Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

'Too Big to Fail' Is Too Big -- Period

By Jim Hightower, Creators Syndicate. Posted April 4, 2009.


The "too big" claim forms the rationale for the diversion of regular people's money into rich people's pockets.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

As skiers and backcountry hikers know, a whiteout is a blizzard that's so intense that those caught in it can't even see the blizzard.

That's how I think of the Wall Street bailout now swirling around us. So many trillions of our tax dollars are being blown at the financial giants that we're blinded by the density of it, unable to see where we are or know what direction we're headed.

However, one way to get your bearings in this bailout blizzard is to focus on the central point that both the bailors (Washington) and the bailees (Wall Street) keep pounding as an irrefutable truth that everyone simply has to accept -- namely, the institutions being rescued are too big to fail.

Even sheep know to flee when coyotes howl in unison -- and we commoners need to confront the absurdity of this "too big" claim, which forms the rationale for the entire diversion of regular people's money into rich people's pockets.

Wachovia, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Bank of America, AIG -- omigosh, cried the Powers That Be, these behemoths are linked to every other behemoth, so if we don't stuff them with tax dollars ... well, we have no choice, because they're just too big for the government to let fail.

Point No. 1: They have failed. They are kaput. It costs more to buy a snickerdoodle than to buy a share of Citigroup stock. AIG is 80 percent owned by you and me, the taxpayers. These once-haughty outfits are insolvent -- wards of the state.

Point No. 2: If they're too big, why should we sustain them? Let's be clear about something the establishment doesn't want you and me to understand -- these giants did not get so big and interconnected because of natural market forces and free-enterprise efficiencies. They amassed power the old-fashioned way: They got the government to give it to them. In the past 20 years or so, they lobbied furiously to get Washington to rig the rules so they could latterly bloat ... and float out of control.

A new report by Wallstreetwatch.org reveals that from 1998 to 2008, the finance industry made $1.7 billion in contributions to Washington politicians (55 percent to Repubs, 45 percent to Dems), spent $3.4 billion on lobbyists (3,000 of them on the industry payroll in 2007 alone) and won a dozen key deregulatory victories that led directly to today's financial meltdown.

Inherent in the industry's push for unbridled expansion was the unstated goal of guaranteeing that they would get taxpayer bailouts if things went badly. So many investors, businesses, employees and others would be hooked into these multitentacled blobs that government would be compelled to rescue the banks from their own excesses.

Knowing that they could privatize all of the profits from quick-buck schemes and socialize the losses, bankers were unleashed to do their damnedest. Which they did.

What to do now? Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is calling on Congress to create a "super regulator" to control the irrational risks that the too-big boys take. Immodestly, Bernanke suggests that the Fed be this overseer. He is backed up by Timothy Geithner, President Barack Obama's treasury secretary and point man on rescuing the giants. He has just outlined a new regulatory regime that he suggests we entrust to the Fed.

Bad idea all around. First, the Fed already has far-reaching watchdog authority that it refused to use as today's crisis built up. We heard no bark and got no bite because, while the Fed has enormous public authority to regulate America's money supply, interest rates and banks, it is governed by -- guess who? -- bankers, and it operates essentially as a private banking cartel.

Second, and most important, too big to fail is too big to regulate. And too big to regulate means they are too big to tolerate. Period.

The answer is to split their investment, banking and insurance functions into separate companies and reinvigorate America's antitrust laws to restore competition in each of the three sectors of finance.

As Newsweek columnist Michael Hirsh put it in an online column in February, "We can't have a free-market economy dominated by institutions so huge that they don't have to play by free-market rules."

Copyright 2009, Creators Syndicate Inc.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: banks, citigroup, merrill lynch, wall street, bank of america, wachovia, aig, geithner, too big to fail, bailouts

Jim Hightower is a national radio commentator, writer, public speaker and author of the new book, "Swim Against the Current: Even a Dead Fish Can Go With the Flow." (Wiley, March 2008) He publishes the monthly Hightower Lowdown, co-edited by Phillip Frazer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Our Money, Our Banks
Posted by: Revolutionary (Direct) Democracy on Apr 4, 2009 12:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nationalize the banks.

Long live the International Socialist Revolution!

