Universally known as a nationUS-B United States BailoutUS-C ????Several pillars of the Capitalistic Foundation have failed. Where to now?? rej 9-17-8

NPR's biased reporting

Harry — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 11:41:30 EDT

This posting is about an NPR story that aired on Wednesday, the 17th of September, 2008. The two segments focused on the presidential candidates solutions to the Wall Street crisis. It was ridiculous to see the kind of coverage that was being provided by NPR, a supposedly liberal station, and how unfair it was to Sen. Obama.

The first segment was on Sen. Obama's approach (by Scott Horsley, excuse the spelling). The second segment following this was about Sen. McCain's approach (by David Green). These two segments were supposed to be about how the candidates are handling the economic crisis plaguing Wall Street.

How Out Of Touch Can One Person Be - McCain???

Mandie from Kirkland, WA — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 01:52:09 EDT

What is happening to our economy? I am so fortunate to have another 40 years before I have to retire because my portfolio and my home value are plummeting. How can John McCain truly say that the fundamentals of our economy are strong when so many people are out of work, our banking system is crashing and people are losing their homes?

I know McCain restated it later as, "the American worker and their innovation...those are the fundamentals of America," so even though I believe that is just another poor attempt at backpeddling, fear gets in the way of innovation. Unemployment, low wages and questionable financial markets all create fear. Therefore, we are in deep trouble.

I know historically Democrats have been known to raise taxes. In fact that is all we have heard from the McCain/Palin ticket. They have said over and over that Barack Obama will raise taxes. Well, first I have to point out that in the eight years that Bush has been in the White House, my taxes have gone up. After reading Barack Obama's plan, it is clear my taxes will go down for a change by up to $1000 more then under McCain's plan. That sounds like something that will actually help the middle class during economic turmoil.

Inspire us with hope

Candice — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:34:17 EDT

Barack Obama, you changed the tone of the campaign this week. You brought it back to politics and policy. With all of the right policies, you should be winning in the polls.

Now look at the electorate. The stock market is in crisis and the Gulf coast is reeling from Hurricane Ike. We are eager for change, yet catastrophic change is already upon us. Now more than ever, we need our leaders to stand up with a message of hope, and deliver.

Again, I say it: Barack, take the highest of high roads. Right now, be the change you want to see.

You want a campaign free of smears? Praise your opponents.

You want a campaign based on truth? Tell us the truth about you. Your plans. Bring it back to you.

Barach Obama, you inspired a nation during the Democratic convention. You inspired us to believe for so many months. We learned all we could about you. We had the audacity to hope.

Then McCain pulled a rabbit out of his hat and inspired his own base.

You have no more rabbits. We all know your message.

All you can bring us is you.

Inspire us again. Speak only kindness. Focus on helping in Texas, even before the financial markets. Go to Texas. Fix things! Be the hope you talk about! Be the change you promise! Start your presidency of hope and kindness and fairness today. Lead us now! Inspire us again. We need you.

5 Good Ideas from the Washington Post's Fix

John Cavanaugh — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:30:12 EDT

The crisis that has seized Wall Street over the last few days caught the campaigns of both Barack Obama and John McCain flat-footed.

Neither man, as we wrote yesterday, has a demonstrated expertise on the issue and national polling shows that voters aren't sure whether Obama or McCain would do a better job in managing the economy as president.

So, with both campaigns scrambling to win the issue over the next few days, The Fix solicited the opinions of a handful of Republican and Democratic strategists, asking them what specifically they would advise their party's candidate to do in the short term to stake their claim to this critical issue.

We collected and sorted the suggestions -- which ranged from the zany to the downright ingenious. We picked the best five for each candidate and listed them below; some contradict one another but all seem to have solid strategic thinking behind them. The names behind the suggestions have been withheld in order to let the operatives speak their minds without being seen as telling their party's candidates (and his inner circle) what to do or not do.

Agree or disagree? The comments section awaits.

OBAMA

1. Two-Day Ohio Tour: Obama should spend two full days traveling the Buckeye State with stops in cities ranging from the big (Cleveland) to the medium (Dayton) to the small (Zanesville). The suggested theme? "McCain's strong fundamentals" playing off of the Arizona senator's much-disputed statement Monday that the fundamentals of the economy are strong. Ohio was the central battleground of the 2004 election and the economic stresses have hammered the state in the intervening four years. Show Ohioans Obama isn't just a gifted speaker; he understand better than McCain the problems faced by average middle class families.

