Do they really think the people who spent themselves silly are going to get out of it and then never overspend themselves silly again? On a personal or a global level?
This from RG's NYTimes Link stood out like sore thumb and screams big problems to me.
after telling us of all the authority that "The Secretary" has and giving him 700 Billion dollars to utilize at his own discretion we further learn
Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.
One man--$700 Billion Dollars ---no oversight--no review ---no legal recourse-
Lets try to be nonpartisan in our replies here so this thread stays informative and doesn't get moved to the Politics forum - so that those who don't visit the Politics and Tacks forums can read this.
The Bottom line is we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve which is a private bank cartel that makes "money" or Fiat Currency from debt. We need to get back to a value based currency and not the current debt based currency. Prices aren't going up, the value of the dollar is going down.
Believe it or not if we were still on the Gold Standard a barrel of Crude Oil would be about $4, a Gallon of Gas about 10 cents, and the Bailout for these banks, well it would have never been needed, but if so only $15 billion. This is based on the price of gold in 1920 which was around $20 an ounce.
But the seizure and the deal with JPMorgan came as a shock to Washington Mutual’s board, which was kept completely in the dark: the company’s new chief executive, Alan H. Fishman, was in midair, flying from New York to Seattle at the time the deal was finally brokered, according to people briefed on the situation. Mr. Fishman, who has been on the job for less than three weeks, is eligible for $11.6 million in cash severance and will get to keep his $7.5 million signing bonus, according to an analysis by James F. Reda and Associates.
Thats not a "golden parachute' thats a diamond encrusted fully loaded next generation orbital reentry vehicle
So this is an Enron situation all over again? But on a much bigger scale and with more far reaching consequences?
Enron? You can go further back then that, almost 100 years ago when stock market speculation was in it's heyday, in the 1920's where people were making millions (today would be hundreds of millions) on a 10% margin.
The JP Morgan's and Rothschild's and Rockefeller's, big money and bankers used the collapse of the small banks to buy up the debt and consolidate more of the wealth into less hands. They might be seen as competitors but they were all friends and even family, this kind of thing has been happening through out history, but in particular within the last 100 years we can see an escalation in occurrences.
It is not surprising to me what's happening, and as we approach the teens and twenties of this century I can't help but think we are headed for a 1929 style collapse again. Why? Because the grand children of the people who engineered the 1929 collapse are in the same position to do the same thing. Again. Nothing changes if nothing changes.
So this is an Enron situation all over again? But on a much bigger scale and with more far reaching consequences?
I agree with what Seth said above this post, but also that these are the very players involved with Enron. I suggest you either read the book or watch the documentary, "The Smartest Guys In The Room" to get the full picture of what happened with Enron. These same big banks, run by the same people, gambled with Enron and helped commit the crimes Andy Fastow dreamed up. If you haven't read the book or seen the movie, you really should because it's a very interesting part of recent history.
The bailout was rejected! WOOHOO!
It seems that politicians with some amount of integrity from both parties in the House came together in the spirit of bipartisanship and dropped the bailout like it deserved. Hopefully now they can focus on helping normal Americans instead of ripping us off to pay a ransom to the wealthy.
Believe it or not if we were still on the Gold Standard a barrel of Crude Oil would be about $4, a Gallon of Gas about 10 cents, and the Bailout for these banks, well it would have never been needed, but if so only $15 billion. This is based on the price of gold in 1920 which was around $20 an ounce.
Seth
It's also supposing nothing would have altered the relationships between gold and the other commodities in the
past 80 years, and that it was feasible to stay on a Gold Standard.
I don't know whether or not either is true, but those are 2 very large suppositions to take without any
documentation of either.
Do you really think ANY "Standard" would have been sufficient to keep corrupt fatcats from getting their greasy,
This is just a really high stakes game of Liar's Poker only it's OUR money they are playing with! I for one, do not like it!
My daddy's bank never made bad loans or softened their standards and they are fine as long as people don't panic and start running the bank based on the bozos making the news.