FREE AMERICA

REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Our Money, Our Banks Posted by: Jaipurr
nationalize the money supply
Posted by: TrollTreason on Apr 4, 2009 3:39 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
credit as A PUBLIC UTILITY... GET RID OF FDR'S UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CORPORATION. THIS IS AN ACT OF TOTAL TREASON LIKE ALL OTHERS DON3E IN SECRET

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Keep 'em Separated"- Ok , but how and then what?
Posted by: Purple Girl on Apr 4, 2009 4:45 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At least you gave one suggestion. Which is obvious- since the ability to comingle funds between banking,investment and insurance was stopped after the last time Wall street Fucked US.So that's a 'give me'
But considering how intricately they have become intwined- how exactly do we unwind them without the house thing falling apart. Sure let the shit Depts fail- but whos' money is actually in those- Our Retirment funds, that the Ratings Agencies opened up to the addicted and corrupt gamblers? Haven't you yet figured out Which Accounts they are scrambling to reconstitute..Reason they aren't eager to tell US where the TARP funds went. Do you think they want to announce to US Our Nesteggs have been crushed? what moeny do you think they used to leverage out their 40:1 Bets? Guess who's $1 is part of that 'Toxic'.
So if Obama did tell the banks it is only His admin between them and the Pitchforks- he wasn't exaggerating. They are taking on the 'wrath' so that an all out bloody revolt does not break out.
I have no doubt there are plenty who were involved with this Economic Treason who want desperately to fix the problem- they know their very lives are on the line...We won't be burning mere Effigys.
so unless you have some divine comprehension of exactly how to undo 30 yrs of Corp Theft in just a few weeks- Please Do share. If it was that simple, I have no doubt they would have done it and not alerted the angry mob about the problem.
And the last people we should listen to are the Repugs- they have been working diligently to make labor as cheap as possible- so keeping as many people in the labor market for as long as possible assure a overwhelming 'supply side'-thus a Cheap commodity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Too Big to Fail" = FASCISM
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Apr 4, 2009 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It always has been and always will be so.

Rockefeller, Robert Rubin and Henry Kissinger cronies Geithner, Larry Summers, etc, etc. were behind the nixing of the 1933 Glass Steagall Act and the foisting of the "Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000" that prevented oversight of the insane derivatives market that has tanked the economy for meltdown. That's to the tune of $1,100 TRILLION dollars into the hole (Bank of International Settlements). And if anyone thinks this is all just about casual greed, laxity and incompetence I've got a derivative to sell you. Cheap.

Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret'

Geithner’s Oligarchs

The entire farce is headed by a privately rigged "Federal Reserve" Corp that was never federal and has no reserves. Under Sir "Bubbles" Greenspan and later Bernanke, the Wall Street derivatives madness was promoted and repeatedly sold as essential for the economy.

Bottom line: this is about a system built from the ground up to extort and thieve from the nation the way a parasite leech takes blood from its host body. This is organized corporate crime extortion by extortionists as a way of life.

In other words, Fascism by the numbers.




“Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means, basically, that there is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take.”
Alan Greenspan (former Chairman “Federal Reserve” PBS' News Hour Sep 21, 2007)

“What we have found over the years in the marketplace is that derivatives have been an extraordinarily useful vehicle to transfer risk from those who shouldn’t be taking it to those who are willing to and are capable of doing so…We think it would be a mistake to more deeply regulate.”
Alan Greenspan (“Fed” chairman before the Senate Banking Committee 2003)

“Overall, the U.S. economy appears likely to expand at a moderate pace over the second half of 2007, with growth then strengthening a bit in 2008 to a rate close to the economy’s underlying trend. ”
Ben Bernanke (“Fed” chairman at the Semiannual monetary policy report to Congress July 18, 2007)

“Our financial institutions are in a strong financial position, and our economic fundamentals are healthy…”
Hank Paulson (IMF meeting 10/20/07)

"In 1913, the money power of the country was taken away from the people. By constitutional privilege it belongs with the Congress, but it was given up in the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve is no more Federal than Federal Express. But yet it has the power to determine the direction and use of money in our economy. If we could take that power back and put the Federal Reserve under Treasury, we start to be in a position of being able to control monetary policy on behalf of the United States people."
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (former Presidential candidate at Congress C-Span January 9th, 2009)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Re- thank you Mister psyops... Posted by: TrollTreason
» RE: It's time to look at Socialism. Posted by: wagnerrocks@gmail.com
» RE: "Too Big to Fail" = FASCISM Posted by: monkeywrench
As I discussed in another article, we're talking about a slippery slope approach being used to
Posted by: maxpayne on Apr 4, 2009 6:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
bailout all the corporate giants. Big Paper is coming up as suggested in another article. I wouldn't say "too big to fail" but "too big to succeed" in the first place. You see, as I explained in that Big Paper bailout article, the market was RIGGED from the start. Maybe the more obscene bailouts more segments of Corporate America get, the more Main Street just might wake up to its senses. That's assuming that countries such as China and Japan don't make us pay back what we borrowed from them plus interest. And looking at the way those countries we're borrowing recklessly from are getting, they're gonna raise those interest rates so hard that this country is gonna be an enslaved nation for generations to come. Once again, the market was RIGGED to fail us all and it's like a time bomb ready to explode and trigger the other financial bombs in the works !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too Big is Bad
Posted by: drricklippin on Apr 4, 2009 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THANKS!

