Monthly Archives:September 2008
FOXNews.com – Bailout in Doubt as Exec Pay Limits Gain Support – International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News
Without the bailout plan, Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke have sketched out a grave scenario for lawmakers: Neither businesses nor consumers would be able to borrow money, and the world’s largest economy would grind to a virtual halt.
Guess what? Credit means you don’t ahve the money in the first place. If you don’t ahve hte cash don’t buy the stuf
Congress needs to be told to stop and think about how bad this is..by YOU..more than once!!! Public outcry is loud but not enough to make congress listen unfortunately. Bernake is holding us hostage with this scare tactic and is deliberately causing banks to fail. Wamu was only the beginning. Read the linked article at the beginning of this paragraph.
The original speech said,
Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) — Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher said the proposed $700 billion rescue of financial institutions backed by Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke would plunge the U.S. government deeper into a fiscal abyss.
The plan by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to buy troubled assets from financial institutions would put “one more straw on the back of the frightfully encumbered camel that is the federal government ledger,” Fisher said today in the text of a speech in New York. “We are deeply submerged in a vast fiscal chasm.”
After bloomberg “updated” it it said,
“Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) — Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher said the U.S. Treasury’s proposed $700 billion rescue of financial institutions would be “a critical first step” toward calming markets even while adding to the U.S. government’s fiscal burden.
The plan by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to buy troubled assets from financial institutions “is an incremental addition to the federal government ledger,” Fisher said today in a speech in New York. Existing federal obligations in Medicare and Social Security mean “we are deeply submerged in a vast fiscal chasm,” he said. ”
This is amazing how the lies are continuing to pile up. The actual speech is contained in the story I linked to int he beginning of this post. I am including it here in case it “disappears”
Richard W. Fisher
Responding to Turbulence (With Reference to Bob Dylan, Alan Brooke, Washington Irving, Anna Fisher and Marcus Nadler)
Remarks before the Money Marketeers of New York University
New York City
September 25, 2008
Thank you, John [Partlan].
I haven’t been in these rooms for some 30 years. The Downtown Association used to be a haunt of some of the partners of the firm where I started my career—the venerable, now 190-year-old and still-thriving private bank, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. I went to work there for the legendary Robert Roosa after graduating from Stanford Business School in 1975. He and the partners of Brown Brothers taught me money and banking and provided me the analytical training and insights that made for whatever successes I have had, including the investment performance record cited by John in his kind introduction.
Most important, it was Mr. Roosa, God rest his magnanimous soul, who set me on the path that led to the Federal Reserve. He had played a signal role in the development of the New York Fed’s operations and later served with great distinction as President Kennedy’s undersecretary of the Treasury before joining Brown Brothers. During his long career, he mentored many good men—from Paul Volcker, who was his deputy at Treasury, to Mike Long, who became a key general partner at Brown Brothers and whom I am very honored to see here tonight, to a few lesser characters like me. All of us take pride in having been members of a small fraternity that was very much “sub-Roosa.”
That was then; this is now. Little about the fraternity I currently belong to—the Federal Reserve System—is sub-rosa, or secretive. Chairman Ben Bernanke has just completed two days of testimony before Congress, and I doubt anything I can say tonight will be any more comprehensive than what you heard from him these past two days. So I will make little effort, neither in this speech nor the Q&A that follows, to review or amplify upon the chairman’s testimony. Instead, I am going to focus my comments predominantly on monetary policy, the bedrock mission of the Federal Reserve System. As always, the views I will express this evening are my own and not those of any other participant in the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) or the Federal Reserve.
As I was preparing this speech against the background of recent fast-moving events in the financial markets, I couldn’t help but think of Bob Dylan’s song “It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding).” One of my favorite lyrics in that song is: “Money doesn’t talk, it swears.” Financial institutions have been bleeding, and the markets have been cussing up a blue streak lately. So I thought I would share with you tonight some perspectives on where we have been, what we have done, where we are now and where this might lead us.
Let me begin by reviewing where we have been on monetary policy by dispatching the excessive attention that has been given to my dissenting votes this year on the Federal Open Market Committee. The morning after our meeting on Sept. 16, the headline in the business section of the world’s most important daily … The Dallas Morning News … read as follows: “Bernanke, Fed Colleagues Decide to Keep Rates Steady; Even Dallas’ Fisher Concurs.”