2. Spend a Night At Home: With home foreclosures still a huge problem and many middle class families worried about being able to make their monthly mortgage payments, Obama should spend a night at home with a family facing potential foreclosure -- either in Nevada or Michigan, two of the battlegroundiest (is that a word) states in the country. This idea is along the lines of the Service Employees International Union's "Walk a Day in their Shoes" campaign during the Democratic primaries but has the potential to produce great television images that ooze "empathy."

3. A Series of Speeches: Obama's greatest strength is his oratorical abilities. Use them. Follow the blueprint used to much success by George W. Bush in 2004 when he gave a series of speeches explaining and contextualizing the war in Iraq and the fight against terrorism. Use that framework and sub in the economy; in one speech tackle the pinch the economic crisis is putting on an average middle class family, in another lay out how small business are being impacted, in a third show -- specifically -- how an Obama Administration would handle the economic problems different than has the current president. "Speeches are his wheelhouse and he needs to get back into his comfort zone," said Phil Singer, a former adviser to Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign. "He's been trying to be someone else which has been cramping his style on the stump."

4. Town Hall Tryout: Obama has largely avoided the sort of town halls that McCain has made his own during this campaign. Pick a series of white working class neighborhoods and set up a series of economic-themed town halls over multiple days. Do more listening than talking. Obama, as The Fix himself has witnessed during a presidential dialogue sponsored by MTV and MySpace in Iowa, tends to shy away a bit from the "I feel your pain" politics of Bill Clinton. Suck it up and wade into the crowd. Console people who are struggling, hug folks having hard times. Be, at least for a few days, the consoler in chief.

5.Sitdown with Lehman Brothers Staff: Don't meet with the bigwigs and suits of the failed investment bank. Convene a roundtable with some of the support staff (administrative assistants etc.) who are impacted by the company veering into bankruptcy. Almost no one feels bad for the executives when these massive companies go through crises, knowing that these well-paid upper management types will survive without a hitch. But, there are also large numbers of employees at Lehman and other companies who are living paycheck to paycheck and will have their lives fundamentally altered by the bankruptcy. Put faces to these statistics and let them speak their minds about what's wrong and how to fix it.

Palin unfit for duty - Article from Kansas City Star

Rick Adis — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:11:07 EDT

Mary Sanchez Posted on Mon, Sep. 15, 2008 10:15 PMreprint or license print email Digg it del.icio.us AIM Palin is gloriously, fabulously unfit for dutyEric RisbergGOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin greeted supporters at a campaign rally Saturday in Carson City, Nev.

Dare to criticize Sarah Palin and you’ll find yourself back in high school, with all the petty taunts.

“You’re just jealous!” is the refrain filling my e-mail and voice mail in-boxes, and no doubt other female skeptics face a similar barrage. As if the presidency is about who has the hottest wardrobe, the best-coiffed hair and the attention of the hunky quarterback.

For men who question Palin’s credentials, it’s different. They’re just sexists.

Sorry, but neither jealousy nor sexism has anything to do with the well-founded doubts about the Republican Party’s choice for vice president. Anybody who cares about the future of this country had better take a long, hard look at her qualifications.

A lot of us anticipate what’s around the bend for Palin, our own Eliza Doolittle awaiting her grand remaking. Many of us have already observed this diversity game in the workplace.

Here’s how it’s played. Say a person is picked to fill a job she has not been groomed for, a position outside of her usual domain of expertise. Next, the new pick is heralded as perfect for the job, but in fact everyone knows the real reason the resume was lifted to the top of the stack is a qualification conferred upon birth.

Sometimes it’s race; in Palin’s case it’s gender.

There is nothing wrong with combing the ranks more thoroughly to bring a greater diversity of gender, age and experience to the workplace. My career has benefited from such thinking.

But the goal should be differently qualified — not unqualified.

Palin’s pithy quips play fine from the podium as a form of campaign entertainment; she is fresh counter to the stiff demeanor of McCain.

But the presidential race is not “American Idol” or a cheerleader tryout. Given John McCain’s age, and the horrific stress he endured as a POW, it is not out of line to envision Palin stepping into the presidency.

While the McCain-Palin campaign has the media parsing the meaning of “lipstick on a pig,” Russia is reasserting its imperial ambitions. Our military efforts in Afghanistan are flailing. The global financial system is buckling. The rest of the world continues to swirl with genocide, terrorism and natural disasters.

So Palin is a proud mom of a soldier. That’s laudable. But if she ends up commander-in-chief, how would she handle the delicate issue of our Special Forces pursuing the Taliban and al-Qaida across the Afghan border into Pakistan?