I've been wondering why I haven't seen more writing of the issue of our US Institutions who are too big?

That includes-

Too big corporations
Too big governments
Too big military

I think we need breakup/decentralization of all three

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Too Big is Bad- YES INHERENTLY Posted by: drricklippin
» DR. FANTASY Projects his CROCK Posted by: PointMan
» Thanks for Reality- PointMan Posted by: drricklippin
Funny comic strip from 1933. Same exact game plan
Posted by: TrollTreason on Apr 4, 2009 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=144392

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is Amazing
Posted by: JSquercia on Apr 4, 2009 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is absolutely amazing that the most obvious of all solutions which a ten year old could see goes unheard and unspoken . Damn right to big to fail is by definition too big . We had anti trust laws that could and should have prevented this but no one wanted to enforce them .
Remember years ago they broke up ATT into those Baby Bells and now it is back .

The ironic thing is that the government solution seems to be making the too big even bigger .

Yes it might be complex unravelling these institutions but it is not impossible .I am sure many of parts are seperate entities either as Departments OR Subsidiaries so that would be a good place to start .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BA
Posted by: mnstra on Apr 4, 2009 7:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WE SAW THIS COMING AFTER TH ENRON THEFTS. IF ENRON EXCS CAN DO A GIANT PONZI SCHEME ON SUCH A LARGE SCALE, THEN IT WAS ONLY WAS A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE IT WAS DONE TO THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Inevitable
Posted by: Archie B on Apr 4, 2009 7:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well said. I to believe many corporations were allowed to get to big in the first place.

Breaking them up now will however create a whole new set of problems. Not breaking them up now simply forestalls the inevitable and will probably make the hard times to come even worse.

It's time to take the bandage off the only question is do we slowly peal it off drawing the pain out for a decade, or do we rip it off and get it over with. I vote we get it over with.

Then we should do what we can to prevent this from happening again. I believe unlike nature, man made catastrophes are preventable, for what is the purpose of having a government if they are not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“Federal Reserve Transparency Act H.R. 1207″
Posted by: vickymiss2001 on Apr 4, 2009 8:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you too would like to see Ben Bernanke squirm and finally discover what the Fed has been up to behind the scenes, call and write your representative and ask that they support the “Federal Reserve Transparency Act H.R. 1207″.

Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 or 1-877-851-6437

Here’s a sample letter you can use:




Dear Representative,

Please co-sponsor and/or support H.R.1207, an effort to audit the Federal Reserve.

Recently, it has come to light that there is little to no accountability to the people on the part of the Federal Reserve. While the citizens of this country are required by law to give an accounting of every penny they come in contact with, the Federal Reserve has never been held to the same standard. During this time of extreme economic crisis, the people deserve an accounting of where our money is going.

Currently there are 58 co-sponsors for this legislation, and it is enjoying bi-partisan support. Your efforts in supporting this important legislation would go a long way in proving to your constituents that you not only hold the Federal Reserve to the same standard as you do your constituents, but it would also show that you believe in transparency. Anything less than support for this resolution suggests that you are in favor of secrecy and a lack of accountability to the people who pay the bills. We pay the tab; we have a right to know where our money is going.

Unlike recent bills that you voted in favor of that had hundreds of pages and just a few hours to read, this bill can be read in under 5 minutes. I encourage you to take the time to read it, and then move to support it.

Thank you in advance for your attention on this important legislation. I have every expectation that you will do right by your constituents and support this measure.

Sincerely,

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Break up the Federal Reserve Cartel
Posted by: cplot on Apr 4, 2009 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The reason these institutions are too big is due mostly to the Federal Reserve Cartel that bolsters them. All the member banks of the federal reserve are the members of that cartel. The Federal Reserve Cartel should be replaced with a US central bank reporting to the President. It should be completely separate from the US Treasury, but include a peer cabinet level position. It should not be allowed to create money except through a specific congressional action.

A US central bank would act as a clearing house and guarantor of interbank loans, serve as a lender of last resort, and facilitate electronic funds transfers, supply currency and coin and other bank services. Electronic transactions should be costless for frictionless commerce. This would facilitate a rich diversity of small banks and credit unions as well as other competitive commerce.