Recommended Posts
doojable
Can you check that link Now I See? I got "Page Load Error" :(
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/...nt_10126522.htm
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2008...ent_7068582.htm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RainbowsGirl
((((Now I See)))),
Are any of these helpful???
http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/what_...for_you/C35/L35
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle4776342.ece
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21draftcnd.html
Edited by RainbowsGirlLink to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
The Link is fixed, everyone has great contributions too!
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...a&aid=10297
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Do they really think the people who spent themselves silly are going to get out of it and then never overspend themselves silly again? On a personal or a global level?
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
This from RG's NYTimes Link stood out like sore thumb and screams big problems to me.
after telling us of all the authority that "The Secretary" has and giving him 700 Billion dollars to utilize at his own discretion we further learn
One man--$700 Billion Dollars ---no oversight--no review ---no legal recourse-
Something is terribly wrong with this picture
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I agree. Something is terribly wrong. For whatever reason ---------
These companies drove themselves into a mud hole, and got mired.
Let the jerks that run these companies HOOK THEIR OWN TRUCK UP TO THEIR INSTITUTION;
and pull it out of the mess they got themselves into. I've got a truck, but I'm NOT willing to help.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seth R.
The Bottom line is we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve which is a private bank cartel that makes "money" or Fiat Currency from debt. We need to get back to a value based currency and not the current debt based currency. Prices aren't going up, the value of the dollar is going down.
Believe it or not if we were still on the Gold Standard a barrel of Crude Oil would be about $4, a Gallon of Gas about 10 cents, and the Bailout for these banks, well it would have never been needed, but if so only $15 billion. This is based on the price of gold in 1920 which was around $20 an ounce.
Seth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
Im not an economist, and realize this is a very complex situation
but at least parts of this government intervention are 100% COMPLETE MADNESS
Thats not a "golden parachute' thats a diamond encrusted fully loaded next generation orbital reentry vehicle
This is appalling
Edited by mstar1Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
So this is an Enron situation all over again? But on a much bigger scale and with more far reaching consequences?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seth R.
Enron? You can go further back then that, almost 100 years ago when stock market speculation was in it's heyday, in the 1920's where people were making millions (today would be hundreds of millions) on a 10% margin.
The JP Morgan's and Rothschild's and Rockefeller's, big money and bankers used the collapse of the small banks to buy up the debt and consolidate more of the wealth into less hands. They might be seen as competitors but they were all friends and even family, this kind of thing has been happening through out history, but in particular within the last 100 years we can see an escalation in occurrences.
It is not surprising to me what's happening, and as we approach the teens and twenties of this century I can't help but think we are headed for a 1929 style collapse again. Why? Because the grand children of the people who engineered the 1929 collapse are in the same position to do the same thing. Again. Nothing changes if nothing changes.
Seth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
I agree with what Seth said above this post, but also that these are the very players involved with Enron. I suggest you either read the book or watch the documentary, "The Smartest Guys In The Room" to get the full picture of what happened with Enron. These same big banks, run by the same people, gambled with Enron and helped commit the crimes Andy Fastow dreamed up. If you haven't read the book or seen the movie, you really should because it's a very interesting part of recent history.
The bailout was rejected! WOOHOO!
It seems that politicians with some amount of integrity from both parties in the House came together in the spirit of bipartisanship and dropped the bailout like it deserved. Hopefully now they can focus on helping normal Americans instead of ripping us off to pay a ransom to the wealthy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
It's also supposing nothing would have altered the relationships between gold and the other commodities in the
past 80 years, and that it was feasible to stay on a Gold Standard.
I don't know whether or not either is true, but those are 2 very large suppositions to take without any
documentation of either.
Do you really think ANY "Standard" would have been sufficient to keep corrupt fatcats from getting their greasy,
unprincipled hands on our money? I
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
NO. Not ONLY no, but HELL NO! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
This is just a really high stakes game of Liar's Poker only it's OUR money they are playing with! I for one, do not like it!
My daddy's bank never made bad loans or softened their standards and they are fine as long as people don't panic and start running the bank based on the bozos making the news.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.