People`s republic of USA?

[louixo]

Karl Marx must be laughing so hard he’s choking on his own bad breath. He said capitalism would implode and boy are we close.

Capitalism - free-market economics - is the law of the jungle: the strong eat the weak. Our brand of capitalism empowers the individual to go from rags to riches- to live the “American Dream”. Our brand of democracy, while encouraging the American Dream, also protects individuals - the little guy - from being eaten up.

It is all possible because these democracy and capitalism operate as checks on each other. When you see them walking hand in hand, it’s time to worry.

In 1999, one individual, Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, an economics Ph.D, pushed through a bill that stripped away laws separating banks from other financial institutions. They were written in the 1930’s to prevent a repeat of the worldwide “run on the bank” that crash the 1929 market. You remember that crash – the one caused by financial experts who convinced everyone the market could only go up?

Gramm started the process of removing the game wardens from the jungle. With fewer regulations, financial gurus, greedy for money, started selling mortgages to individuals who couldn’t afford them on the pretense that their homes would always rise in value. They packaged the mortgages, and sold them at a profit to other bankers who made bigger packages and sold them for more profit. Then they bought insurance from companies like AIG, assuring them that housing values would simply keep rising.

The insurers sold investments in these policies - with the same reasoning - all over the world.

Remember the phrase “you can’t cheat an honest man?” Lehman Brothers, Bear Sterns, Fannie and Freddi, AIG, etc… all were run by leaders who knew exactly what they were doing.

The homeowners inevitably stopped paying, the banks and mortgage companies lost revenue, depositors and investors started asking for their money, banks went to insurers for reimbursement, and the insurers don’t have the money. So, we are looking at another worldwide “run on the bank.”

Welcome to 1929.

Gramm has been supported by a President, greedy for power, who believes not only in de-regulation, but also the superiority of the Presidential branch over the rest of government. This is a man who sold us, under false pretenses, on a war that is being fought with borrowed money - 1 trillion and counting. We were in debt before the war. Now he wants us to pay up to another trillion to nationalize failed financial companies, that too, to be borrowed.

In a move reminiscent of Iraq, there are few details about the financial crisis is, but plenty of alarm bells. Moreover, like the war in Iraq, they are demanding we nationalize banks and insurance companies - without proper debate and thought.

“Help! The sky is falling!”, say our leaders to all those little guys. “Give us your money!”, say the financial institutions. “Give us your economic freedom!” say Bush and Bernatke and Paulson. “And in 5 days!”

Capitalism offers the little guy a chance to become a big guy. Democracy protects the little guy from the big guy. These big guys want us to panic and alter our form of government. They want us to panic and change our economic system.

It’s time to worry- really worry- when a few big guys – individuals who have achieved too much power - start throwing in together. Because the most essential part of democracy and capitalism: respect for and empowerment of the individual - the little guy - will be lost.

“Is that you, Karl? Welcome home!”

 

[aristotle]

Good post. I fear this exercise in democracy is just about over. Social upheaval can't be far away.

 

[Turtle]

I don't know who penned the above article, but it's fundamentally flawed in many respects, not the least of which the reason for all this in the first place is not capitalism, but rather the Socialist ideas that everyone should be able to buy a home whether they can afford to pay the mortgage or not, whether they have a down payment or not. That's a far cry from the strong eating the weak.

The 1995 law had a built-in 7-year review period, in 2002, at which time the president took a look at it and wanted to dramatically change it, or eliminate it completely, and he was pilloried for even making the suggestion. At the time is was a Republican congress, but they still didn't have the votes to stave off a certain filibuster, so he let it go and predicted dire consequences if the financial institutions didn't clean up their act.

Now we are in a situation where capitalism, if left alone, would sort it all out, but instead, we're sticking our Socialists fingers in to stir the pot.