For that matter, does she understand the power struggle going on in Pakistan’s army and intelligence service between Taliban supporters and supposed friends of the U.S. — and how it plays when we kill Pakistani civilians?

Supporters like to point out that Palin governed a state “surrounded by two countries.” Has she ever been to Russia, or done much in Canada but hunt? How deeply does she understand the nuances of U.S. export/import markets?

The United States is in the midst of the largest real estate crisis since the Great Depression, but does Palin possess even a rudimentary understanding of how the U.S. mortgage market works? Apparently not.

She told a Colorado audience that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had “gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers.” But Fannie and Freddie, as McClatchy reported, “aren’t taxpayer funded but operate as private companies.”

Yes, taxpayers may take a hit as a result of the government takeover. But the problem with Fannie and Freddie and subprime mortgages has been regulatory failure.

I don’t envy Sarah Palin — I pity her.

The most humiliating experience a working person can have is to be plucked from the herd and placed into a job she is not able to fulfill.

The rest of us face the prospect of having to pick up the pieces when Palin inevitably fails. And we can’t afford four more years of that.

To reach Mary Sanchez call 816-234-4752 or send e-mail to msanchez@kcstar.com.

World Fanancial Turmoil

gjl — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:04:38 EDT

As the country's fanancial power houses continue to fall like house of cards the question rises as to who is responsible for allowing these institutions to run themselves to the ground. The answer since pretty obivous, the government is the one who had allowed these sector of the economy to run rampid with little supervision if any. Maybe this situation will bring some republicans to our side.

Also remember, one may fool the market but the market will always end up correcting itself. The timing could not have been better.

GJL

Huracan Bush. (Bush Hurricane) Spanish,

Willheim from Pompano Beach, FL — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:45:21 EDT

Una vez más, el presidente Bush y su banda de ineptos lobistas demuestran que son absolutamente incapaces de conducir los destinos de este gran país. Sólo el presidente mas imbécil de la historia moderna de los EU ha sido capaz de llevar al país a esta situación: por octavo mes consecutivo la tasa de desempleo ha cobrado 84,000 puestos adicionales de trabajo llegando al record de 6.1% de desempleo; el déficit ya alcanza los 482 mil millones o 3% del PBI; el país sigue llevando a cabo una absurda y costosísima guerra pagada con el dinero de los contribuyentes, un terrible proceso inflacionario; aumento ridículos de los precios de los productos de primera necesidad y los combustibles además de la tremenda crisis inmobiliaria. Durante casi 8 años los amigos del presidente de han llenado los bolsillos con recortes impositivos y aumentos de los precios del petróleo; luego de casi 8 años los ricos se han hecho aun más ricos y la clase media se ha empobrecido.

Hoy el partido republicano nos propone quedarse cuatros años en el poder; continuar con la fiesta de ineptos y angurrientos políticos que han llevado al país al borde de la recesión: más recortes tributarios, más dinero para la guerra, menos dinero para la salud y la educación; mas contaminación, menos regulaciones para las empresas, menos derechos civiles.

Mc Cain dice que el cambio está por llegar; porque no empieza cambiando las cosas en su partido primero?; Si McCain sabe cómo solucionar los problemas nacionales porque entonces no le da la receta a su presidente y cómplice George Bush para solucionar en algo los problemas nacionales y levantar en algo la imagen del partido republicano? Simplemente no entiendo como después de los terribles resultados alguien del partido republicano tiene sangre en la cara para pedir un voto a su favor; si hay algo de decencia en el partido de gobierno deberían pedir perdón públicamente por la desastrosa administración y desaparecer de la escena política por los próximos 10 años.

Quiero enviarles un mensaje de reflexión para estas futuras elecciones:

SI VAS A VOTAR.- Piensa que estamos eligiendo entre el modelo absolutamente fracasado y destructivo del presidente Bush y su banda de secuaces o una opción de cambio y reconstrucción del país que Barack Obama propone.

SI PUEDES VOTAR PERO NO QUIERES HACERLO.- Piensa que una elección es una toma de decisiones; si tu no eliges entonces dejaras que otra persona elija por ti y puede que esta no tome la más sabia de las decisiones, además si piensas que participar en la política es participar de las cosas de este mundo entonces estas negando tu presente y el hecho que de las decisiones políticas que se tomen en este momento afectan el presente tuyo y el de tu familia.

SI NO PUEDES VOTAR.- Busca a las personas cercanas a ti que pueden hacerlo y hazles saber lo importante que su decisión política y la manera en que esta va a afectar la vida de todos los que vivimos en este país.

Sinceramente.