The same public utility approach should apply to nationwide energy distribution, nationwide communication, and nationwide transport (e.g., rail corridors in addition to federal interstates and highways). Providing these core public services (banking, communication, transport and energy distribution) as public utilities utilizes economies of scale while simultaneously guaranteeing a level playing field for enterprise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A government of the Banksters...by the Banksters...
Posted by: TJColatrella on Apr 4, 2009 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are a government of the banksters, by the banksters, and for the banksters...not the people..!


Is that what you're trying to say, Jim..?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too big to mortgage
Posted by: tokerdesigner on Apr 4, 2009 10:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Karlh used the term "Democratic Socialism"-- I'm not sure in today's world, any more than in the fifties, that anyone clearly agrees what "D(d)emocratic" means, thus transparency is lacking, so I would substitute "Limited Socialism". Having a voting system you can point to might not be enough.
2. Hightower has a point: "Too big to fail is too big." To be precise-- just as in government and the military, "big" means many layers of authority, or "chain of command" as the cliche has it. Each individual paperpusher reports to a next higher and so forth. This is echoed on the petit-bourgeois level, with each family obliged to buy a house too big to pay for, otherwise zoning laws won't permit you to live in a neighborhood where the schools are safe for your child. Most of that too-bigness consists of insulation and protection of each overpaid underexercized employee against abuse and victimization, right up to the CEO (it)self.
3. What we confront today is a plot worthy of an Ayn Rand Novel (and in the final chapters of "Atlas Shrugged" the whole damn state of Iowa was casually blown off the map). In a book of 1084 pages, just as in a government with a budget of trillions, "accidents" happen. (Just a few weeks ago someone in WSJ mentioned that Rand protege Greenspan's favorite novel is "Atlas Shrugged.") (No, I don't hate Rand, she influenced my mother, and fate is fate. Check out "The Night of January 16th".)
4. Now to my serious proposal--
a. Rather than fire all those bureaucrats, hire them all to guide the corporations safely through bankruptcy without hurting anyone, and sort out all the tangled IOU's, then
b. Give obese, underemployed, ex-offendor Americans and a hundred million destitute immigrants (Haitians, Darfurians, etc.) jobs clipping, gathering and bundling mountains of deadwood underbrush (California multi-billion-dollar fire prevention bonanza) and
c. Distribute vaporizers, e-cigarettes and single-toke utensils to all nicotine addicts (tobacco abatement bonanza: WHO official Patrick Petit says cigarette-related diseases cost the US economy alone $180-bil. per year. Raising taxes isn't enough).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are in a new age and it isn't guilded like the last one.
Posted by: symcokid on Apr 4, 2009 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are now in the next naturally evolving age after Democracy - Socialism. After firing Wagoner, the COO of General Motors Barack "Hussein" Obama has appointed himself the new head of GM. This grandoise government of ours also now owns 80% of AIG, where will this all end, anybody know?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here is a video that will open your eyes to the "big picture" ...
Posted by: TarryFaster on Apr 4, 2009 11:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and history of what the banks/bankers have been doing to us:
Unmasking the Fed.

Also, keep in mind that five months after JFK signed a bill to abolish the Federal Reserve, he was shot down in the streets of Dallas.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only thing propping up the US economy now...
Posted by: leafsong1 on Apr 4, 2009 11:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...is the "too-big-to-fail" myth. The debts of these financial behemoths dwarf the gross worth of the Fed. The Fed props up the banks that are too big to fail using credit that they receive precisely and exclusively because the Fed is too big to fail. The full faith and credit of the US lasts only as long as our creditors fear its failure. "Too big to fail" is the modern equivalent of "In God We Trust;" it is the cornerstone of our "prosperity."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wee
Posted by: aroleflin on Apr 4, 2009 2:21 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real criminal is the federal government, meaning the Democrats and the Kenyan Community Organizer in Chief. They are spending $1 billion per hour!!! Our social security trust fund has NO money in it. Just IOU's!! Our chldren are bankrupt before they are even born. This in itself is criminal action.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

start new lending institutions
Posted by: bugaboos on Apr 4, 2009 2:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sometimes you just have to start over. If we need institutions to start lending again, why cant we create new smaller banks/lending institutions? Ones based on principles that have not yet been bloated by deregulation and unbridled capitalism. Could attract customers and capitol by promoting such features as transparency, having no employee making over say 25 times what the lowest paying worker earns (how radical!), and no accumulated toxic assets. These features would not be imposed by government but would attract consumers who are currently paralyzed and fed up with the current system. There are probably plenty of out of work financially savvy folk (and business space) available to startup new banks. Of course hypocrisy and greed are always present and vigilant regulation is probably always required but we have to start somewhere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BAILOUT & THE HIDDEN LEECHES
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 4, 2009 2:41 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
however,Thomas Jefferson pretty well covered much about our situation today in two quotes made by him over 200 years ago. Our founders fathers feared what we are living today:

1. "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

2. "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."*



the problem with these DERIVATIVE BETS that are used in HEDGE FUNDS is that these IRRESPONSIBLE USA INVESTMENT FIRMS buy these BETS why??