I wonder how many people even realize what percentage of banks and financial institutions are affected by this? Or for that matter, the percentage of of the American people this will affect? It's far, far less than most think. The largest chunk of people who will be affected by this is the very wealthy who own 85% of all outstanding stock, and the much smaller percentage of people who bought homes they couldn't afford in the first place, and/or those who refinanced their mortgages in debt consolidation measures and then failed, utterly, to modify their insane lifestyles that got them into the position of needing to consolidate to reduce debt in the first place.

The strong did not prey upon the weak, the weak offered themselves up to be eaten. Now, those who have dined are sick and are looking for some Rolaids. The people who are maddest about this are those who are finding out they can't get something for nothing like they thought they would, or at least get a really good deal that they didn't deserve in the first place.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

so if I decide to take a load for .10 a mile and I am going bankrupt can I get bailed out too??? It was just a little bit of a bad business decision.

 

[theBeemer]

We are not a government by and for the people any more. I posted in another post how our government is by and for the state of Israel. Look at Clinton's Cabinet more then 93 percent of it was Jewish..Over half with dual Israeli American Citizenship. Bush's is cabinet is a little less but still the ones there over half hold dual citizenship..

Since the Jewish folks are 3 percent of our population how earth can be so many way over represented? How on earth someone can believe they are loyal to the USA is mind boggling...Wake up already.


Our Federal Reserve(?) 10 banks, 8 of them own by zionist..94 percent of out media owned by zionist, is really any wonder who benefits from all of this bail out? Think about it.

Just another scam we get squeezed for lets see 700 billion plus all the money that wasn't just paper..Down Payments payments made etc..Then the outrageous interest comes up people loose everything. These vampires keep that money, houses are sold, they keep that money..You add it all up a good 1.2 to 1.3 trillion dollars these vampires get..Let alone the kosher taxes and other scams and the billions freely giving to them and they still want more..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
It amazes me the most is how they get away with it. If your like me not afraid to call this bunch out your anti semtic or a crazy radical conspiracy believing nut case.
I still wonder how on earth people can defend them? Ya I know what it says in the bible...but did it mean the ashkenazi (zionist) or Sephardic?

 

[Turtle]

You need to get off this dual citizenship kick. A foreign citizen does NOT lose his or her citizenship when becoming a U.S. citizen. It used to be that when you became a US citizen you had to renounce your citizenship of your native country, but that hasn't been the case for a long time. An individual that becomes a U.S. citizen through naturalization may keep his or her original citizenship. However, because some countries do not recognize dual citizenship, it is important to consider it carefully before applying for US citizenship. Some countries allow dual citizenship with some countries but not others, and some don't allow it at all. There are some security issues with dual citizenship that can arise, but those are easily handled by the State Department and USCBP.

In other words, dual citizenship ain't a big deal in most cases, even if they're Jewish.

 

[pelicn]

The strong did not prey upon the weak, the weak offered themselves up to be eaten. Now, those who have dined are sick and are looking for some Rolaids.

The wise Mr. Turtle offers the best analogy again!

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Turtle said...."It used to be that when you became a US citizen you had to renounce your citizenship of your native country, but that hasn't been the case for a long time. An individual that becomes a U.S. citizen through naturalization may keep his or her original citizenship."

Actually half true....if you go to the US gov site there is a list of who the U.S. will allow to be dual citizens.

Also the Dept. of Homeland Security does not recognize dualality(sp)....You must claim one or the other not both. You are either American or you are not. This I was told when I officially entered the U.S.

 

[Turtle]

Yeah, like I said, some countries allow for dual citizenship, some do not, and none allow for it for all other countries. As for Homeland Security, that's one of the security issues that can arise and is handled by USCBP. You can't have a dual passport kind of thing, it's one or the other. But, you don't have to actually renounce your Canadian citizenship to become a US citizen. The US doesn't care that Canada will still recognize you as a Canadian citizen, just like Canada doesn't care if you become a US citizen.

The real problems come from countries who will disown you if you become a citizen of another country, or if you're of dual citizenship and need US citizenship help in your other country, that can get sticky, cause you have to follow the laws of both countries, even when tey may be in conflict with each other.