The less parochial among you may have read Hong Kong’s Asia Times on Sept. 18, which had this gem of an analysis on the meeting: “Like an old-time cowboy, [Ben Bernanke]’s got all his ‘little doggies’ back into the pen. Dallas Federal Reserve [Bank] president Richard Fisher, the leader of an anti-Bernanke insurgency calling for higher interest rates to fight inflation since spring, fell in line this time with the rate hold [at 2 percent], making the statement unanimous.” To which the writer appended: “… if the choice was between the health of the economy and the restoration of Bernanke’s authority, it seems that the economy got the nasty end of the stick.”
I am not sure what was meant by that last clause about the end of the stick. But I can tell you this: Ben Bernanke, whose authority as chairman has never been in question, is no cowboy. And I am no “doggie” (though our family does own a handsome herd of Longhorns and a fine breeding bull named, incidentally, Irrational Exuberance; I consider these noble animals, so the term in itself is hardly insulting). Nor am I a member of, yet alone a leader within, what some cynical writer imagines is an “anti-Bernanke insurgency.” I am a member of a group of earnest policymakers, which includes the chairman, that places the health of the economy and the proper conduct of monetary policy above any personal interests or intrigue.
The FOMC met on Sept. 16, the day after the Lehman announcement and as the New York Fed was wrestling with AIG. As we prepared to meet, fed funds were trading at up to 5 and 6 percent, triple the targeted level, even as the open market desk was injecting prodigious amounts of liquidity into the system. And we met on the eve of some $89 billion in one day’s withdrawals from money market funds. The problem was clearly not the fed funds rate target. A rate cut was not, and is not, the cure for an economy where many banks cannot expand their balance sheets, or must shrink their balance sheets, because of capital constraints. The case for a rate rise seemed both less urgent and potentially disruptive given the clear and present danger of an imploding financial system and the considerable downside risks to the economy should that implosion occur. This “little doggie” entered the pen not because Ben Bernanke or anybody else had herded me there. Rather, I did so because I felt, as others at the table did, that holding the fed funds rate steady at 2 percent was the right thing to do while our colleagues at the New York Fed and at the Treasury turned to dealing with the risk of AIG and other choke points in the markets.
This does not mean that I or anybody else at the table have abandoned our primary job as central bankers to deliver upon our mandate to provide the monetary conditions for maximum sustainable noninflationary employment growth. We do our duty when we vote with that mandate in mind, even if it means not satisfying the pundits or market operators who wish for us to accommodate their more immediate needs.
I take this charge very seriously, as does every other member of the committee. If the author of that Asia Times article, or any of you, wishes to place in perspective my votes—or those of Charlie Plosser of the Philadelphia Fed or Bill Poole of St. Louis, or those last year of the Boston Fed’s Eric Rosengren or the Kansas City Fed’s Tom Hoenig or any other member of the FOMC—he might benefit from reading Andrew Roberts’ magnificent new book, Masters and Commanders. It tells the story of Churchill and Roosevelt and their top aides as they sought to negotiate the Second World War. Sir Alan Brooke was Churchill’s equivalent to Roosevelt’s Gen. George Marshall. On more than one occasion, Brooke openly refused to fall into line with Churchill, and often articulated arguments that differed from the consensus of the war cabinet meetings. A critic considered him an insurgent and told him so, saying that it would appear that he might not hold the prime minister in highest regard. To which Brooke replied: “I adore him tremendously … but the day that I say I agree with him when I don’t is the day he must get rid of me because I am of no use to him anymore.”
In a committee such as the FOMC, the best service a member can render is to show his or her affection for the institution, its members and especially for its chairman by calling it as he or she sees it.
In my view, the situation this year has been as follows:
Since the beginning of the year, I have been worried about the efficacy of reducing the fed funds rate given the problems of liquidity and capital constraints afflicting the financial system. As I see it, the seizures and convulsions we have experienced in the debt and equity markets have been the consequences of a sustained orgy of excess and reckless behavior, not a too-tight monetary policy.
There is no nice way to say this, so I will be blunt: Our credit markets had contracted a hideous STD—a securitization transmitted disease—for which lowering the funds rate to negative real levels seemed to me to be not only an ineffective treatment, but a palliative and maybe even a stimulus that would only encourage further mischief.