A. firms are either IRRESPONSIBLE AND DON'T CHECK ON WHAT THEY ARE INVESTING IN, or
B. OR DON'T CARE THEY WILL JUST TAKE THE UNSUSPECTING PUBLICS bailout MONEY AND RUN
C. OR, these companies DO KNOW and DON'T CARE because they figure when the USA IS BANKRUPT it will wipe out all small/mid business sectors leaving 1 or 2 or several of the engorged companies in the marketplace gravytrained for life partying hearty while the small/med business sectors and publics livliehoods bites the dust gone in smoke forever. However, don't count on any sympathy from these people for American's allowing themselves to be bamboozled into this bailout.

Because the BAILOUT creates a NEVERENDING MONEYDRAIN OF PUBLIC FUNDS out of USA to the creators of these BETS (many of whom hate the USA. stop the bailout people to ALL COMPANIES.

It has been ALL the companies in the BAILOUT whom are involved in this type scenario NOT JUST AIG however, the problem is that ALL THE COMPANIES need to be sent back to the public sector thru the public seeking LEGAL ACTION to GET THESE COMPANIES OUT OF THE BAILOUT AND RESTORED TO 100 PERCENT PUBLIC SECTOR.... OTHERWISE the noose around the publics neck whose name is THE BAILOUT will be DRAGGING THE USA public into bankruptcy and will be forced into a SOC/GLOB/COMM/MARX/FAC GOVERNMENT/SHARIA LAW and no one will be able to have a hope of starting a small business and making a profit to live off for their family.


by the way??? the DEMS LIED TO CLAIM FAIRNESS DOCTRINE IS OUT here they are trying to re-vive it under a new name the --TRANSNATIONAL TREATY AND THRU SEEKING A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.

It is imperative the public seek LEGAL action to dissolve the bailout and restore these companies to public sector.

NOW??? they are attempting to use the temporary ease that the business are experiencing thru their rigging of these bets to do whaaat??? YOU GOT it attempt to want to EXPAND GOV TO GIVE GOV more POWERS THAT THEY SHOULD NEVER BE SEEKING TO get from the public.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Too big too fail" is a congressional eufimism
Posted by: Givvemhell on Apr 4, 2009 2:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to deny blame for enriching the financial industry. It really means either (1) they deny that they have made sure there is no free market by all the contortion of law for the benefit those whose best interest it is, or (2) it is an indictment of capitalism in that a gigantic failure is the only outcome possible when their version of "a free market," without appropriate regulation, is allowed to run wild through to an end of its own making. For which also, they deny any culpability.

So here we are, stuck paying the bill for them to shove gas up the tail pipe in order to start this already satiated giant, when the taxpayer has no purchasing power to qualify for credit in any way after several decades of trickle-down economics. Congress is so blinded by their own greed, they have never noticed that the car is parked facing up hill and the money will never get to the people who do the spending.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEMS LIED TO CLAIM FAIRNESS DOCTRINE IS OUT
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 4, 2009 2:47 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ONCE AGAIN DEMS are attempting to re-vive the mislabled fairness doctrine which disguises SHARIA LAW how??? only this time you got it!!! they want to call it a new name ---the TRANSNATIONAL TREATY and by seeking GLOBALISM.

THIS treaty means that anything that happens in USA courts that GOV DOESN'T LIKE they simply have it kicked out of courts at all levels and then give it to the UN/SHARIA LAW international court (icc) whom will IMPOSE their SHARIA LAW WILL ON THE PEOPLE.

WHAAT IS SHARIA LAW--it states

1. it is illegal to be a christian or any religion different from Muslim
2. it is punishible by death to claim any of the muslim/islam/sharia law murder rapes and terrorist activity are 'bad'
3. it would mean female mutilation would become common place.
4. it would mean that all non-muslims land monies possessions would be confiscatable at whim by the GLOBAL/UN GOVERNMENT.

