Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2008 > September > 17 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USObama, McCain both wrong
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In a crisis politicians are just worthless. There’s nothing helpful they can do — and therefore they have nothing of value to say.
Not John McCain. Not Barack Obama. Not Barney Frank. Not Jim Martin. All are quoted in today’s AJC commenting on the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the takeover of Merrill Lynch and the Federal Reserve rescue of insurer American International Group.
McCain’s response to the rapid demise of Wall Street financial institutions was to say that “we are going to reform the way Wall Street does business and put an end to the greed that has driven our markets into chaos. We will stop multi-million dollar payouts to CEOs who have broken the public trust. We will put an end to running Wall Street like a casino. We will make businesses work for the benefit of their shareholders and employees.”
Obama is an empty suit, once again vowing that he would have been smarter, better and wiser in providing solutions — something he’s never yet demonstrated in his life. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had him pegged in her acceptance speech: “Listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate.” The problem with Obama and his rhetoric is that, in his mind, all the world’s troubles started 8 years ago and they end with his election. This is not a guy you want around in crisis, any crisis.
Then there’s Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who is part of that cozy Washington insider culture that allowed Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to operate with lax regulatory oversight, while using its profits to fund their social programs and campaigns and provide employment to the well-connected. Frank is part of the problem.
His comment to the AIG action?
“This is one more affirmation that the lack of regulation has caused serious problems. That the private market screwed itself up and they need the government to come help them unscrew it.” You wonder why politicians are unpopular? Barney Frank. Their action, or lack of it, help to create the problem — and they take no responsibility.
Even Jim Martin, the Democrat running for the U.S. Senate in Georgia, can’t resist the temptation to say stupid things. Opponent Saxby Chambliss has “been part of a system that’s been broken in Washington” and “I hold him accountable for the financial crisis we’re in,” said Martin. May-lar-kee. Chambliss has been there one term — of course, all this just started 8 years ago, as the left sees it — and during that time he’s been part of some problems, excessive spending among them. But on this Martin’s just background noise.
Right now the Bush Administration and the Federal Reserve are putting out fires that have been smoldering for decades. It is outrageous that even a dollar of taxpayer money has been required to salvage financial and now insurance firms. I’m not sold on the AIG rescue and want to see no more for financial institutions, but so far the Administration has handled the crisis properly to keep turmoil from spreading.
They’re not bailouts in the sense that taxpayers rescued investors and managers from bad decisions and reckless lending behavior. The reckless lost their investments, their companies and in many cases their jobs. The golden parachutes that would have brought Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd $8.4 million and former Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron $15.5 million have been taken away by the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
It’s probable that the failed companies are in better shape financially than the current panic among investors would suggest. It’s the panic the Administration and the Federal Reserve have to contain. Ultimately, these loan guarantee should turn out like the 1979 Chrysler Corp. guarantee. Taxpayers lost no money, but still government loan guarantees to private companies is no more desirable as financial policy than it was as industrial policy.
McCain suggests that something like a 9/11 Commission is needed and he’s right, though Obama ridicules it. The worst possible outcome now would be for Congress to dash out regulation, even of the sort McCain first suggested to combat “greed.” What’s needed is a careful analysis of how the Washington insiders and Big Money got so close that government lost its ability to regulate properly.
It started at the bottom with a system that allowed people to buy homes they couldn’t afford without checking their ability to repay and without requiring them to put down their own money. And it continued up the line. Nobody was accountable. Nobody owned the bad loans they made or took.
The solution is not more regulation. In some cases it may be less. At the end of the day, though, no private business — and especially not Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae — should exist in the marketplace with real or implied taxpayer guarantees.
Comments
By Get Real
September 17, 2008 8:48 AM | Link to this
Less regulation? Wooten you have lost it. I do agree with you on one point: none of these companies should be bailed out. But if you start bailing out the companies that approved these bad loans and reward them for their bad decisions, why not the people who bought the houses as well? Less regulation though, I mean get real. Seems to me there was none to begin with. And I wonder what your post would be like if this exact downturn occurred under Democratic leadership? Probably not the same. When are you going to put your partisan ways aside, when you know that Barney Frank did not become head of the House Financial Services committee until 2006. Subprime loans began to spring up as early as 2001. Present all the facts old man.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. Before Jim published this morning I drafted the following notes:
Perhaps Jim would agree with me that the AIG bailout is less justifiable than even that of the corrupt democrat funding organizations FNMA and FHLMC? I think AIG is more like Chrysler in the 1970s, except AIG is stronger. The core business of AIG is sound, and I have little distress that the government will lose anything on the AIG liquidity-based bailout. For anything other than an insurance company, I think bankruptcy court – chapter 11 - should have been the reasonable alternative, except that the attorneys likely would have bled it dry, and the regulatory capital requirements are a special constraint on insurance companies and banks. My sense is that the AIG failure belongs to democrat Eliot Spitzer alone.
By Peter
September 17, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this
Well folks the government is sending YOUR TAX DOLLARS to save Corporations, and now in the case of AIG they own 79.9%……..
Is the Government giving you money to bail yourself out of your problems ?
WELCOME TO REPUBLICAN LED COMMUNISM !!!!!
VOTE REPUBLICAN FOR COMMUNISM !!!!!
By Ga Values
September 17, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this
Our Conservative colume for today
Throwing away a winning hand Senate bill might scuttle momentum for the energy reform Americans want Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff Wednesday, September 17, 20083 Usually we’re in accord with Georgia’s GOP U.S. senators, Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isaakson; for the most part they are excellent public servants. And despite inappropriately wandering off the conservative reservation a few too many times, we also admire South Carolina U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham.
But this Gang of Three, which spearheaded a so-called bipartisan energy bill that grew to a Gang of 10 and in recent days to a Gang of 20, may be on the threshold of a huge mistake.
The energy measure they’re pushing, which may be voted on this week and, even worse, might pass the Senate and eventually the full Congress, is ostensibly a compromise between the two political parties. Using consumer and business tax credits — paid for by repealing tax credits to major oil and gas companies — it would transition 85 percent of the nation’s cars and trucks away from gasoline and diesel to renewable fuels by 2028.
And in a sop to the widespread public demand to “drill here and drill now,” the bill would increase domestic oil drilling to 100 miles off shore, but would permit Georgia, Virginia and the Carolinas to petition for leasing as close as 50 miles off shore.
Sounds like it might be a good “compromise” deal, but it isn’t. The four states would have to jump through a bevy of federal and state environmental regulatory hoops before they could move ahead on their 50-mile offshore leases.
The Gang of 20’s measure also cuts the heart out of the GOP House bill, which was picking up steam across the nation and has gained the tentative backing of the party’s presidential candidate, John McCain. That bill, sponsored by House minority leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, is detested by liberal Democrats and their environmental extremist allies.
Informally known as the “all-of-the-above-bill,” it, too, would encourage alternative fuels and the like, but it would also allow drilling more than three miles offshore, instead of 50 — and with fewer regulatory hoops. The measure also permits revenue sharing with the states and opens the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.
This kind of energy action is what the public has been clamoring for, and for good reason: It makes the most sense in a time of soaring fuel and energy costs that are cutting into every American’s pocketbook. So it’s beyond us why any Republican lawmaker would abandon support for Boehner’s bill, which is not only best for America, but, as a bonus, is also a winning issue for Republicans heading into the November elections.
Conservative critics rightly note that the Gang of 20’s “compromise” is much more compatible with Barack Obama’s energy policies than with John McCain’s.
It’s inexplicable to us why Chambliss, Isaakson and Graham are pushing an energy plan that falls so far short of what’s needed for the nation and robs their party of an issue that was winning it votes.
It’s like offering to split a poker pot while holding four aces in their hands.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this
I urge all to read Dr. Walter E. Williams’s essay today on the mortgage market meltdown and causation. It tracks our discussion yesterday: my arguments from 9:34, 10:49, and 1:15. I would claim genius inspiring even Dr. Williams – one of my heroes – but I found an uncomfortably similar argument that predates my discussion. I suppose our genius is not as original as we imagine. But for the unfortunate tie to another controversial character, I would cite the democrats’s role in the causation of the mortgage disaster as “chickens come home to roost.” Or, in any discussion of the role of the democrats’s policies here, as maybe “lipstick on a pig?”
Look at the sham “drilling” bill the Pelosicrats passed yesterday, a law making it even harder to drill than before – locking up some territory forever - and raising taxes for motorists in order to fund corporate welfare for well-connected “friends of leftists” who have pie in the sky energy sources that defy the laws of physics. But no new nuke plants, nothing to use abundant coal, nothing that actually works. Why would anyone let those corrupt people continue to run Congress? Everything they do is wrong.
By findog
September 17, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this
Jim, Senator Chambliss was in the House for I think eight years before his ascension, so his tenure dates back to when Speaker Gingrich came to power. However, you are only partially correct on your basic premise that politicians: one – there is nothing helpful they can do [yes]; and two — therefore nothing they have of value to say [no] they can either have a plan (neither has presented one worthy of a pot it note) or they can try to quell a panic by not blaming everything on Washington. Then again if they were to just be quite they would all be like potatoes in a microwave, “poke them with a fork or they’re going to explode.”
I eagerly await Rangar who is wiser than I in financial matters to weigh in on today’s topic.
By hillbilly ragger
September 17, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this
“Listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate.”
That’s a lie, Jim.
Why can’t your side tell the truth to make its case?
Why does it have to lie, lie, lie, and lie some more, in order to have a shot at winning?
By "The Corporal"
September 17, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this
Federal law should be changed so that the top management of any of these huge financial corporations being bailed out by the taxpayers should not be able to receive any type of “golden parachute” compensation.
By Goldie
September 17, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this
all the world’s troubles started 8 years ago and they end with his election.
WOOTEN— maybe not ALL of the world’s troubles, but the majority of them will end with Obama’s election to the White House…. Bank on it!
Of course, you, WOOTEN, can keep hoping that America gets attacked again by “those terrorists” before November, and then your guy can go back to his war-mongering and nation-building drumbeats in an attempt to win in November. Just keep clinging to that cherished thought of yours.
By Goldie
September 17, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this
John McBush— “he’d rather lose his integrity than lose an election!”
By "The Corporal"
September 17, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this
Luke Chapter 14
28For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?
29Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him,
30Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.
Wise words from the Banker of the Universe.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this
Dear real @ 8:48, perhaps this is the rest of the story an immature girl would seek?
Dear GaValues @ 9:01, great argument, I fully agree. I also liked the link yesterday, but not for the reasons you published. It persuaded me that the libertarian candidate is intellectually dishonest.
Dear Findog @ 9:03, I have a friend practicing in Memphis who pretends to be uninformed, using that as bait to snare the overconfident. You do not fool me on your financial expertise!
By Goldie
September 17, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this
Peter @ 9:00 — I believe the AIG bailout can be included with all of the other CORPORATE WELFARE that the Repugs promote year after year? Billions of our tax $$$ going to BIG OIL companies alone, and those guys are raking in BILLIONS in PROFITS — can you connect the dots as to where our tax $$$ are really going? I mean, besides going to that sinkhole in the Middle East?
Vote For Dems in November to save America!
By Ga Values
September 17, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this
Ragnar Danneskjöld
Pelosi’s drilling program is basically the program of the gang of 10 TRAITORS, whisch is led by Jim’s hero Saxby Special Interest Chambliss. McCain says Country First, Saxby says LOBBYIST First. If OBAMA is our next president thenk Saxby Chambliss.
By AmVet
September 17, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this
What a laugh.
All of this teeth-gnashing and faux erudition by sheep and arm-chair economists.
The mantra goes, “There is nothing the politicians can do…”
WRONG.
There is nothing the politicians WILL do.
They simply are indentured by their corporate masters.
Bought and paid for.
Owned, lock, stock and barrel.
And NOT ONE OF THEM, Republican or Democrat, of them will ever stop taking the dirty money.
But there is one candidate.
He has spent his life fighting the plutocrats and corporatists on behalf of Americans.
And you fools pay him no heed.
And continue the laughable woe is us mantra…
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this
Dear GaValues @ 9:01, I belatedly noticed one additional defect in the otherwise excellent litany of shortcomings in the house drilling bill. The courts are hamstringing development, in that enviroloons currently have standing to seek injunctive relief to block drilling that manages to jump through all regulatory hoops. Of course, in a rational world, the regulators would do the regulating and the courts would not recognize standing for the litigious Luddite obstructionists.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this
Dear hillbilly @ 9:03, after reading your link, I think Jim got it right the first time.
By walterrhett
September 17, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this
Carefully look at the fall of mega-financial companies through non-partisan lens!!! finding the flaws in McClain’s and Obama’s positions and crtiquing the rresponses of other elected officials who serve on national economic committees begs the question! Looking at politivcal views is exactly that: looking at political views!
Rather look at the actual failures! Ask: 1) how come the accounting firms hired by these companies give no warning of the tilt toward impossible debt? 2) How come the internal firewalls, safe guards, oversight, risk assessment committees dismally failed to sound alerts far in advance of the brink of collaspe? 3)Why, after the junk bond fiasco, the savings & loan implosion, Enron’s failure, international hoaxes by rogue traders, there is still no system in place that offers a measured, planned response to the failure of firms that affect the economic well being of the entire planet? 4)how do government and private economic leaders work together, apart from weekend meetings where they shift tens of billions of dollars w/o the public, the President, or other peers weighing in, how do these leaders arrange relationships that strenghen the system, rather provide for the “rescue” of failures?
Really, the current situation is much larger than partisan politics! The global system is at risk, and being fixed w/ band-aids! The real question is not who is right, but who will step up.
By Redneck Convert
September 17, 2008 9:54 AM | Link to this
Well, as best I can tell, I own a part of AIG now. I kinda like this notion of the guvmint owning part of whoever and whatever gets aid from it. Matter of fact, I wish they would do it with people too. For instance, if you are a welfare bum, the guvmint gets to decide what you do and what your rights are. And if you don’t pay no taxes, you don’t get to vote on weather the rest of us do.
I feel all manly this a.m. We put the needle to another criminal down in Jackson yesterday. Trouble is, it took him 14 minutes to die. Seems to me the guy was being stubborn. Seeing as how Fambly Values sort of comes with no jobs these days, this would be a good job for a GA redneck. Some good old boy could roam the death chamber with a piece of lead pipe and hurry stubborn people like this criminal along.
Anyhow, I’m awful glad all my retirement plan down at the warehouse is in beer co. stocks. Alot of people woke up yesterday a.m. to find out they were broke. Long as we got winos and potheads like Captain Freedom and TFTT, my plan got nothing to do but grow and grow.
Have a good day everybody.
This message sent by handheld wireless Blackberry, invented by Senator John S. McCain.
By Captain Freedom
September 17, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
THE Captain wonders how Cynthia McKinney Tucker managed to get her apostasy published under Mr Wooten’s name. THE Captain just had to stop at the first line:
In a crisis politicians are just worthless. There’s nothing helpful they can do.
Nice try, Commie Cindy. This is clearly just another Islamunistoliberal slander of Our Leader, who proved his worthy helpfulness when he calmly listened to My Pet Goat as the Towers fell; when he cheerfully celebrated St John’s birthday as the flood waters inundated New Orleans; when he rolled up his sleeves for one photo opportunity after another in the wake of Katrina and Ike; and just this year, when he boldly stepped forward to initiate the full nationalization of the US Banking Industry, thus cementing his reputation as the Hugo Chavez of Wall Street.
So, whatever else Ms McKinney Tucker had to say under the Wooten byline, THE Captain has managed to work up a hearty state of outrage a la Carlton Snead Fiorina excoriating that anti-woman Tina Fey.
And it is this outrage that shall fuel THE Captain’s labors today as he watches the Wall Street crash sweep away the losers and suckers who are not as smart as THE Captain and Ragweed Duznotknow. Indeed, THE Captain intends to demonstrate His faith in our sound economic fundamentals by loaning himself another $2 million dollars today. It worked for AIG!!
By Chris Salzmann
September 17, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this
Jim wants even LESS regulation? So how do you oversee greedy mortgage brokers and bankers selling mortgages to folks who cannot afford them? How do you oversee these folks from getting people into complicated mortgage deals (buy downs/upside down loans, negative equity loans, etc, etc) they just don’t understand? Less regulation??? So what are we going to rely on, Jim? Their sense of right and wrong? Wow, you and Phil (mental recession) Gramm would fit well together. Phil is right up there when it comes to folks who led the push for deregulation of the financial system the results of which we are seeing now.
McCain want’s a 9/11 commission? In Washington speak, that says “Kick it down the road”. When in doubt, always set up a commission because the end result’s going to be the same: Announce findings that were already self evident. BTW, can anyone even explain what the original 9/11 commission accomplished that we already didn’t know??? Jim, this proves you’ve really lost your marbles.
Obama an empty suit??? Try looking those up on Wikipedia, Jim. Or are you also “internet challenged” like your friend John McCain? What’s your excuse? Were you also a POW? ROFL
By Churchill
September 17, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this
A Failure Tax By JONATHAN G S KOPPELL Published: September 16, 2008 New Haven
AS venerable American financial institutions topple like dominoes, the concept of “too big to fail” is being sorely tested. Bear Stearns gets help. Lehman Brothers does not. The Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department are acting like insurance claims adjusters, selectively providing assistance when a company’s failure seems too much for the financial markets to withstand.
Why not make investment banks and other companies pay premiums for this catastrophic risk insurance? The government already provides flood, bank and crop insurance. Unlike participants in those programs, however, the companies that qualify for “too big to fail” insurance do not pay for the privilege.
Designing this too-big-to-fail insurance would be tricky but feasible. The potential economic impact of financial companies’ failure and the risk in their portfolios would have to be evaluated to determine which companies would be required to obtain this protection, and to calibrate premiums.
The goal should be to limit the contagion of failure rather than to prevent failure itself. Thus the payouts, which could still take the form of loan guarantees to parties willing to cover the failing institutions’ obligations, should not go to shareholders, who would lose all or most of their equity, but to counterparties — the banks, hedge funds and pension funds that are jeopardized by default. Still, these parties must share in the losses to reinforce the need for due diligence in securities transactions.
Critics might denounce institutional risk insurance as a tax. But so what? Forcing companies to pay for undesirable side effects is routine. The risk of a financial meltdown introduced by companies intertwined through Byzantine financial transactions imposes a burden on the government as real as pollution. The premiums could cover the costs of better regulation, a trade most stockholders would happily make today.
What’s truly radical is that government officials are empowered to determine when corporate failure is not tolerable. The question now is who should pay for the intervention.
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this
After writing, faxing and emailing Senator Chambliss, I must conclude that he does not have the good of the country at heart.
In his bill, the New ERA 2008, he cedes to the states the first 50 miles off their coasts. Guess where the best chance of finding oil is? Within the first 50 miles.
He wants to “allow” the states to decide whether or not to drill beyond the 50 mile limit.
Another idea in the bill is to take away from the consumer, what kind of cars and trucks we can buy. The Apollo Project will fund the transitioning of 85% of our cars and trucks to non-petro fuels over the next 20 years. At the tax payers expense.
Senator Chambliss has lost it and sold the overall good of the US down the tubes - metaphorically speaking. With his bill we will continue to be dependent on foreign oil while we sit on untold reserves. Between our untapped reserves of oil, natural gas and coal, (not to mention wind, solar and other non-traditional forms) we should not be dependent on any foreign country for energy.
By jm
September 17, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this
I wonder why the bond rating companies - whose downgrade of AIG accelerated this mess - are getting a free pass. After all, they were the ones who told us that all of those sub-prime loan backed mortgage securities were AAA.
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this
Chris Salzmann,
The “oversight” the lending institutions have encouraged them to open more pathways to home ownership. Remember the great 0% down loans? How about the 125% equity loans? I really loved the interest only loans.
With the regulations the lenders did not see the need to be prudent in their lending practices, Hey, the Fed’s will back us - yep Fannie Mae and Feddie Mac will back us up.
Now, we see these “progressive” lenders reaping what they sowed.
Making the lenders more responsible and cutting back on their ability to sell the notes to someone else would help all of us.
By Maniac is accurate
September 17, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this
Well, if we’re going to bail out faltering businesses, why don’t we go ahead and nationalize the oil industry to pay for it? Then show me some cheap gas and diesel.
I jest, but, dang, boy!
By Jim is a caveman
September 17, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this
Yes, Dagwood, Elliott Spitzer is the reason that AIG failed. Those executives who ran the company, chosen by the AIG board, had nothing to do with it. It was all the former gov. of NY’s fault. Brilliant deduction. Perhaps your genius isn’t really genius at all.
By findog
September 17, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this
President Roosevelt chose Joe Kennedy, inside trading stock market swindler, to develop the regulations put in place after the big crash and depression. Maybe as a get out jail free card we make these banking CEO’s take on a similar role at the rate of a dollar a year to come up with a regulatory method that: 1 – protects the economy, 2 – protects the consumer, 3 – protects the builders and suppliers, and 4 – drives the bus over those who feed off of our financial markets with dishonest practices.
Rangar @ 8:58 One other thought, F&F did not provide funds for sub-prime loans. They could only back loans that were made to people who qualified for a prime mortgage on moderate [middle class] housing. That they allowed capital to be made available for people who qualified for loans then is not a bad thing, just like people in California are not bad people. These two institutions, flawed as they were, did not create the crisis; they just saw the bubble burst and the valuations of the homes drop to where they were not prudently capitalized. I feel that a Bush-1 type resolution trust bailout of the mortgage industry would find the majority of their loans to be in the column of limited risk good banks would crave while the sub-prime’s of the other unregulated institutions would end up being those held by the government for years until they finally became viable properties.
To hold Freddie and Fannie out as the cause of the current crisis is in violation of the ninth commandment and everyone who utters it, or repeats it, is going to heck.
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this
Maniac is accurate,
Bailing out viable companies is less dangerous than bailing out non-viable corporation.
What is happening today, this week is a massive market correction brought on by fool hearty lending. Not everyone should have their own house in the suburbs. I have had relatives that lived their entire live in apartments.
If you can’t handle the note, don’t buy.
By Ray
September 17, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this
Unregulated greed, pure and simple.
By Dennis
September 17, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Jim Wooten writes, ““This is one more affirmation that the lack of regulation has caused serious problems. That the private market screwed itself up and they need the government to come help them unscrew it.” You wonder why politicians are unpopular? Barney Frank. Their action, or lack of it, help to create the problem — and they take no responsibility.”
Who are you, Mr. Wooten, to point the finger?
On any other day you would be screaming your usual trash about keeping government out and leaving the market to regulate itself.
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this
“At 35%, the United States has a higher corporate tax rate than France (34.4%), the United Kingdom (28%), Japan (30%), Germany (15.83%) and even that Scandinavian welfare state deluxe, Sweden (28%). And Barack Obama intends to keep it that way—-competitiveness be damned!” —-Don Feder
another pearl -
“[Barack] Obama… blamed the shocking new round of sub prime-related bankruptcies on the free-market system, and specifically the ‘trickle-down’ economics of the Bush administration, which he tried to gig opponent John McCain for wanting to extend. But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk sub prime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street’s most revered institutions. Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or face stiff government penalties. The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky sub prime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but ‘predatory.’ Yes, the market was fueled by greed and over leveraging in the secondary market for sub primes, vis-a-vis mortgaged-backed securities traded on Wall Street. But the seed was planted in the ’90s by Clinton and his social engineers.” —-Investor’s Business Daily
By deegee
September 17, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this
What do managers do when they don’t have a clue? Form a committee. McCain was at the center of the S&L bailout 20 years ago. The underpinnings of that disaster are the same as those of the present crisis. Can we all agree now that in a capitalist economy unsupervised industries will not police themselves after they are deregulated? We have learned that a corporation can grow to a point where it is too big to fail. The consequences of their reckless actions will fall on the federal government and the taxpayers. Over the last few months we have seen large banks being acquired by investment firms and large investment firms being acquired by banks. Where risk was spread out over a larger swath it is now becoming even more concentrated. When all is said and done, will we have even more Fannies and Freddies and AIGs that are just too big to fail? Twenty years from now will we be having the same conversation that we had twenty years ago after the S&L disaster?
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this
deegee,
Yes, a committee. A gathering of people to look into a problem and to suggest possible solutions. I would forward that it is too large for a single person to handle, even if they were a community organizer.
By Saxby got to Go
September 17, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this
After a five-week paid vacation, Democrats are back in Washington and claiming that they want to do something about oil prices.
But the problem is that their plan, which passed the House yesterday and will likely come up for a vote in the Senate later this week, will not produce a single drop of oil.
Why? Because it does nothing about environmental groups that are suing to stop drilling.
The Democratic proposal is not a death-bed conversion, it’s designed to solve their political problem. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told her members in August that they can say they are in favor of drilling, but that she wouldn’t allow a vote on a drilling bill. Now that she has been forced to, she knows her environmental allies will block new drilling from going forward.
The Sierra Club has told its members that it is “working to ensure that the final bill’s focus is on real clean energy solutions rather than expanded offshore drilling.” Democratic Rep. John Murtha, a Pelosi confidante, went further last week in noting that his party’s not above cynical politics: “This is a political month. There’s all kinds of things we try to do that will just go away after we leave.” And Legislative Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council Karen Wayland has said “This is about politics, not necessarily about policy.”
The green lobby, however, is not going away. EarthJustice, which employs over 150 people, has filed hundreds of lawsuits. On its Web site, it says “Because lawsuits can be so effective, we have a team of policy experts in Washington, D.C. that work hand-in-hand with our attorneys to stop legislative backlash …”
Indeed, incessant legal and administrative challenges make true the Democrat claim that oil from newly opened areas will not reach the market for years. These groups make use of a wide range of laws and regulations to challenge development. And they will make sure that the Democrats’ proposal is meaningless.
In February 2008, the administration issued 487 leases in Alaska’s Chukchi Sea, which holds an estimated 15 billion barrels of oil and 76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, and other groups used the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act to challenge and delay progress on all 487 leases. In a separate lawsuit, they challenged the entire national outer continental shelf (OCS) leasing program, seeking to block all future leases.
Even if a lease makes it through these challenges, it isn’t clear sailing. Right now, there are 748 leases in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. Exploration activities in every single one were challenged in May of this year by EarthJustice in conjunction with others.
The Alaskan OCS contains 26 billion barrels of oil and 132 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Not one offshore lease has escaped litigation.
And it’s not just Alaska. Wild Earth Guardians and others recently filed suit to block energy exploration on all leases in recent sales in Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas. Last year, almost 50% of gas leases in the Rocky Mountain states were protested in court.
Environmental protections are necessary. But, there must be reasonable limits on litigation.
During the oil embargo in 1973, Congress waived environmental laws for the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. That waiver, Democratic Sen. John Tunney of California said at the time, “in no way dilutes or diminishes the applicability of NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act].” Rather, he said, it “brings into balance grave concerns of national security” with our nation’s environmental safeguards. In 1996 and again in 2006, environmental laws were waived for the construction of fences along the southern border of the United States.
Absent provisions to stop abusive litigation, the bills Democrats support will not lead to oil production. Any serious energy plan would encourage the development of alternative and renewable fuels, and open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the OCS and the Western U.S. to drilling. It also would put a stop to never-ending litigation. But that’s not what Democratic leaders are offering.
We’re told that the Democrats now favor drilling. That they have seen the light after feeling the heat all summer. What’s really happening is we’re mid-way through a political hoax.
Some 70% of Americans favor increased domestic drilling. Unfortunately, if Mrs. Pelosi and her party’s leaders continue to play politics, we can be sure Americans won’t get the energy they want.
Mr. Shadegg, a Republican, is a U.S. congressman from Arizona.
By Copyleft
September 17, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this
who is part of that cozy Washington insider culture that allowed Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to operate with lax regulatory oversight
Thank you, Mr. Wooten, for acknowledging the obvious: the only way to avoid crashes and bailouts like this is to step up regulation of the irresponsible industries involved. More regulation, not less, is needed to ensure a prosperous middle-class society.
This “government is the problem” nonsense should’ve died with Reagan, or perhaps with his brain.
By "The Corporal"
September 17, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this
It’s all about greed.
“For the love of money is the root of all evil.”
I Timothy 6:10
By getalife
September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this
Fiscal conservatives should be screaming about all the corporate welfare and socialism.
Where have you been Jim? Oh, pimping Palin with country first bs. Pathetic.
And the last betrayal was capitalism in the death of America.
Hopefully, this will finally wake up America to stop trusting these corrupt politicians.
They don’t deserve our trust so stop blindly supporting them and giving them money.
Tell them to fix our broken government or shut it down. Lock the doors and stay until it is done. They can start by banning lobbyists and shutting down K Street.
And ideologue, partisan, hacks should join the unemployment line.
By deegee
September 17, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this
Sorry, Dutchman but you may be the only person that needs a committee to understand what went wrong here. Barack Obama doesn’t need one and in spite of what John McChange says publicly, he doesn’t need one either. Let’s have a 9/11 type committee formulate a color-coded warning system that will alert an anesthetized American public to the state of the economy. I suppose that today we would be seeing the color pepto-bismol pink.
By GOOD INFO
September 17, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this
It is too bad that politicians continue to exempt themselves from Do Not Call law.
StopPoliticalCalls.org is fighting for the privacy of the American voter.
1 - Creating a Political Do Not Call Registry 2 - Testifying in the US Senate about robo calls (Sen. Feinstein’s Robocall Privacy Act) 3 - Forcing states to enforce existing robo call laws (CA, MN, NJ, etc..) 4 - Getting politicians to take a do not robo call pledge (7 have)
As I testified at the US. Senate these robo calls are an epidemic and this election cycle “phone spam” and are invading the privacy of All American Voters.
Our members are taking a stand and saying enough is enough at the National Political Do Not Contact Registry at StopPoliticalCalls.org.
Here is a quote from a member recently:
“I’m a shift worker, working variable shifts. I depend on my sleep to be able to do my job safely and efficiently. I’m a locomotive engineer. Imagine the disaster were I to fall asleep, operating a freight train carrying hazardous materials in your neighborhood, due to fatigue from being awoken in my middle of the night on a continuous basis during election season. Please stop..”
Learn more.
Shaun Dakin CEO http://www.stoppoliticalcalls.org A non-profit fighting for the privacy of the American voter
By AmVet
September 17, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this
With one day shy of six weeks left before the elections, it’s time to change the discussion.
*I contend that most Americans truly want fundamental changes in our government that result in an improved America. *
There is after all little reasonable counter-argument that it has been essentially hijacked and has gone TERRIBLY awry.
The cause of this problem is that the finger pointing by both of the dominant, self-serving political parties is both disingenuous and counter-productive.
There is a better choice. And its time will come.
http://www.votenader.org/issues/national-initiative/
By Tonia
September 17, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this
And I quote:
““What people still are missing is that every growth story of the last five to ten years has been based on credit. China, commodities, real estate, hedge funds, everything was a capital-intense endeavor. Global growth was the symptom of the credit bubble,” he said.”
By aaa
September 17, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this
SO, Jim should we vote for you?
By getalife
September 17, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this
And then Jim spews for less regulation.
Retire Jim.
By Chris Salzmann
September 17, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this
Dutchman: It isn’t the tax rate that’s the issue here, its the loopholes. Most corporations don’t even pay taxes or pay a ridiculously small amount in taxes because of loopholes. Remember the 60 minutes story about Wachovia/First Union “leasing” the sewer system from a small town in Germany??? There are tons of other loopholes out there that allow corporations to avoid even coming close to that 35% figure.
By Saxby got to Go
September 17, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this
Where Saxby Chambliss gets his money::
Agri Business—-$1,368,000 Banks, Insurance, Real Estate—-$1,332,000 Lawyers & Individual Lobbyist——$641,000 Misc Business —-$679,000 Other ——$606,000..
The Agi Business got a gift of $20 billion waste from Saxby’s Farm Bill. The Banks, Real Estate & Lawyers just got a $2 TRILLION gift from the Bail Out the Banks act which Saxby & Johnny voted for. Not a bad return on your money.
By Jim is a caveman
September 17, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this
And you quote who, Tonia?
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this
Dear findog @ 10:34, while I agree that FNMA and FHLMC are not responsible in any way for any portion of the mortgage security meltdown attributable to nominally subprime loans – there really were not so many of those - I think nominally “subprime” loans are not the cause of the mortgage security meltdown. To the extent that FHLMC and FNMA contributed to the formation of the house price bubble through their funding of “interest only” loans, “adjustable rate” loans (and other inherently unsound forms of lending that became mainstream via the taxpayer backed securities), they are the main culprits. I deem the ratio 5% subprime/95% creative financing loans. Worse, the executives of FNMA and FHLMC consistently sought to grow the bubble by putting the taxpayer on the hook for ever-larger (“jumbo”) mortgages. If we had a responsible Congress that would not have put the taxpayer on the hook for any mortgage larger than, say, $200k, no bubble could have grown. Of course, the executive bonuses at FHLMC and FNMA would have been constrained also, and Congress would never let that happen to their friends.
Dear Dutchman @ 10:37, you make my argument without all of the fluff, well-said.
Dear Deegee @ 10:55, “The underpinnings of that (S&L) disaster are the same as those of the present crisis. Can we all agree now that in a capitalist economy unsupervised industries will not police themselves after they are deregulated?” The underpinnings of the S&L disaster, as in the present “crisis” – your word, not mine – are in a Congressional mandate for funding housing. Then the problem was a legislated effort to fund long term loans with short term deposits – one can defy gravity, but not indefinitely, and of course the Roosevelt-era S&L industry came crashing to earth. The unlimited taxpayer-backed spigot for FHLMC and FNMA, coupled with obscene short term profit incentives for executive management, created a bureaucracy protected by Congressional lapdogs from any meaningful executive oversight. I think we can all agree that a capitalist economy will always blow the whistle on uneconomic Congressional schemes. Can you say “medicare” or “social security?”
Dear Corporal @ various times, I think you are closer to the Truth than any other posts here.
Dear goodinfo @ 11:46, I like that idea.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this
Dear findog @ 10:34, I realize suddenly that @ 12:06 I failed to tie the loop between the house price bubble and CRA. The easy cure for CRA, one that always pleased bank examiners, was originating mortgage loans. Selling off those mortgage loans was a great way to “serve the community” without keeping the risk.
By @@
September 17, 2008 12:24 PM | Link to this
Alrighty Jim! The economically challenged @@ has arrived to offer my “expertease” on the “wall” we just hit in NYC. So I’m watching the Governor of NY (the legally blind shaker) in a press conference, wondering what he’s up to. Anyhowitzer……
Left————-to————Right — @@’s Linear Math 2+2=22
Shock waves from Wall Street endanger state finances
But just as in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in 2001, the state expects a financial slowdown from just five ZIP codes in Manhattan that will affect the rest of New York. That means even further cutbacks in state government, less revenue for cities such as Buffalo and a topic that nobody dares to openly discuss in an election year — raising taxes.
Damn New York State De-publi-cans. What the heck is wrong with just raising those taxes?
Governor Paterson, playing “Kick the Can” in New York City.
See ‘ya Jim…….gotta bail for the homefront.
By getalife
September 17, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this
The ad that won Obama this election
By deegee
September 17, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this
Ragnar, so what you are saying is “the devil made me do it.” It was funny when Flip Wilson said it and it’s still funny.
By "The Corporal"
September 17, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this
Ragnar Danneskjöld
Thank you sir. I try. I’m not the most intelligent person on these blogs but I like to think I have a little wisdom and as you know there is a big difference.
By Hillbilly Deluxe
September 17, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this
The big guys are too big to fail. Screw the little guys. Everybody keeps their commissions. Isn’t that about it in a nutshell?
By Up the Downstairs
September 17, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this
My Favorite Things ……………
Lipstick on Pitbulls and Flip Flops on Stances
Smear ads that swiftboat both candidates’ chances.
VPs that poll well because of their bling
These are a few of my favorite things
When the veep stings, attack-dog style
and the polls are bad,
I simply remember my favorite things, and then I dont feel so bad.
Pink liberal whiners, and GOP bashers
Cops weilding numbchucks at convention crashers
Speeches that say nothing yet still impress
Imagine our president wearing a dress
.
Snowflaking babies that lead to the alter
Bailing out Wallstreet when Ponzi Schemes falter
Tortured insurgents all tied up with string
These R a few of my favorite things.
.
Losing elections instead of the wars
Not teaching Johnny about dinosaurs
Russia’s white winters I see from my swing
These are a few of my favorite things.
When the veep stings, attack dog style
and the polls go bad
They simply refuse to allow paper trails
or recount the hanging chads.
By ron
September 17, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this
Good afternoon,I would like to be able to follow the 85 billion dollar loan to see where the money goes.That would be an enlightening exercise.Is 85 billion going to be enough to keep AIG afloat?I seriously doubt it.When will they be back?Next month?
No drilling inside of 50 miles unless the state wants to drill.Texas will drill one foot off shore.New England,the user of fuel oil,opted out entirely.No drilling on George’s Bank,period.No nuclear plants,no coal,nothing.What a sham of a bill.Pelosiesk,to say the least.
United States sits with it’s banking system in a shambles,it’s stock market going down,It’s energy policy is buy, baby buy,and all is well in Dem land.
Obama rubbed shoulders with his citizens last night.The ones he wants.9 million was extracted from the wallets of the Hollywood elame.Rock stars make money.Was Paris there?She’s Barak’s mentor you know.Life has become a movie for Americans.If we can’t fix it before the credits roll,too bad.We’ll run a sequeal.The next monetary bubble will be……?
By davidg11
September 17, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this
CONG. BLACK CAUCUS: HOMEOWNERSHIP KEY TO MINORITY WEALTH
Watt told attendees of the First Annual Mortgage Industry Diversity Conference in Arlington, Virginia, in October that the CBC remains committed to the removal of obstacles to home-ownership for minorities, including the elimination of disparities in mortgage lending.
“We don’t own retirement accounts, we don’t own stocks and bonds, we don’t own other real estate-but the one thing we own in our community, sometimes, is our home,” said Watt. “And those homes are disproportionately our wealth.”
not to mention everyone elses. Sheesh!
By findog
September 17, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this
Now Rangar please accept my applause [golfer level of course]
By Common Sense
September 17, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this
Jim nice compliment to Mr. Obama about an empty suit! Funny now that is has more money then you and is smarter then you!
I guess by those standards he is better than you are!
How about tomorrow’s article Governor Palin is going to visit the U.N. and the Republicans are going to call that foreign experience the next day!
I cannot believe what is going on in this country with the politics!
AMERICANS we are being played by our politicians. Can anyone tell the truth?
TRUTH DOES NOT COUNT IN THE COUNTRY!
By deegee
September 17, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this
And does anyone want to speculate which cabinet position Carly “They’re so disrespectful!” Fiorina will end up with if John McChange lands in the white house? Hopefully she made another career limiting choice yesterday and she can make her retreat to the Fox News Commentary wilderness. After she was dismissed from HP with a $21Million golden parachute that, BTW, came from the “fundamentals” that work for HP, she had the nerve to go on the 60 Minutes show and whine to Lesley Stahl that she was dissed and deserved so much more respect than what she got from the male chauvanist board of directors. What a Lulu she is.
By Grading Wooten
September 17, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this
Who does Wooten propose we want around in this crisis? the conservative pirates who caused it?
Wooten has to weigh in on the AIG bailout with more partisan sellout hack-wipe. What a waste of a great talent. Every sentence this menace to journalism writes has to conform to GOP hatespeak because of some old pledge to a conservative Professor Higgins; but it’s not so much My Fair Lady, as Lipstick on Pygmalion.
By davidg11
September 17, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this
Rep. Gary Franks elected from Connecticut in 1990, accepted membership in the CBC but soon found that, despite paying $5,000 in dues, he was never informed of some of its meetings and was locked out of others by Democrats who wanted to keep what they discussed in those meetings secret from Republicans.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this
Dear Deegee @ 12:31, although I never equated the Congress with the devil, perhaps you are onto something there.
By Dr. R
September 17, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this
As a Libertarian, I am of the belief that like letting forest fires burn to clear off the undergrowth, you need to let some investment houses fail so others will learn their lessons. But I don’t suspect that will be allowed to happen in an election year. And I also think that we’ll probably have to elect Obama and let the Democrats mess up the economy even more to prove to their followers that they do not have all the answers, as is commonly believed. You can blame Carville and Begala for convincing voters that the president “handles” the economy from the Oval Office. God help us if that ever really is the case. Free markets mean freedom to succeed and freedom to fail. Yet our coddled masses, in their unwillingness to cash in their government-protected security and go it alone, aren’t willing to buy the notion. So we get what we get. Maybe we individuals could start by no longer living beyond our means with fancy cars, plasma TVs and unnecessary gadgets we can’t afford. Perhaps we should get our own houses in order before we condemn Wall Street for the same behavior.
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this
Dear up the downstairs @ 12:47, nobody will top that. Magnificent.
Dear findog @ 12:53, “golfer level” is the most sincere applause, thanks.
By deegee
September 17, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this
Yeah, right, Ragnar. You never equated the congress with the devil until about 7 minutes ago. That’s about how long it takes John McChange to go from a deregulator to a regulator.
By Grading Wooten
September 17, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this
My Favorite Things ……………
Lipstick on Pitbulls and Flip Flops on Stances
Smear ads that swiftboat both candidates’ chances.
VPs that poll well because of their bling
These are a few of my favorite things
When the veep stings, attack-dog style
and the polls are bad,
I simply remember my favorite things, and then I dont feel so bad.