I was and I remain skeptical that lowering the fed funds rate is the most effective antidote for such a pathology, given that, in my book, rates held too low, too long during the previous Fed regime were an accomplice to that reckless behavior. A fed funds rate of around 3 1/2 percent—that was the level at which I began to stray from “the pen”—did not appear to me to be the principal problem, particularly with commodities prices soaring and incipient inflation coming to our shores from demand-pull pressures and rising labor costs in the countries that we use to source the inputs needed to run our manufacturing base and stock the shelves of our retail stores.
I would be happy to go into further detail during the Q&A period about my concerns this past year for the risk of inflation “pass through.” Again, that was then; this is now. But we certainly were seeing it continue as we entered the third quarter, even as the financial crisis was reaching a crescendo. On Sept. 5, almost at the moment the Treasury announced it had taken Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship and the stock market had once again turned dyspeptic from fears of an economic slowdown, the customers of Georgia-Pacific woke up to find a note dated Sept. 4: “Please be advised that the Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP is increasing prices up to 10% with selected items increasing more than 10%, on commercial towel, tissue, napkins, wipers, dispensers, soap, aire [sic], and specialty products due to continued cost increases…. Orders shipped on or after Monday, December 1, 2008, regardless of order date will be invoiced at the new prices.”
On the day that notice was mailed to Georgia-Pacific’s customers, oil had fallen to $106.23 after peaking at $145.66 on July 11, the dollar had rallied to $1.42 on the euro from $1.60 over the same period, and the benchmark Goldman Sachs commodity index overall had come off a July high of 473.97 to close at 374.55. I single out this interestingly timed notice to illustrate a broader phenomenon of well-managed companies determined to preserve their margins after years of upward-creeping cost pressures, despite the retrenchment of commodity prices. I suspect that this risk, while muted, still lingers. Only days after the FOMC met on the 16th, FedEx, for example, announced that its “U.S. express-delivery unit would raise its shipping rates by an average of 6.9 percent in January.”
But I digress. The problem that has been ailing capital markets and, by extension, the economy has not been the fed funds rate. It has been and remains risk aversion and uncertainty about counterparty risk and capital adequacy.
It may be useful to review the emergency initiatives taken by the Federal Reserve as the hemorrhaging patient was being rushed into the ER:
First, there was the administration of various emergency efforts to stabilize the situation. The Federal Reserve created three new facilities: the TAF, or term auction facility; the TSLF, or term securities lending facility; and the PDCF, or primary dealers credit facility. We used these improvised devices to intravenously inject liquidity in amounts and on terms that were unprecedented.
We worked with other “ERs” as we saw the infection spread and take on global dimensions. We established and expanded our swap lines with the Europeans and the British and the Swiss and the Canadians and the Japanese (and just this week with the Norwegians, Swedes, Aussies and Danes). Together, these central banks injected sizable amounts of liquidity to satisfy dollar demand in their respective home markets.
And, working with the Treasury, we cauterized certain blood vessels that seemed to burst almost spontaneously and threaten the system, like Bear Stearns and AIG and debilitated money market funds.
Meanwhile, other responders were at work—from the Federal Housing Administration, to the Federal Home Loan Banks, to the Securities and Exchange Commission, to the Treasury, to the Congress. As they collectively sought to contain the disease, they applied emergency treatments ranging from extending lines of credit, to constricting short selling, to easing capital requirements, to putting the government-sponsored enterprises into conservatorship, to negotiating the dissolution of iconic financial institutions, to backstopping money market mutual funds, to passing bills to support these various piecemeal efforts.
These various efforts were reactive responses. They were as deliberately and thoughtfully crafted and administered as they could be under the unusual and exigent circumstances. But they were necessarily ad hoc. We were fast reaching a point where a more comprehensive, coordinated solution was needed. Given that you are all New Yorkers, I am sure you read the Sunday Times. So I am not divulging any great secrets in saying that Ben Bernanke, a careful student of the Depression of the 1930s and other crises, had long been warning the secretary of the Treasury and others that a more comprehensive solution might be required. He pressed especially hard on this front after the events surrounding our last FOMC meeting. You know the outcome: A proposal by the Treasury was sent to Congress Saturday, and both the secretary and the chairman have been reviewing the merits of the proposed “package” with Congress these past few days.
So now a proposal has been made to isolate and quarantine the principal source of this debacle, the toxic mortgage and mortgage-related bacteria, by placing it under a TARP, or “Troubled Asset Relief Program.” All parties have recognized that this proposal entails risk, not least of which is that every lobby will seek to sweep other festering sores—from credit card receivables to auto loans—under the TARP. The president of the United States summed up the sense of urgency last night in no uncertain terms.
As you heard Chairman Bernanke testify, the key strategy in the Treasury proposal is that by gathering these distressed assets under the TARP and auctioning them off in a prudent manner, something closer to a “hold to maturity” price, rather than a panic-based “fire sale” price, can be determined. This process would give banks a basis for marking their portfolios to a more realistic level, allowing them to clear the air and stabilize their capital base. By removing diseased mortgages and curing the credit market patient, creditors can begin getting back to the business of funding commerce and economic growth.
One could make the argument that isolating the infected assets that were the most active sources of contagion is a necessary but still insufficient condition for restoring a healthy credit system. That argument would suggest that once the TARP, or whatever comes of it, passes through the political process and debilitating toxic assets are removed from balance sheets, we must next go about buttressing the equity side of the balance sheets of the system’s key agents. I believe that after something along the lines of the Treasury proposal is enacted, that is the next task. The Street and the authorities must put their shoulders to the wheel, and I will be interested in hearing your ideas about how this might be accomplished.
Even before tackling the task of cementing capital adequacy, we need to bear in mind that the TARP places one more straw on the back of the frightfully encumbered camel that is the federal government ledger. Other off-balance-sheet liabilities were already in place before Washington took on additional burdens from the reorganization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and whatever we realize—which may, after all is said and done, be a positive return—from the liquidation of collateralized loans made through the Fed to Bear Stearns and AIG, and now the Treasury’s discharging of “x” dollars of mortgage-related securities for which there is presently no palpable market. (I say “x” because under the proposal made, the taxpayers’ outlay is not $700 billion; it is the difference between $700 billion and the return earned on that $700 billion investment.)
Foremost among the existing liabilities are some $13 trillion in unfunded Social Security benefits and Medicare obligations already promised to the people but as yet unfunded, an obligation that the Dallas Fed staff estimates at a present value of over $80 trillion. The former comptroller general of the United States, David Walker, estimates the Medicare deficit to be less, only $34 trillion, so let’s work with his less-excitable numbers. With everything including Social Security and Medicare properly accounted for, Mr. Walker estimates that “as of September 30, 2007, the federal government was in a $53 trillion fiscal hole, equal to $455,000 per household and $175,000 per person.”
We are deeply submerged in a vast fiscal chasm. Which begs the question: Is it possible, now that so many distinguished senators and congressmen are proclaiming their concerns for the price tag of the Treasury proposal and are ardently defending the interests of the taxpayer, that one of the outcomes of this debate will be that Congress, which alone has the power to tax and spend, will finally face up to the task of squaring the nation’s books?
John Plender, writing in the weekend edition of the Financial Times, reminded us of economist Hyman Minsky’s dictum that fiscal activism and last-resort loans more often than not set the stage for serious inflation.
Whether or not Minsky is right depends in part on those who have the power to tax and spend the people’s money. They can use this crisis as a call to arms for coming to grips with our fiscal predicament, or they can punt by asking our children and their children to do what they cannot bring themselves to do. Or, just as awful, they can turn to the Fed to print their way out of their dilemma and encumber future generations of Americans with the debilitating burden of debased money.
Two weeks ago, I was blessed with the birth of a grandchild. Her name is Anna. For Anna’s sake, I pray that those with the power of the purse will take the high road and come to grips with our nation’s fiscal predicament either through deft management or enlightened fiscal initiatives. And I pray that Congress will resist the temptation to hinder the Federal Reserve’s independence and instead allow us to implement policy unencumbered by political exigency. For if they don’t and the people who deliberate monetary policy in the Fed’s hallowed halls are no longer able to do their Alan Brooke-ian best to tell it like it is and act accordingly to provide the monetary conditions for sustainable noninflationary growth, I will fear for Anna’s future.
Very serious matters are before us, and they require the most thoughtful responses from all parties concerned—from the Fed, to the administration, to the ultimate representatives of the people, the Congress. Mind you, this is not the first time that the capital markets have forgotten that there are consequences to indiscriminate behavior. Consider this description of what we have experienced:
“Every now and then the world is visited by one of these delusive seasons, when ‘the credit system’ … expands to full luxuriance: everybody trusts everybody; a bad debt is a thing unheard of; the broad way to certain and sudden wealth lies plain and open; and men are tempted to dash forward boldly from the facility of borrowing.
“Promissory notes, interchanged between scheming individuals, are liberally discounted at the banks…. Every one now talks in [bodacious amounts]; nothing is heard but gigantic operations in trade; great purchases and sales of real property, and immense sums [are] made at every transfer. All, to be sure, as yet exists in promise; but the believer in promises calculates the aggregate as solid capital.…
“Now is the time for speculative and dreaming or designing men. They relate their dreams and projects to the ignorant and credulous, dazzle them with golden visions, and set them maddening after shadows. The example of one stimulates another; speculation rises on speculation; bubble rises on bubble; every one helps … to swell the windy superstructure.…
“Speculation is the romance of trade, and casts contempt upon all its sober realities. It renders the [financier] a magician, and the Exchange a region of enchantment.… No ‘operation’ is thought worthy of attention that does not double or treble the investment. No business is worth following that does not promise an immediate fortune.… The subterranean garden of Aladdin is nothing to the realms of wealth that break upon [the] imagination.
“Could this delusion always last, … life … would indeed be a golden dream; but it is as short as it is brilliant.”
That was not recently written by Martin Wolf of the Financial Times or David Brooks of the New York Times or Paul Gigot of the Wall Street Journal. It was written by Washington Irving in his famous Crayon Papers about John Law’s “Mississippi Bubble” fiasco of 1719. Irving had never heard of a subprime mortgage or an Alt-A loan, an SIV, a CDS, a CLO or a CMO. But he understood booms propelled by greed and tomfoolery and busts born of fear, and that these underlying forces are deeply rooted in human DNA.
If this is a DNA issue, perhaps no financial system—no matter how enlightened its central bank or sophisticated its regulatory architecture or wise its Congress or executive—can prevent nature from running its course. Still, our country is the most advanced in the world. We have been at the forefront of innovation and structural advancement in biology and science and technology, in culture and management and commerce and countless other fields. We must continually strive to be at the forefront of figuring out how to corral the “little doggies” that are the financial markets’ animal spirits in a way that encourages them to work their magic of underwriting prosperity and yet discourages their straying from the pasture. This is not an easy thing to do. But if we want to preserve our way of life, and do what is right for Anna and future generations of Americans, we must get it done.
Let me wrap up this long monologue by going back to the origins of this club. At times like this, it is easy to become melancholy and bitter and cynical. This club, the Money Marketeers, was founded by Marcus Nadler, one of John’s and my predecessors at the Federal Reserve who was there “at the creation.” You will remember that Nadler put forth four simple propositions to counter the intellectual paralysis and down-in-the-mouth pessimism that gripped the financial industry after the Crash of ’29:
“You’re right if you bet that the United States economy will continue to expand;
“You’re wrong if you bet that it is going to stand still or collapse;
“You’re wrong if you bet that any one element in our society is going to ruin or wreck the country;
“You’re right if you bet that men in business, labor, and government are sane, reasonably well informed and decent people who can be counted on to find common ground among all their conflicting interests and work out a compromise solution to the big issues that confront them.”
This became known as “Old Doc Nadler’s Remedy,” and for my part, it is spot on. Every red-blooded American should keep it in mind.
About the Author
Richard W. Fisher is president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
1. “It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding),” by Bob Dylan, Bringing It All Back Home,1965.
2. “Holding the Line: Bernanke, Fed Colleagues Decide to Keep Rates Steady; Even Dallas’ Fisher Concurs,” The Dallas Morning News, Sept. 17, 2008, p. 1D.
3. “Ben First, Economy Last,” by Julian Delasantellis, Asia Times, Sept. 18, 2008.
4. President Plosser voted against the majority on March 18 and April 30. President Poole voted against the majority on Jan. 22, 2008. President Rosengren cast a dissenting vote on Dec. 11, 2007. President Hoenig cast a dissenting vote on Oct. 31, 2007. All voting records are publicly available at www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomccalendars.htm.
5. Letter addressed “Dear Valued Customer,” by Dennis B. Shearer, vice president, commercial sales, Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP, Sept. 4, 2008.
6. “FedEx Delivers Plan to Weather Downturn,” by Justin Baer, Financial Times, Sept. 19, 2008, p. 20.
7. “A Professor and a Banker Bury Old Dogma on Markets,” by Peter Baker, New York Times, Sept. 21, 2008, www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21paulson.html.
8. “Storms on the Horizon,” by Richard W. Fisher, remarks before the Commonwealth Club of California, San Francisco, May 28, 2008.
9. “Washington Must Heed Fiscal Alarm Bell,” by David Walker, Peter G. Peterson Foundation, Sept. 22, 2008, www.pgpf.org/newsroom/oped/ft/.
10. “Capitalism in Convulsion: Toxic Assets Head Towards the Public Balance Sheet,” by John Plender, Financial Times, Sept. 19, 2008, www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b210deec-8675-11dd-959e-0000779fd18c.html.
11. “A Time of Unexampled Prosperity,” by Washington Irving, in The Crayon Papers, 1890.
FOXNews.com – 11 Children, Including Family of 9, Abandoned – Local News | News Articles | National News | US News
Nine of the children came from one family. The six boys and three girls were left by their father, who was not identified, at Creighton University Medical Center’s emergency room. Unrelated boys ages 11 and 15 also were surrendered Wednesday at Immanuel Medical Center.
The law, which went into effect in July, initially was intended to protect infants. In a compromise with senators worried about arbitrary age limits, the measure was expanded to include the word “child,” which wasn’t defined. Some have interpreted this to mean anyone under the age of 19.
At least 14 children have been abandoned under the state’s safe haven law since it took effect.
Todd Landry, director of Health and Human Services’ division of Children and Family Services, said that in nearly every case, the parents who left their children felt overwhelmed and had decided they didn’t want to be parents anymore. None of the kids dropped off so far has been in danger, Landry said.
I totally forgot to lbog about this looming disaster. You can simply decide you don’t want to be a parent and abandon your child(ren) on a lark. So far these “parents” have done just that.
All of them..Bush, Bernake, Paulson are pushing a huge fraud upon the american public. The spin machine is starting now since the panic mahcine has met a wall of resistance. in an earlier post i’ve shown how the Fed is pulling money out of hte banking sysem at an enormous rate. This is a classic way to raise the stakes by causing a cataclysmic disaster.
Frnakly, The american automakers screwed up big time and of course now they are also getting bailed out. The 700 Billion is just the begginning if you don’t contact your federal reps yesterday..loudly and often.
Watch this video first:
It gets better though. Here’s the post for the above video. More details are leaking out though. Like the fact the Bush administration has been sitting on this bailout plan for months now. This means this mess was allowed to happen for the express purpose of financial socialism. I like these 14 questions for these shiesters. This whole thing looks like a nigerian 419 scam. Frankly this should result in people being criminally prosecuted and if congress signs off on htis allof them should be impeached. I think Bush at this point should be removed…now.
If you put a deposit into these firms..you are either stupid or insane. Stay away from these frauds.
I am so glad this household runs on cash. It’s tough to be sure but we don’t ahve looming depbts over our heads we can’t pay either.
Gingrich to Biden: You’re a ‘socialist’
“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” said Sen. Biden, D-Del. “It’s time to be patriotic, time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”
Bailout backlash builds across the board – Avi Zenilman – Politico.com
This is the scariest part of the “plan”
“non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”
You always see the true colors of somebody right before they leave office. Bush is a socialist..plain and simple.
I am sooooo sick of hearing this. Obama doesn’t have the experience, Palin doesn’t have the experience. I am listeneing to The American View episode 172. John Lofton whom i normally respect has this all wrong. Talk about the Constitution and the Constitutional qualifications..that’s what matters..not the rest of this huburistic garbage.
Leo Laporte in his latest techguy podcast saying they are making “windfall” profits and that the gov’t should step in and stop them. Leo needs to realize that if you don’t like it…DON’T USE IT!
Wait until the mother of all bailouts happens. It won’t be bilions it will be trilions. The gov’t now owns nearly half of all mortgages out there, the largest insurance company, and soon even more. This is purely socialism under the guise of free markets.
This is not a libertarian group but a murderous cult. My boss’s son is Down’s afflicted but he is far from being non-productive. He’s 26, and works well. He’s a bit complusive but you avhe to realize he has the EMOTIONAL mentality of a much younger person..teenager perhaps. I honestly believe with a SMALL amount of supervision he could live on his own. Had his parents followed this lunatic’s advise the world would have one less very special person on this planet.
Barr Tries to Kick McCain, Obama Off Texas Ballot – America’s Election HQ
Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr has filed a lawsuit in Texas demanding John McCain and Barack Obama be removed from the ballot, saying they missed the official filing deadline.
Texas law requires that written certification of the party’s nominees be delivered before 5 p.m. of the 70th day before Election Day. This year, the deadline fell on Aug. 26.
Barr’s campaign contends that because neither candidate had been nominated by the official filing deadline, it was impossible for them to file under Texas law.
The thing is..he’s absolutly right. Obama did not claim the nomination until August 27th. McCain did not claim the nomination until Sept 4th. There’s no way either of them could have filed. I am hoping the Texas Supreme court actually follows and enforces state law. Stay tuned this could be huge.
It’s a wildy popular product and Biizzard has run it lean and mean. Read the linked article for details.
Fed rescues AIG, Barclays buys Lehman U.S. unit – Yahoo! News
AIG will pay interest at a steep 8.5 percentage points above the three-month London Interbank Offered Rate, equal to about 11.4 percent. That gives AIG a big incentive to embark on a massive asset sale program to pay back the loan quickly.
AIG’s bailout brings to about $900 billion the total of U.S. rescue efforts to stabilize the financial system and housing market. Authorities may get much of that sum back provided asset prices don’t continue to slide.
“In current circumstances, a disorderly failure of AIG could add to already significant levels of financial market fragility and lead to substantially higher borrowing costs, reduced household wealth and materially weaker economic performance,” the Fed said in a statement.
Senior Fed staff told Reuters that AIG’s broader business ties and its retail products meant a rescue was necessary, unlike in Lehman’s case.
AIG faced a cash crunch after $18 billion of losses over three quarters, largely because of complex securities that are tied to mortgages, and which plunged in value as the nation’s housing crisis deepened.
Investors and credit rating agencies grew more doubtful that AIG could offset its losses with enough capital, which became prohibitively costly to raise as its share price plunged.
They too shall be taken over by the fed. Of course none of htis is actually on the public books are the national debt would be many trillions higher than they are saying. don’t forget page 2’s morsel, “But Whalen said the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and Congress should “immediately devise” and announce a plan to backstop the FDIC with up to $500 billion in borrowing authority to meet cash needs for closing or selling failed banks.
“While the FDIC already has a credit line in place and this figure may seem excessive — and hopefully it is — the idea here is to overshoot the actual number to reinforce public confidence,” Whalen wrote in a note to clients. “Simply having Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson or Ben Bernanke making hopeful statements is inadequate. Like it says in the movies: ‘Show us the money.'”
I saw this coming this morning but only could post a minute ago about it. This means now the gov’t owns most of hte mortgages in this country and now the largest insurance agency. Folks..socialism is so close..just nobody is looking at it right now and it’s right there staring us in the face. Supposedly this was to stop a worldwide meltdown..it’s really another attempt to bandaid an already broken system. The gov’t has printed nearly 1 trillion dollars out of thin air…the next couple of preses are going to ahve a hard time as is the entire country for a while..unfortunately.
*Edit* The big Picture has a ton of links and information about this story. there’s one list at the beginning that irritates me:
Here are 4 items regarding the AIG bailout that are worth thinking about:
1) AIG is the world’s biggest insure. Had they gone belly up, they might have turned the current recession into a depression;
2) AIG was a huge Credit Default Swap writer, and that insurance required collateral to be posted, depending upon such factors as credit rating and credit spreads;
3) Hence, why this was a liquidity issue, not an insolvency problem;
4) Moral Hazard, successful avoided in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy, was put aside given the massive size of AIG — if any firm was too big to fail, it was them.
LET IT FAIL!!! it’s going to suck for everyone..IT NEEDS TO SUCK and turn off the debt firehose!!!!
I wnated to post this earlier in the morning but i was too busy…soooo:
FOXNews.com – Market Rebounds Slightly After Biggest Drop in Years, AIG Still Teeters – Local News | News Articles | National News | US News
Investors worry its failure would pose an even greater threat to the U.S. financial system than the collapse of Lehman. AIG stock was down as much as 60 percent Tuesday.