THIS would for example entail that any USA CITIZEN could be apprehended by local Muslim authorities for an offense, real or imagined slammed into the ICC and flown to the Hage, netherlands where they would rot for months waiting for trial and done ENTIRELY without due process. they would get not trial and no confronting of accusers, No protection from double jeopardy and no unanimous verdict for a conviction.



Take a second to THINK about this all of the globalists within and without the USA think the murderous Al Qaida terriorists should have these rights HOWEVER NOT OUR US SOLDIERS and NOT OUR US CITIZENS.


24 hours after the UN accepted the SHARIA LAW 30 christians were kicked out of their home and their lands and possesions and everything why??? because the country was SHARIA LAW and the GOV FELT LIKE IT.

however, in the media they said that since they aren't be-heading people that it terrorists are 'somehow' not that bad anymore.

You can bet that if the USA is allowed themselves to be bamboozled by this that it won't be 24 hours before they kick everyone else and resume all their other behaviors because the USA WILL HAVE NO RIGHTS PEOPLE.

CLINTON IN 2000 gave his blessing to the whole globalist thing on the UN "INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC). The DEMOCRATS all along want to make US citizens SERVANTS TO THE UN AS OUR GOVERNMENT instead of a country governed by WE THE PEOPLE.

Thankfully a handful of protestors in SEATTLE WASH REMEMBA?? SECURED our freedom and

Thankfully Bush saw the serious threat this Socialist star chamber posed to our military and he told them to stuff a sock in it. Apparantly at that time the UN was insulted by it. Although the REPUBLICANS tried twice to negotiate immunity for US peacekeepers thru the Sec Council



To the present it's only one of the 1 % group of people attempting to destroy our Nation's economic systems.

WHY??? It was said to a WASH DC VIP---that the reason the Socialists think they will win this time and are doing this is because ACLU and their DEMS SLUGS -- they don't think American's are " smart enough" to care to let their fingers do the walking to protect their lands, their CONSTITUTION or their freedoms. The DEMS and ACLU don't think the 99% of American's will be 'smart enough" to CARE about their country, their homes, their small business enough to kick the WASH DC SLUGS out and send them packing by way of Balagovich for NOT doing what is right to protect PUBLIC freedoms and the free enterprise system (ie meaning small business/med business) and rights.



Therefore, they want to make sure they take all freedoms away from the public and they want to make it impossible for FREE ENTERPRISE to exist for the small business and mid business and sole proprietorship thru gravytraining BIG BUSINESS

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEMS LIED TO CLAIM FAIRNESS DOCTRINE IS OUT---PART B
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 4, 2009 2:59 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
DEMS WANT TO bankrupt our Nation and MUSCLING OUT the small/med sole proprietorships, and creating a welfare state. A move straight out of the marxist handbook. and by attempting to eradicate free speech.

Then, we will be SOCIALIST/GLOBALIST/MARX/FACIST/COMM COUNTRY and the marketplace will be MONOPOLIZED AND DOMINATED by the ENGORGED 1 or 2 or several big businesses in sector. Gone will be the hope for any American whom would wish to start a business and earn profit to live on. it's why they cannot wait to get their hands on public money and THROW parties COSTING MILLIONS and big bonuses to CEO'S at the public expense.

WANNA KNOW whaat OBAMA'S biggest dislike of our USA NATION IS???... that the SUPREME COURT will not OVERRIDE the WILL OF THE PUBLIC to IMPOSE the will of any dictator or himself.

don't believe it??? Melanie Phillips did a whole expose on this at spectator site a while ago.

Sooo... now this seems their way to want to get around that.

I THINK ravel from wikipedia said it best:

The democracies that will surely perish will be those who cannot tell the difference between good and evil, survival and ruin, freedom and tyranny. Or, perhaps more to the point, the greatest danger faced by democracy are those who deny that there is any real difference after all.

IT'S important the public seek LEGAL (don't allow yoursleves to be put off) and LEGISLATIVE action to DISMANTLE bailout and kickout stimulus and protect our Sovereignty.

see familysecuritymatters.org and American Center for Law and Justice and oliver North sites and National center for public public policy research and civic council thomas cromwell groups

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SOC SEC & MEDICARE CAN BE SAVED--AND WHY YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT IT YET
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 4, 2009 3:17 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
HR 219 --will save SOC SEC AND MEDICARE for all time FOR both military and non-military
HR 236 AND BE9006 COLA PROTECTION

it will protect these benefits without
1. RAISING TAXES
2. WITHOUT RAISING PREMIUMS
3. WITHOUT CUTTING SERVICES

It's no surprise the DEMS want to do away with the lobby groups working for PUBLIC to be protected. It won't pass unless there is an OUTPOURING of PUBLIC pressure on CONGRESS.