Pink liberal whiners, and GOP bashers
Cops weilding numbchucks at convention crashers
Speeches that say nothing yet still impress
Imagine our president wearing a dress
.
Snowflaking babies that lead to the alter
Bailing out Wallstreet when Ponzi Schemes falter
Tortured insurgents all tied up with string
These R a few of my favorite things.
.
Losing elections instead of the wars
Not teaching Johnny about dinosaurs
Russia’s white winters I see from my swing
These are a few of my favorite things.
When the veep stings, attack dog style
and the polls go bad
They simply refuse to allow paper trails
or recount the hanging chads.
By tcoach
September 17, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
This all started because banks and lenders were forced to offer loans and mortgages to those, let’s say unqualified individuals. The banks and other coorporations did what they are taught in school. They took advantage of the situation. They offered the loans. There was never anyone ther forcing the people to sign off on their loans. I hear many people whinning about the people on Wall Street being greedy. What about the people who were forclosed on? Where they not being greedy by trying to live far beyond their means.
There is a reason that the government bailed out these coorporations. People who had done nothing wrong would have to suffer more. There were people who had money and other types of interest in the companies recently purchased. These people had done nothing wrong and would face ruin by the poor judgment of lenders, and the greed and unwillingness to pay of the forclosed.
That is why the government bails these companies out, while not doing the same for individuals. The individual is teh only one directly hurt, I know we are all indirectly hurt too, so they should have to suffer the consequences. Had the government NEVER stuck its nose in the business of telling loan officers what crieteria to take, none of this would have happened. It is simple if the people did not have an overwhelming desire to “keep up with the Jones’ ” then the banks would have had no bad loans to be forclosed on.
I am young and own a home, no trouble paying my mortgage, do not know any of my friends that can’t pay theirs. However I have watched three houses in my neighborhood be forclosed on in the last year. Each and every single house was someone trying to live a lifestyle well beyond teh paycheck they take home.
When did it become a bad thing for people to rent?
I guess at the same time everyone began to complain that minorities can’t get a loan You people asked for this now take it.
By Sherry
September 17, 2008 1:27 PM | Link to this
Our country is going to hell in a handbasket. The high cost of fuel has driven up the production and shipping cost of everything. Consumers have nothing left over after filling the tank and paying more for the necessities of life to spend on extras, save or invest. We need to get ourselves out from under our dpendency on foriegn oil.Just as gas prices start to fall slightly and we felt like there might be hope along comes Ike and causes them to spike to an all time high. Families everywhere are wondering where else they can cut back to cover the cost of fueling up the family vehicle to get back and forth to work and take care of the necessities of life. There is no money left for relaxation and family fun. The stress level continues to rise. Most areas of the country have seen a sharp rise in their electric bill as power companies pass their increased production costs on to consumers. The price of a gallon of milk is almost as precious as a gallon of gas. The cost of every consumer product has risen sharply. Americans are stretched to the limit. Jobs are being lost, foreclosures are increasing at an alarming rate. Seems even the family pets are suffering the high cost of fuel as almost daily a sad new story is on TV about shelters being forced to euthanize record number of surrendered pets from those forced out of their homes due to foreclosure or they simply can’t afford to feed them anymore. The energy crisis in our country is far reaching and needs immediate attention. Our economy is in a sorry state of affairs directly related to the high cost of fuel. We have become so dependant on foreign oil that we have neglected to fully utilize such natural sources of energy such wind power & solar power. Along with modern technology such as plug in cars, hybrid cars, v2g technology ,and regenerative braking, technology we still seem to be floundering as a nation as to devising the best plan utilize all that is available to us and lift ourselves out of this mess we are in. We need to take our closest look at which candidates put our economy and energy crisis at the forefront of their agenda. The Manhattan Project of 2009 by Jeff Wilson
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
Chris Salzmann,
In reality, corporations pay NO TAXES. If you own a company , your cost of doing business, including taxes are passed on to the consumer. The left over is called profit.
That 35% Corporate Tax is tacked on to the cost of - take your pick - your new American made car, comes out of your pocket.
By getalife
September 17, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this
Lets socialize big oil for cheap gas.
Let’s socialize health care like Canada.
The door is open.
w killed capitalism and opened the door to socialism.
Chavez is laughing today.
By Elberton Libertarian
September 17, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this
I agree 100% with the author’s comments on BHO, what a joke Obama is!
And a note on Chambliss:
He is a RINO, a big-spending w******* to special interests (farm Bill, Gang of 10, etc.), who will be just as comfy in a Chavez-like Obama socialist government as he is in a big-government, warmongering neoconservative Bush / McCain administration.
Vote Liberty!
Barr/Root 2008 Buckley for Senate
By Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 17, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this
Dear Dr. R @ 1:16, I am not as pessimistic as you – I think people can learn and those of us who know are obliged to teach. I think even our leftists are slowly beginning to understand that every problem in the country arises from the democrat Canute believing he can command the tides. All of the most fantastic disasters seemingly spring from government activities. Social security and medicare are Damocles’s sword, and that truth is unavoidable even for leftists. The leftists whine that, if only the market would cooperate, the world would be more beautiful under their schemes; if only the leftists were smart enough to appreciate the superior beauty of freedom.
By Grading Wooten
September 17, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this
Now Jbmlaw is quoting Moe?
This is a serious crisis.
By Grading Wooten
September 17, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this
Now Jbmlaw is quoting Moe? (sword of damacles)
This is a serious crisis.
By Dutchman
September 17, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this
getalife,
That undoubtedly is the most ignorant statement I have ever heard. Socialism did what to Russia, you know the old USSR? Look what it has done to Cuba and Hugo is not doing much either. Guess where he has to go to get his heavy crude refined?
If the Canadian and British model of heath care is so great, then why is there private heath practices doing so well - or why are they all coming here?
Another thought, after we nationalize the 4-5 American oil companies, what do you think Shell, BP and the others would do?
By @@
September 17, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this
O.K., so I don’t really understand this economy stuff, but HEY!!!!!!!!!!