Late Monday night, all three major credit rating agencies cut AIG’s ratings at least two notches. While the new ratings are all still considered investment grade, they add pressure on AIG as it seeks tens of billions of dollars to strengthen its balance sheet.
New York Gov. David Paterson said Monday he would support a measure allowing it to use $20 billion of assets held by its subsidiaries to pay for its business — essentially giving it a bridge loan from itself.
A collapse of AIG would force Wall Street to untangle the complex credit derivatives markets and send the market scrambling to figure out who owes what to whom — or even who owns what.
Vox day has this one nailed. This is the failure of the socialcrats and outright greed. this is not the failure of hte capitalistic market system. The gov’t should not have stepped into freddie, fanny, indymac, or BS. They should have all failed and brought risk back into this market. They have only dealyed the inevitable. right now our mortage is a 30 year fixed mortgage. We didn’t pay much ofr the house as it was an estate sale. I’ll be watching hte housing market value around here though as we have one new development that finished and another one that just getting started. With the markets the way they are I don’t know if hte developer is realisticlaly going to be able to do much with the land for 10 years if it wants to stay afloat..depending on how leveraged they are it may never get off the ground.
Hey guys. it didn’t work here. It’s not going to work there. It’s time for the debt spigot to get turned down to a trickle since it’s the debt firehose that started this mess. More of hte same won’t fix anything.
Obama wants socialism..not regulation. mcCain wants to leave the debt spigot on..that’s not worked so far now has it?
Honestly? The real problem is MCcain himself. Just go research mccain-feingold to see how radically against hte Constitution he really is. Palin is a smokescreen. Both johadobama and mccinsane are going to be very very bad for this country..go Ron Paul via the writein!!!!
Dr. Laura is still going to vote for Mccain in the mistaken belief that it’s one less vote for obama. The only way to get this corruption out of our gov’t is to not continue to fall for the two party system lie!!!!
Checkout this older post from the blog
Read the last paragraph. I was going through the archives for curiosities sake and came across this post. That event was the culmination of a bad time for me and honestly it’s still hanging around. Damping my enthusiasm for the very church I was very excited about…and has has also dampened my relationships within my church and with Christ. Talking about conviction..I was an “infectious” Christian then. Now i’m just wading through the one of the darkest times in my walk of faith. My faith is not shaken and I know what awaits me when I die..my joy about it here on earth has faded and that’s not good. It was quite amazing when i looked back at that post and remembering that time and compared it to now. It’s time I got right with God and get this ship called my household turned back into God’s wind…It’s going to be work..i want that enthusiasm again.
P.S. We still have thos chairs…:)
This is the status page for a community who’s server I manage. This attack took out entire isp’s and another client of mine was also affected by this. Take a read for a look at how this DDOS(Distributed Denial of Service) attack worked.
State’s attorney accused of skipping out on child support
“When we first separated, we had an agreement that I pay her $200 a month. I paid that amount, and much more at times, until she got a different job,” Charles Smith wrote in the statement. “After that happened, we’ve had a standing agreement that neither of us owed the other child support because there have been years that her income was higher than mine, and vice-versa.”
I quote an earlier part of the article:
The papers state that the court ordered Smith (R) to pay $209 per month for the couple’s two children, now 13 and 14. As of Aug. 1, he owed $19,444 in back child support, the papers state.
Another section sounds like a typical deadbeat parent excuse:
“We always have had shared physical custody, the kids splitting time at each household, and have always shared expenses 50/50, reimbursing each other frequently if someone was out-of-pocket more than the other,” Charles Smith said in his statement. “I have never once asked for child support all these years, nor has she.”
There’s one huge issue here. Mr. Smith is under a court order to pay the money. His excuses about physical custody mean nothing as in Maryland custody decisions are independent of child support. OOP reimbursements if they aren’t covered by the court order don’t mean a thing when it comes to paying your child support. For someone who makes 2-4 times my entire HOUSHOLDS income for him to skip out because of the statements above is ridiculous. Mr. Smith, pay your child support..all of it..immediately and stop giving excuses. You profess to be a Christian AND you are a state’s attorney. You are in office to enforce the law not break it. I say if you don’t immediately pay up everything owed and start paying monthly as per the court order then you Mr. Smith should be removed form office as someone who thumbs their nose at the law should not be in a position to enforce it.