Politicians would rather scare everyone with tax cuts and service cuts rather than keep their hands out of the SOC SEC "till" --to keep on using SOC SEC as a "petty cash fund" for pork projects instead which will further aid in bankrupting this Nation.

They would rather scare everyone by claiming it's needful to raise taxes or make cuts or their Socialist rhetoric of---how "selfish" everyone" is for not wanting to pay higher taxes; Rather than refrain from 'raiding" SOC SEC for their pet pork projects.

Here the DEMS CONGRESS JUST took a COLA INCREASE for CONGRESS OF 550.22 PER MONTH ... while DECIDIN you THE PUBLIC could live on 63.00 per month.

they want to raise taxes and price of foods and prescription and even eggs is up 55 %.

and yet they say $63.00 a month--a lousy 5% COLA INCREASE is enough for PUBLIC.

Here, the DEMS want to irresponsibly bailout the business, which will bankrupt US unless we apply brakes and ceilings, and caps and make businesses pay money back in timely fashion.



However, when it comes to doing something GOOD to BAILOUT the PUBLIC the DEMS don't want it--which incidentally is why this is probably the first time you are reading or hearing about it.

To the present it's only one of the 1 % group of people attempting to destroy our Nation's economic systems.

WHY??? It was said to a WASH DC VIP---that the reason the Socialists think they will win this time and are doing this is because ACLU and their DEMS SLUGS -- they don't think American's are " smart enough" to care to let their fingers do the walking to protect their lands, their CONSTITUTION or their freedoms. The DEMS and ACLU don't think the 99% of American's will be 'smart enough" to CARE about their country, their homes, their small business enough to kick the WASH DC SLUGS out and send them packing by way of Balagovich for NOT doing what is right to protect PUBLIC freedoms and the free enterprise system (ie meaning small business/med business) and rights.

Therefore, they want to make sure they take all freedoms away from the public and they want to make it impossible for FREE ENTERPRISE to exist for the small business and mid business and sole proprietorship thru gravytraining BIG BUSINESS bankrupting our Nation and MUSCLING OUT the small/med sole proprietorships, and creating a welfare state. A move straight out of the marxist handbook. and by attempting to eradicate free speech.

Then, we will be SOCIALIST/GLOBALIST/MARX/FACIST/COMM COUNTRY and the marketplace will be MONOPOLIZED AND DOMINATED by the ENGORGED 1 or 2 or several big businesses in sector. Gone will be the hope for any American whom would wish to start a business and earn profit to live on

Seek legislative and LEGAL agencies to DISMANTLE the bailout and kick out the SOCIALIST stimulus.

SEE --CIVI COUNCIL THOMAS CROMWELL also Amer Ctr for Law and Justice and The National Center for public policy research

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE???
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 4, 2009 3:27 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WASH DC SLUGS VOTED THEMSELVES A 550.22 MONTH RAISE IN COLA WHILE DECIDING PUBLIC GET 63.00 A MONTH WHILE THEY PUSH TO deprive YOUR CHILDREN OF MED

MEANWHILE???....
HERE hr219 Hr 236 and VETS LOCKBOX LAW AND COLA WILL SUCCESSFULLY PROTECT SOC SEC AND MEDICARE AND MEDICAID (protects non-military too) and YET WASH DC SLUGS PREFER to TURN in an SOCIALIST healthcare which will let YOU NOT SOMEONE ELSE you/your child to DIE. how will this NATION silence the screams of people left to die. It's necessary legislation to OPPOSE STIMULUS NOW
see American Center for law and Justice, Campaign to Save SOC SEC and medicare (for non-military included) -A project of National Association of Uniformed Services and CIVIC COUNCIL THOMAS CROMWELL pres and--THE national center for public policy research david Ridenour president

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Words, words, words ...
Posted by: monkeywrench on Apr 4, 2009 4:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Too big to fail" is just another way of saying monopoly, and "Credit Default Swap" is another term for collusion.

Where in hell is the Sherman Anti-trust Act when we need it?

(And, to quote Janis Joplin: "Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose." So, I guess that soon we're all going to be a lot more free, huh?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ralph Nader praises Jim Hightower for being correct all along !
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Apr 4, 2009 4:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/04-0

3. Jim Hightower whose books (If the Gods Has Meant Us to Vote, They Would Have Given Us Candidates, 2000) and the monthly mass circulation Hightower Lowdown newsletter pointed out again and again the abuses of the “greedhounds” and vastly overpaid corporate bosses that have run consumers of health care, credit, cars and banks into the ground.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"It can't happen here" –– oh, yeah?
Posted by: monkeywrench on Apr 4, 2009 4:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The French Aristocracy, just before 1789, thought they could ignore the desperately impoverished peasants while they wallowed in their lavish lifestyle. Didn't work out too well for them – in fact, you might say they lost their heads over it.

After FDR took office, when someone said to him that if his programs didn't work, he'd not get a second term as president, he reportedly replied, "If my programs don't work, there WON'T BE a second term."

We once had a little skirmish over slavery and state's rights – especially southern states and the economic subjugation they felt they suffered at the hands of the North: it was called The Civil War.

So ...

If this "Clusterf**k To the Poorhouse" (as Jon Stewart puts it) continues to its conclusion, just what is Washington going to do about a couple of hundred million REALLY PISSED-OFF citizens?

Does "The Little Bighorn" ring any bells, sparky?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You forgot about Fannie and Freddie...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Apr 4, 2009 6:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wachovia, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Bank of America, AIG -- omigosh, cried the Powers That Be...

Yeah, we get that, and we're at least as pissed that our dollars are going to support failed enterprises as well as folks who welshed on their house payments.

But their enablers and masters--Fannie and Freddie--seem like they are getting a pass. Of course they are, though, Fannie and Freddie's enablers are running the damn country.

Fits, eh? Congresscritters who can't do basic math well enough to write a balanced budget can't get fannie and freddie out of hoc...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

US is broke ... tries to tell the wworld itis too big to fail!
Posted by: phindrup on Apr 4, 2009 10:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your only chance, to go home and put up the shutters.
Might be good for you, but the certainty is that it will be great for the world!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Gorbachov
Posted by: Perry Logan on Apr 5, 2009 2:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We needed another FDR, but I fear we got another Gorbachov. :(

Democracy Now has been doing a great series of interviews on the economic crisis. The consensus seems to be that Obama and Geithner are hellbent to funnel huge amounts of the national wealth into the financial sector--which is the last thing we need.

This virtually guarantees the economy will tank and people will be mad at the Democrats. What a screw-up.


PS: My new YouTube clip is Xe

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Gorbachov Posted by: richholland
Too big to fail--
Posted by: Aquinas on Apr 5, 2009 12:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Where in the textbooks of our Economics courses is this phrase presented as an intrinsic part of the capitalistic system?
How easy it is for the fatcats to accept a little socialism when it's to save their bacon.
Even those with the most rudimentary knowledge of capitalism as a system, know that it is presented as a system where you step up and take your chances and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose; that is the nature of the beast but when it needs bailing out with public funds you can call it anything you want but it damn sure isn't capitalism.
Too big to fail is just another one of the rich man's ploys to privatize the profits while socializing the risks. It didn't happen by chance, it was intentionally designed to achieve exactly what it did.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too Big to Fail......
Posted by: eosrk on Apr 5, 2009 4:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Too Fucked Up to Operate,too
Not Greedy Enough so Let's steal other peoples money

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

geico
Posted by: om7buss on Apr 6, 2009 7:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the image of warren buffett, to start making sense of their own 'creatures'...www.davidicke.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
HEALTH COV U CAN'T AHVE
Posted by: reelman on Apr 9, 2009 11:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever wonder why people spend a million to get a job paying under $175k? Our arrogant congressional royalty…you know, the one that raises its own pay in a severe recession and lusts only for 40 years in the D.C. power bubble, that royalty.
Ever realized their health care coverage WE pay for with taxes?
According to the May 2009 CR…

this is what they have in their FEDERAL Employees Health Benefits Program:

1…No annual or lifetime limits for major services
2…$300 deductible per person and $600 per family
3…Limited 5k a year they pay with preferred providers (which includes most deductibles, co-insurance and co-pays)

Covered Services are:
1…In and out-patient care, visits, surgery and mental health care
2…Prescriptions and diagnostic tests
3…Preventative care including routine shots
4…Chem and radiation therapy
5…Family Planning and organ-tissue transplants
6…Durable med equip and artificial limbs
7…physical, occupational ans speech therapy

They pay $152 a MONTH each or $357 a FAMILY.
Okay, take out your family policy and compare.
The folks that “understand” your family struggles has this program.
The feds are special, you and your family are not.
Ask yourself why we can’t have the same coverage.
(this is only one of at least a dozen perks on US)

http://conservablogs.com/theconservativecrawfish

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is This The Right Time?
Posted by: Usiku on Apr 9, 2009 5:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is this the time for a shaking out of not only the industry but for all the industries dependent on these industries plus the towns?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement