Friday Blog Round-Up: Talk Like a Pirate Edition

I am for Walmart building an energy efficient and attractive building in place of the horrendous KMart eyesore. There is virtually no traffic at the location, however, there is easy access from FootHill Drive and Interstate 80. I now drive across the Valley to shop at Walmart or to Park City. I favor the rezoning.

I fail to see the “design” or aesthetic of the business area of Sugarhouse. Can someone please explain? Any type of city planning is not evidenced or recognizable unless the aesthetic is “shabby chic.” I live at Foothill Drive. When did the Foothill area become Sugarhouse? I must have missed the meeting.

Why not ask KMart to replace their “eyesore” as you call it? Buy some Sear’s holding Stock.. Why put your eggs in one basket? Do you think K’Mart is incapable of achieving this goal? Judging by their stock price and Sears’ Historic pro American Agenda I would think this would be the best outcome for your comunity....
Or do you have alterior motives?

At a time when our economy is already in crisis, we can’t turn the banking industry over to Wal-Mart. Please write a note to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and the Banking Committee”...and while you’re at it, express your opinion of Paulson’s bailout of Wall Street, at taxpayer expense-(taxation WITHOUT representation,BTW.) But here are the key points:

No one who foresaw the crisis, such as Krugman or Stiglitz, is involved in making the plan to fix it.
The man overseeing the bailout is the ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, a Wall Street Company. He helped cause the crisis.
Paulson helped obtain the SEC exemption which allowed brokerages to increase leverage to 60:1 from 12:1.
The money is Paulson’s to use for buying commercial and residential mortgages and mortgaged backed securities as he chooses. No one has any oversight over him, and he can pay any price he wants to, including face amount of the debt.
Courts cannot review his decisions, not can any regulators. He has to report to Congress once every six months.
He gets 700 Billion dollars to use as he sees fit, looking after the taxpayer is a “consideration” not a requirement.
Bet on that 700 Billion dollars being gone before January 20, 2009. Bet on Treasury asking for more.
That is $2,324 dollars per man, woman and child in America
There is no bailout for mortgage holders. Banks get bailed out, but not ordinary people.
Banks and brokerages made record profits these last eight years. Ordinary Americans barely broke even.
In 2007 Wall Street paid itself bonuses equal to the raises of 80 million Americans.
Banks bailed out by this plan need make no changes in how they do business.
Banks bailed out need not replace the management which drove them into insolvency.
Shareholders and bondholders of such banks do not lose a cent.
The securities which caused this crisis are still allowed.
Expect the 700 billion dollars to increase inflation, especially in oil.
Bush is asking you to trust his administration with 700 billion after spending 580 billion on the Iraq war. Do you trust him? ~~~~~~~~~~Ian Welsh Saturday September 20, 2008,FIREDOGLAKE~~~~~~Note:No ,I don’t trust Bush,McBush, OR WalMart to help us save more and live better!

Wal-Mart Kicks Off New Campaign, With New Tagline [Wall Street Journal] September,’07

The Bentonville, Ark., retailer hopes to avoid the failed liftoff of last year’s upscale marketing campaign push by splicing warm scenes of families with a tagline that promises a good life for less. The tagline “Save Money. Live Better.” replaces the “Always Low Prices” tagline that has appeared on the company’s stores and ads for the past 19 years...In unveiling the new branding effort, Wal-Mart cited an updated Global Insight study that estimates U.S. families save $2,500 a year shopping at its stores. Critics of the savings study said it “glosses over” the chain’s impact on poverty, wages and local businesses. “They are basing an entire ad campaign around some sketchy figures,” said Nu Wexler, spokesman for Wal-Mart Watch.~~~~~~WMW~~~~~~Note:Sketchy figures indeed,how about Voo-Doo economics and WalMath? Well,there goes the WalMart $2500 saving-considering the “Free Market” bailout will cost $2,324 ,for every man,woman and child in the U.S.! Are we living better,yet?

In 2007, new research from Global Insight shows the retailer now saves American families $2,500 each year, up 7.3 percent from $2,329 in 2004.” – [Wal-Mart press release, 9/12/07]

The Truth:
A University of California at Berkeley study finds Wal-Mart could raise wages without compromising its low price strategy. While Wal-Mart touts its “average” wage of $10.83, most researchers conclude that the average worker at Wal-Mart makes around eight dollars an hour. A key study from the Center for Labor Research and Education at the University for California at Berkeley concludes that:

Increasing Wal-Mart’s minimum wage wages to $10 per hour would contribute to a payroll of $2.38 billion a year, a 9.3 percent increase over the retailers’ current payroll.
Poor and low-income Wal-Mart workers could expect to earn an additional $1,020 to $4,640 a year in pre-tax income, depending on what they earn now and whether they work part-time or full-time.
If Wal-Mart shoppers were asked to absorb all of the wage increase, the average impact would be a price increase equivalent to 36 cents per shopping trip or $9.70 per year, for the store’s average consumer, who spends $1,088 per year at Wal-Mart.
High-spending Wal-Mart shoppers, (the 12.5 percent of store customers who account for 54 percent of all Wal-Mart sales and average expenditures of $9,775 per year) would see an additional cost of $1.47 per shopping trip, or up to $87.98 a year. The study estimates that 3.4 percent of Wal-Mart shoppers are both high-spending and low-income. [“Living Wage Policies and Wal-Mart,” UC Berkeley Center For Labor Research And Education, December 2007]
The Council of Better Business Bureaus criticizes Wal-Mart advertising. The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus found that recent Wal-Mart ads are misleading to consumers. “The group found that the ads — which imply that savings from Wal-Mart allowed the families to take the vacation and buy the car — could lead consumers ‘to quite reasonably take away the message that families that shop at Wal-Mart will save $2,500 per year more than families that shop at other stores.’” [New York Times, 3/31/08]

Wal-Mart is responsible for lower wages.  A robust set of research findings shows that Wal-Mart’s entry into local labor markets reduces the pay competing stores. This effect is greatest in the South, where Wal-Mart expansion has been greatest. [EPI, “Wrestling with Wal-Mart”, 6/15/06]

Global Insight study findings are “implausible.” A widely quoted figure from a study by the consulting firm Global Insight (GI) indicates that Wal-Mart’s expansion has resulted in $263 billion in savings to U.S. consumers. We find this to be implausible. The statistical analysis generating this highly influential result fails the most rudimentary sensitivity checks.  [EPI, “Wrestling with Wal-Mart”, 6/15/06]

Global Insight study relies on internal, unverifiable data.  BusinessWeek reported of the Global Insight study, “Wal-Mart hired Global Insight to conduct its own study of the retailer’s economic impact. It gave Global what it says is unprecedented access to its internal data about wages, benefits, and other employment issues.” [BusinessWeek, 10/20/05]

...reclaimed a leading spot this year at No. 4...

The Waltons had slipped on the Forbes list before the Bush economy collapsed. Further proof of my contention…

What’s good for Wal-Mart is BAD for America!

ddrb you are spouting the same old tired uproven united food and commercial workers union bullcrap fed to you

MATT: YOU are spouting the same old tired uproven bullcrap-just like YOU always do----hey,YOU are a union member,aren’t you,WalMatt?

Matt doesn’t even have a MEMBER!!!!!!  HAAAAAAAAA

ddrb

That is $2,324 dollars per man, woman and child in America

I used an estimate of one trillion dollars and calculated the cost per tax payer. That works out to about $7,000 per person. It makes me sick to my stomach.

However, I think now would be a great time for Wal-Mart to get into banking - it would be a good thing.

Regarding the GI study, I agree that the impact is overstated, but there is a positive impact on cost of living. There is a paper posted on my blog that examines Wal-Mart’s impact on poverty.

|

Last week was historic. It is a week that financial and economic people will study for generations. It also marked the end of certain elements of the Republican Party’s ideology. Below are statements the Republican party can no longer claim as part of their core ideology.

We are the party of small government

Actually, this week simply added to the the end of this claim. Under Bush II, discretionary spending has increased from $640 billion to $1.040 trillion dollars. Also remember that Bush had a Republican controlled congress for 6 of those years. However, Paulson will send a package to Congress which totals $800 billion. The Treasury will create a new agency to buy bad debt (which the WSJ’s Marketbeat blog has called the Treasury Garbage Machine). In short, when the Republicans control all branches of government they spend like drunken sailors.

We Support Free Markets

Last week the SEC banned short-selling in financial shares:

The Securities and Exchange Commission has announced a ban on short-selling financial stocks over the next two weeks. Short-selling is essentially betting that a stock’s price will go down. The SEC hopes the ban will reduce downward pressure on the market, but some think it will backfire. Wall Streeter Barry Ritholtz tells Madeleine Brand that the SEC action reverses 1,000 years of theory about how free markets should work.
In short, markets are supported when they are going up. But when they are going down, we’re going to do everything we can to prevent them from going down.

We Are the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.

No they aren’t. No Republican president has ever balanced a budget. While Republicans have argued that Reagan had to contend with Democrats, Bush II did not for 6 years. Under this scenario where the Republicans controlled all branches of government they never even came close to balancing a budget.

We are the Party of Personal Responsibility

No you’re not. When companies make really stupid decisions the Federal government bails them out. Just ask any shareholder of AIG. Or any taxpayer who will not help to finance the latest government bail-out.

Simply put, this week has demonstrated a key point: when the going gets tough, the Republicans become socialists:

If you are a fan of irony, consider this: The conservative movement has utterly hated FDR, and his New Deal programs like Medicaid, Social Security, FDIC, Fannie Mae (1938), and the SEC for nearly 80 years. And for the past 8 years, a conservative was in the White House, with a very conservative agenda. For something like 16 of the past 18 years, the conservative dominated GOP has controlled Congress. Those are the facts.

We now see that the grand experiment of deregulation has ended, and ended badly. The deregulation movement is now an historical footnote, just another interest group, and once in power they turned into socialists. Indeed, judging by the actions of the conservatives in power, and not the empty rhetoric that comes out of think tanks, the conservative movement has effectively turned the United States into a massive Socialist state, an appendage of Communist Russia, China and Venezuela.

Whenever a Republican talking head says they are for any of the above mentioned things they should be questioned to explain how that statement (I’m for free markets) jibes with banning short selling of an entire sector of the market. Whenever a Republican says he is for smaller government, have him explain the nearly doubling of discretionary spending when the Republicans controlled all branches of government.

Simply put, this week demonstrated how hollow many of the Republican values are. They sound great on paper, but aren’t put into practice when that result might cause financial harm to another Republican.~~~~~~~~Hale “Bonddad” StewartPosted September 21, 2008 ,Huffington Post~~~~~~NOTE: I think WalMart going into banking is hollow headed,just like the dummy that sits on the ventriloquist’s lap, mindlessly and mechanically mouthing his handler’s spiel,all the while being manipulated by either puppet strings from up above ,or ,from an unseen hand down below...(up his butt,directing his every gesture.)

You sounded almost rational there for a minute, Someone, until…

...I think now would be a great time for Wal-Mart to get into banking -

With Bentonville’s track record of total distain for laws and regulations, a Wal*Mart Bank would be just one more fox in the hen house. A bottom feeding fox at that.

“The free market for all intents and purposes is dead in America.” Senator Jim Bunning, (R) Kentucky ~ NYT

TPM: Taxpayers to bail out Phil Gramm’s foreign bank
The New York Times reports this evening that “foreign banks, which were initially excluded from the plan, lobbied successfully over the weekend to be able to sell the toxic American mortgage debt owned by their American units to the Treasury, getting the same treatment as United States banks.”

The Times further reports that two of the biggest foreign banks in need of such relief are Barclays and UBS. In fact, my understanding is that UBS is more on the line here than any other foreign bank.

Let’s add this up.

John McCain’s top economics advisor, who is widely believed to be his choice for Treasury Secretary, should he win in November, is former Sen. Phil Gramm. (Indeed, just last night his spokesman refused to say Gramm wouldn’t be McCain’s choice for Treasury Secretary.)

Gramm is both vice chairman of UBS’s US division and a lobbyist for UBS.

If UBS successfully lobbied over the weekend to get in on the bailout, what was Gramm’s role in the lobbying?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ -Smoogatz 9/21/08~~~~~~~NOTE: And the title of this thread is” Talk like a Pirate,"matey,we’re ALL being pirated by this Republican administration,arrghh!

Paulson: Foreign banks can use U.S. rescue plan
Published on 21-09-2008

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Sunday that foreign banks will be able to unload bad financial assets under a $700 billion U.S. proposal aimed at restoring order during a devastating financial crisis.

“Yes, and they should. Because ... if a financial institution has business operations in the United States, hires people in the United States, if they are clogged with illiquid assets, they have the same impact on the American people as any other institution,” Paulson said on ABC television’s “This Week with George Stephanopolous.”

Paulson was appearing on the Sunday television talk show circuit to provide details about the U.S. government plan for a sweeping bailout to mop up hundreds of billions of dollars in toxic mortgage debt.

The moves capped a week in which financial markets faced their most serious confluence of crises since the Great Depression in the 1930s and threatened national economies and the worldwide banking system.

Paulson defended the rescue package as painful and costly, but necessary to stabilize a financial system that has all but ground to a halt.

“The situation we had, where the markets are frozen and lending may not be available, is one that won’t be good for the American people,” he said.

“The fact that the taxpayer is in this position is painful to me.”

Paulson acknowledged that an emergency rescue plan aimed at stabilizing a financial system in freefall will cost taxpayers money, but argued that costs will not be as high the $700 billion limit of the package.

“The taxpayer is at risk,” he said on “Fox News Sunday” television program, but added, “It would be extraordinary circumstances, highly unlikely, that the cost will be anything like the amount you spend for the assets.”

Paulson said the U.S. government is pressuring financial authorities in other countries to adopt similar financial stabilization plans.

“We have a global financial system and we are talking very aggressively with other countries around the world, and encouraging them to do similar things, and I believe a number of them will,” he said.

Paulson said the sudden crisis was stunning but he expressed hope in U.S. economic resilience.

“I wouldn’t bet against the long-term fundamentals of this country,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “But this is a humbling experience to see so much fragility in our capital markets, and ask how did we ever get here.”

“I’m confident Congress will move and move quickly,” Paulson he added~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Chapter 11 provisional agreements of the NAFTA plan could be included -accordingly ,that foreign investors profits should not have their investments negatively impacted.

Viewpoint: The cult of unfettered private enterprise
By Cynthia Tucker
September 22, 2008
The high priests of capitalism are in sackcloth and ashes, their belief in markets shattered, their catechism of risk-taking renounced. From Wall Street to Detroit, once-devout believers in unfettered private enterprise are running from their religion. Now that their greed has brought the economy to the brink of depression, they want government help.

What happened to those masters of the universe? What happened to their handmaidens, the Republican politicians who denounced government regulation and read from the holy scriptures as recorded by Ayn Rand?

When ordinary Americans began to lose their homes several months ago, conservatives were quick to denounce them for being too stupid to understand a simple mortgage or too undisciplined to know how to live within their means. The right-wing talking heads had a field day denouncing plumbers and painters, teachers and personal trainers who were threatened with foreclosure: They’re idiots! They’re losers! They’re suckers!

Well, it now seems there were quite a few idiots among the brokers and bankers who bundled loans in complicated investment vehicles they didn’t fully understand. They actually believed they could vastly increase the financial rewards they received while virtually eliminating the risk of losses. That’s the very definition of “sucker.”

Last week, sensing shifting political winds, Sen. John McCain took to criticizing those Wall Street schemers, imbuing his speeches with a populist rhetoric intended to make you believe he’s always been a firm supporter of government regulation. As the Dow was plummeting, Mr. McCain was the change agent, the reformer: “The regulatory system is broken. ... We’ve got to catch up the regulatory bodies to make sure that there is the proper oversight and regulation and transparency. That is vital.”

Actually, that is laughable. In March, Mr. McCain told The Wall Street Journal: “I am fundamentally a deregulator. I’d like to see a lot of the unnecessary government regulations eliminated, not just a moratorium.”

In a speech a few weeks later, he argued that our approach “should include encouraging increased capital in financial institutions by removing regulatory, accounting and tax impediments to raising capital.”

There is a reason for McCain’s somersault. He knows the economy wouldn’t be in this mess if Congress had passed regulations to curb Wall Street excesses, so he’s feigning a sudden conversion.

So are the masters of the universe who created the vast Ponzi scheme that has entangled Wall Street, Main Street and markets around the world. After decades of fighting off government as intrusive, rigid, bureaucratic and downright dumb, financial titans are begging for taxpayer-backed bailouts. After the quasi-bailout of Bear Sterns, they were aghast when Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson refused to bail out Lehman Brothers. And they were deeply relieved when the government came to the rescue of AIG.

Wall Street kings are not the only ones begging for bailouts. Detroit automakers have also stuck their hands out, proposing that government fork over $50 billion to prop them up. They spent decades fending off efforts from Congress to improve fuel efficiency, insisting that American motorists wanted only huge gas-guzzlers. Now that they can’t sell those SUV-ehemoths, they’re staring at the possibility of financial collapse. Perhaps the pendulum is finally swinging back to a widespread recognition that government has a role to play in regulating markets, protecting consumers and providing a social safety net. That lesson comes at a very high cost: lost jobs, ruined retirement portfolios and added taxpayer debt to pay for bailouts.

Unfortunately, many experts believe the end is not yet in sight; it may be many months before the markets hit bottom and the economy starts a vigorous recovery. But there may be a small benefit in this burgeoning catastrophe: The worship of unfettered private enterprise has been exposed for what it is: just another cult.

Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Her column appears regularly(.Courtesy Baltimore Sun)NOTE: The “beauty” of the the “Free Market” ain’t so beautiful,anymore,and it sure ain’t “free”,now is it,Mary?

What happened to those masters of the universe? What happened to their handmaidens, the Republican politicians who denounced government regulation and read from the holy scriptures as recorded by Ayn Rand?

And what happened to their toadies that fill this comment section with Capitalism Über alles claptrap?

Mary? Dave? Someone? Speak up.

“The free market for all intents and purposes is dead in America.” Senator Jim Bunning, (R) Kentucky ~ NYT

However, I think now would be a great time for Wal-Mart to get into banking - it would be a good thing.

I concur - it’s obvious that the major investment banks on Wall Street were not exactly what I would call “fiscally responsible”.

As for the ddrb/Bobby “anti-WM club”, consider this…

When you watched the news, last week, how many times did you hear the name “Wal-Mart” mentioned in conjunction with Lehman Bros. and all the rest of those investment banks and their forced shotgun marriages?

Here’s your answer:  None

Now, you two can do the rest of the world a huge favor and get off your high horses, because no one is interested in what you people have to say about WM, any longer.

Face it, it’s no longer relevant.

Correction on the name…

Why not ask KMart to replace their “eyesore” as you call it?

Because Sears Holdings has a history of holding more “dark stores” (by virtue to store closings during two Kmart bankruptices) for real estate portfolio purposes than you could ever imagine possible.

Buy some Sear’s holding Stock.. Why put your eggs in one basket?

No thanks—that’s no different than going to Las Vegas (except in Vegas, you can actually have a good time in the process).

Do you think K’Mart is incapable of achieving this goal?

Absoutely.  It’s been proven on two seperate occassions over the past 15 years.

Judging by their stock price and Sears’ Historic pro American Agenda I would think this would be the best outcome for your comunity....

Tell that to those who sunk a couple hundred bucks (per share) in 2007.  As for the “Historic pro American Agenda”, it’s just that—history!

This is today—like WM and all the rest, very little hardline/softline retail product is sourced from this country.

And, by the way, SHLD is little more than a hedge fund.  It’s obvious by their dismal performance compared to WM, Target, and the mall anchors that the stores are being run by the seat of their pants…

Or do you have alterior motives?

I can’t speak for the OP, but your priase of Kmart sounds an awful lot like something your #1 fan ddrb said, a while back…

Could it be???

If what I have to say is irrelevant,isn’t it time to shelve the use of initials similar to mine? Why risk having your “glowing” thoughts mistakenly posted with MY initials? Seems you have had trouble lately getting your OWN initials” straight”....among other things.

Oh, and by the way, YOU seem to have a LOT to say about what we (Bobby and me) think,so how does that make our comments irrelevant-- unless,ofcourse, it’s because YOUR comments are even more irrelevant,perhaps?

Wal-Mart Gambled, Lost $1.3B on ‘Dead Peasant’ Policies, Insurers Say
By FRANK REYNOLDS, Andrews Publications Staff Writer

Discount retailing giant Wal-Mart cannot sue its insurers just because it gambled and lost $1.3 billion on getting a tax break from thousands of insurance policies it took out on employees, according to a brief filed by the insurers in the Delaware Supreme Court.

Press reports have dubbed the “corporate-owned life insurance” policies at issue in this litigation “dead-peasant insurance” because most of the policies were purchased by companies that employ large numbers of workers at the lower end of the wage scale and most of the policy benefits went to the companies rather than to families of deceased employees.

The practice was curtailed in the mid-1990s when the federal government, which had previously called the financing scheme “tax arbitrage,” closed the tax loophole and began to pursue Wal-Mart for back taxes.

Meanwhile, outraged employees and their relatives sued.
After the Chancery Court dismissed the suit, Wal-Mart appealed, claiming that the lower court overlooked the duty of the insurers to deal in good faith with their client.

“Wal-Mart’s allegations of misrepresentation fail as they concern non-actionable expressions of opinion of law or future or contingent events not representations of fact,” the insurers say.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. et al. v. AIG Life Insurance Co. et al., No. 172, answering brief filed (Del. Aug. 12, 2005).
Delaware Corporate Litigation Reporter
Volume 20, Issue 05
09/08/2005 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~NOTE: AIG sold WalMart millions of dollars worth of these dead janitor policies,considered illegal in some states. The insurance company extended loans against the value of the policies which WalMart wrote off as business expense. Later,when the employee died,WalMart cashed in the policy,with W/M themself as beneficiary...even in cases where the employee had left the company years earlier.

Correction on the name…

You, bb, and you alone are the reason I use this sig quote:

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. ~ George Carlin

Where is Alex Goldschmidt? Is she still “keeper of the gate?” You forgot to close the gate,Alex.

If what I have to say is irrelevant,isn’t it time to shelve the use of initials similar to mine?

Or is it that your initials are similar to mine?

Or maybe I just like “dishing it all back” to you!

Since neither of us will probably ever disclose who we really are, I guess we’ll never know…

Seems you have had trouble lately getting your OWN initials” straight”....among other things.

Doubtful on that, “Googly”...I haven’t been around here, much over the past couple of weeks.

Oh, and by the way, YOU seem to have a LOT to say about what we (Bobby and me) think...

Either you two were twins seperated at birth, you’re married to one other, or perhaps one of you is a “charcter within a character”?

AIG sold WalMart...

And AIG sold me auto insurance in the 90’s—your point is??

NEWSFLASH FOR: anonymous in usa.com

Calling the puke you post “poetry,” is like referring to the National Enquirer as great investigative journalism.

Sigh....
When did our Democracy become a Dumb-ocracy?

Idiocracy is a 2006 American dark comedy directed by Mike Judge, and starring Luke Wilson and Maya Rudolph. The two main characters sign up for a military hibernation experiment that goes awry, and they awaken 500 years in the future. They discover that the world has devolved into a dystopia where marketing, commercialism, and cultural anti-intellectualism run rampant and dysgenic pressure has resulted in a uniformly stupid human society.

Despite its lack of a major theatrical release, the film has achieved something of a cult following because of its satire of the “dumbing down” of contemporary society and the breakdown of individual responsibility and consequences.


Synopsis
A narrator explains that natural selection is indifferent to intelligence, so that in a society in which intelligence is systematically debased, stupid people easily out-breed the intelligent, creating, over the course of five centuries, an irremediably dysfunctional society. Demographic superiority favours those least likely to advance society. Consequently, the children of the educated élites are drowned in a sea of sexually promiscuous, illiterate, alcoholic, proletarian peers.~~~~~~~~~~~Wiki~~~~~~~~Bobby,you gotta rent or download a copy of this movie. Hilarious!BTW,Mike Judge is the creator of King of the Hill,and, Beavis and Butthead, This,however,is NOT an animated feature,but is portrayed by REAL people. It is a MUST!

and your point?

if any, must be hilarious.......

well another hack, cut & paste from the.......

pointless ddrb.....

Pointed enough for you to take time off from your purgative poetic pursuits to comment.

And I said to myself… What a Wonderful World!

Best Remake: Joey Ramone. If you haven’t heard it then find it, here it, think, and THEN RESPOND!

To pick up the morning paper and see the word “recount” in a headline stirs an ominous case of déjà vu.

Judge Robert Rosenberg examines a ballot in Broward County, Florida, during the election recount in 2000.

At issue in recent days in Palm Beach County is a local judicial race that is hardly of national note. But problems with administering the local election, and statements from county officials that some critics call confusing, if not contradictory, have some worried about the coming presidential election.

Polls showing a dead heat in the battle for Florida’s 27 electoral votes only add to the drama.

“Managerially, software-wise, procedure-wise, training-wise, there is no confidence that these people will be ready in less than 50 days for the election we are all going to have,” said Sid Dinerstein, the Palm Beach County Republican chairman.

“Never again!” was the county’s promise after the butterfly ballots and hanging chads of the 2000 recount drama.

For 2004, the county switched to touch-screen machines. There were no major issues here. But some local Democrats, including Rep. Robert Wexler, demanded changes because they said the touch-screen system might be vulnerable to fraud and did not, in their view, provide a reliable audit trail.

So the county switched again, to its third system in eight years, this time a paper ballot that is scanned by an optical reading device. The paper is then retained in case of recounts or other irregularities

“Never again!” was the county’s promise after the butterfly ballots and hanging chads of the 2000 recount drama.

My Chinese-made crystal ball tells me to keep an eye on Michigan for Republican shenanigans this time around. They get Detroit burning, the whole state is liable to go up in flames.

Wal-Mart is the exemplar of a form of corporate colonialism, which is to say, organizations from one place going into distant places and strip-mining them culturally and economically. ~ James Howard Kunstler

How was it “Republican shenanigans” that Democrats in Florida supposedly weren’t smart enough to figure out a ballot.  I always knew Democrats weren’t very bright but blaming their lack of intelligence on Republicans is a little absurd.

Dave,
The Democrats may, or may not be very bright, but what does that make the Republicans who voted for Bush? Two Terms!!!! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me Twice… I wouldn’t be throwing any stones in a glass house right now if I were you. At the end of the day, as an independent I wish things would have worked out differently in Florida in 2000. I don’t think the Republicans have any bragging rights at this particular moment in history.

Bobby’s Ghost: Well,want another illustration of Repube “shenanigans”?? Although the American public is being told this is of” imminent importance”,according to Tony Fratto,White House Deputy Press Secretary,its been on the drawing boards for weeks-"but a few days is enough time for the lawmakers to review it!” .....To wit:

White House Dispatches Team to Push Economic Bill
September 23, 2008, 10:42 a.m.
By Keith Koffler
Roll Call Staff

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The White House today is drumming up extraordinary pressure on Congress to approve its plan to enact a $700 billion mortgage bailout fund, suggesting the markets cannot wait much longer and dispatching Vice President Cheney and other top officials up Pennsylvania Avenue to jawbone lawmakers.
Cheney, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and presidential adviser Ed Gillespie are meeting this morning with House Republican conservatives, where a rebellion is brewing against the size and questionable free market credentials of the administration proposal.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who collaborated in drawing up the proposal, are testifying this morning on Capitol Hill in an effort to defend their handiwork.

But Bush himself continues to do little to explain his plan, and he has refused to be questioned about it.

Asked during a telephone briefing for reporters today whether Bush was speaking with lawmakers, White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto said the president is aware of their concerns but that Paulson is the salesman.

Paulson said Congress and the administration must move rapidly.

“We must do so in order to avoid a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets that threaten American families’ financial well-being, the viability of businesses both small and large, and the very health of our economy,” Paulson said in remarks as prepared for delivery. “The market turmoil we are experiencing today poses great risk to U.S. taxpayers.”

Fratto said it would be “unthinkable” for Congress not to pass legislation this week, asserting the result would be a “very, very serious situation” for the U.S. economy.

“It shouldn’t take much analysis to remember what happened last week, which was a very serious freeze-up in our credit markets,” Fratto said. “Our financial markets right now do not need uncertainty, they need increased certainty as to how this rescue plan is going to go forward — and that they can be sure that there is a plan to go forward — and that will begin the correction in our financial markets.”

Fratto insisted that the plan was not slapped together and had been drawn up as a contingency over previous months and weeks by administration officials. He acknowledged lawmakers were getting only days to peruse it, but he said this should be enough.

Amid growing criticism of the initiative from multiple quarters, Fratto sought to defend its key principles and argue against changes.

He argued that the proposal is being unfairly characterized as a boon to Wall Street at the expense of Main Street, since credit market difficulties also squeeze average consumers. He minimized the need to help homeowners as part of the package — a key demand of Democrats — saying aiding the credit markets will help on its own and noting that Congress just approved a housing bill that includes assistance.

And Fratto sought to beat back efforts to limit the pay of CEOs whose companies would draw assistance under the legislation, saying it would make it difficult for the plan to work “If you provide disincentives for companies and firms out there that are holding mortgage-backed securities and other securities from participating in the program.”

Fratto noted that some firms holding troubled securities are otherwise successful. “They were not necessarily irresponsible players, and so you have to be careful how you deal with them,” he said.~~~~~~~~~Roll Call via What Really Happened

We’ve all heard of shadow government-here’s shaadow baking,also known as “dark liquidity"----The shadow banking system is unravelling
By Nouriel Roubini

Published: September 21 2008
Last week saw the demise of the shadow banking system that has been created over the past 20 years. Because of a greater regulation of banks, most financial intermediation in the past two decades has grown within this shadow system whose members are broker-dealers, hedge funds, private equity groups, structured investment vehicles and conduits, money market funds and non-bank mortgage lenders.

Like banks, most members of this system borrow very short-term and in liquid ways, are more highly leveraged than banks (the exception being money market funds) and lend and invest into more illiquid and long-term instruments. Like banks, they carry the risk that an otherwise solvent but liquid institution may be subject to a self­fulfilling and destructive run on its ­liquid liabilities.

But UNLIKE banks, which are sheltered from the risk of a run – via deposit insurance and central banks’ lender-of-last-resort liquidity – most members of the shadow system did NOT have access to these firewalls that ­prevent runs.

A generalised run on these shadow banks started when the deleveraging after the asset bubble bust led to uncertainty about which institutions were solvent. The first stage was the collapse of the entire SIVs/conduits system once investors realised the toxicity of its investments and its very short-term funding seized up.

The next step was the run on the big US broker-dealers: first Bear Stearns lost its liquidity in days. The Federal Reserve then extended its lender-of-last-resort support to systemically important broker-dealers. But even this did not prevent a run on the other broker-dealers given concerns about solvency: it was the turn of Lehman Brothers to collapse. Merrill Lynch would have faced the same fate had it not been sold. The pressure moved to Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs: both would be well advised to merge – like Merrill – with a large bank that has a stable base of insured deposits.

The third stage was the collapse of other leveraged institutions that were both illiquid and most likely insolvent given their reckless lending: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, AIG and more than 300 mortgage lenders.

The fourth stage was panic in the money markets. Funds were competing aggressively for assets and, in order to provide higher returns to attract investors, some of them invested in illiquid instruments. Once these investments went bust, panic ensued among investors, leading to a massive run on such funds. This would have been disastrous; so, in another radical departure, the US extended deposit insurance to the funds.

The next stage will be a run on thousands of highly leveraged hedge funds. After a brief lock-up period, investors in such funds can redeem their investments on a quarterly basis; thus a bank-like run on hedge funds is highly possible. Hundreds of smaller, younger funds that have taken excessive risks with high leverage and are poorly managed may collapse. A massive shake-out of the bloated hedge fund industry is likely in the next two years.

Even private equity firms and their reckless, highly leveraged buy-outs will not be spared. The private equity bubble led to more than $1,000bn of LBOs that should never have occurred. The run on these LBOs is slowed by the existence of “convenant-lite” clauses, which do not include traditional default triggers, and “payment-in-kind toggles”, which allow borrowers to defer cash interest payments and accrue more debt, but these only delay the eventual refinancing crisis and will make uglier the bankruptcy that will follow. Even the largest LBOs, such as GMAC and Chrysler, are now at risk.

We are observing an accelerated run on the shadow banking system that is leading to its unravelling. If lender-of-last-resort support and deposit insurance are extended to more of its members, these institutions will have to be regulated like banks, to avoid moral hazard. Of course this severe financial crisis is also taking its toll on traditional banks: hundreds are insolvent and will have to close.

The real economic side of this financial crisis will be a severe US recession. Financial contagion, the strong euro, falling US imports, the bursting of European housing bubbles, high oil prices and a hawkish European Central Bank will lead to a recession in the eurozone, the UK and most advanced economies.

The writer, chairman of Roubini Global Economics (www.rgemonitor.com), is professor of economics at the Stern School of Business, New York University
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

Sorry,that should read SHADOW BANKING.................

My Chinese-made crystal ball tells me to keep an eye on Michigan for Republican shenanigans...” ~Ken V

If not there, then in Ohio, Ken.

If history has taught us anything, it should be that if Republicans can’t win the election outright, they steal it any way they can.

“The Democrats may, or may not be very bright, but what does that make the Republicans who voted for Bush? Two Terms!!!! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me Twice… I wouldn’t be throwing any stones in a glass house right now if I were you. At the end of the day, as an independent I wish things would have worked out differently in Florida in 2000. I don’t think the Republicans have any bragging rights at this particular moment in history. “

How is this all the Repbulicans fault?  I was reading up on the “Community reinvestment act” that Clinton made stronger, and according to the liberal sources it wasn’t the cause of this crisis because only half of the defaulted mortgages fell under this act.  I’m not sure why this was there defense since I think if you cut the problem in half it would be a lot better right now.  Also how do you tell someone buying investment property that they aren’t worthy of a loan when their neighbor has a lower credit score than them and has less income.  By forcing lenders to make bad loans the Democrats opened the door to all kinds of problems.  Perhaps Bush should have acted sooner, but even if he had he would have gotten grief for “giving in to big business.” It was yet another situation that he inherited that was inevitably going to go badly.

Also Bobby, I can’t remember if it was you that was talking up Carter but if it was, he was the one that originally signed the Community reinvestment act that is responsible for at least half of the current subprime mortgage process.  It’s great when liberals enact socialism and then blame the little bit of a free market that is left when their socialism fails badly.

...  Jesse LeePosted September 24, 2008 | 12:41 PM (EST)
41 Days Out (Rick Davis Day): “He was John McCain’s campaign manager and it was felt you couldn’t say no.”

Maybe it’s better that John McCain’s top advisors are spending their time during this crisis in a losing war on the New York Times. The less people like Rick Davis have time to advise him on the economic situation, the better for America. Almost patriotic of him.

Washington Post: “The lobbying firm founded and co-owned by Rick Davis, the campaign manager for Sen. John McCain’s White House bid, received payments from Freddie Mac in recent months, despite assertions by Davis earlier this week that the firm’s work for the mortgage giant had ended three years ago. An industry source told The Washington Post that Davis’s firm, Davis Manafort, continued to receive monthly payments in the $15,000 range from Freddie Mac until very recently, confirming an ongoing financial relationship reported last night in several other publications. The source said Davis Manafort was paid for being on retainer to Freddie Mac but did little actual work after early 2007.”
Newsweek: “...Davis’s lobbying firm, Davis Manafort, based in Washington, D.C., continued to receive $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac until last month--long after the Homeownership Alliance had been terminated. The two sources, who requested anonymity discussing sensitive information, told NEWSWEEK that Davis himself approached Freddie Mac in 2006 and asked for a new consulting arrangement that would allow his firm to continue to be paid. The arrangement was approved by Hollis McLoughlin, Freddie Mac’s senior vice president for external relations, because ‘he [Davis] was John McCain’s campaign manager and it was felt you couldn’t say no,’ said one of the sources. [McLoughlin did not return phone calls].”
New York Times: “They said they did not recall Mr. Davis’s doing much substantive work for the company in return for the money, other than to speak to a political action committee of high-ranking employees in October 2006 on the approaching midterm Congressional elections. They said Mr. Davis’s firm, Davis Manafort, had been kept on the payroll because of his close ties to Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who by 2006 was widely expected to run again for the White House.”
One would think that might bother the McCain campaign, given that McCain’s said that “At the center of the problem were the lobbyists, politicians, and bureaucrats who succeeded in persuading Congress and the administration to ignore the festering problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” Sadly, no! It’s all the boogeyman New York Times’ fault! So out went yet another McCain campaign screed (this time with a special shout-out to HuffPo). Without spending too much time debunking, the Politico headline, “McCain camp attacks Times, doesn’t deny report,” and HuffPo take, “McCain Camp Whacks And Misses In Latest NYT Attack,” probably tell you all you need to know.

So what’s the next question, given that Rick Davis apparently was taking hundreds of thousands of dollars for basically nothing except for being John McCain’s friend?~~~~~~~~~~~~~Huffington Post~~~~~~~NOTE: Rick Davis said this campaign would NOT be about issues,but personalities. I somehow don’t think he thought it would be about HIS!(BTW,Davis is the one who targeted WalMart moms as a GOP demographic for this election. Wonder what example this sets for the kids of those moms? Saving more and living better than those left homeless by Fannie and Freddie,while Davis gets paid for just BEING around McCain?

Monday, July 14 at 01:51 PM

From Wal-Mart Moms to Facebook Independents, GOP Targets Voters ----April 5,2008

SANTA ANA PUEBLO — Remember the soccer moms?
The top campaign official for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain on Friday identified five groups of target voters, a wide-ranging bloc that includes young people, Hispanics and what he called “Wal-Mart moms,’’ “Rehab Republicans’’ and “Facebook independents.’’
Addressing the Republican National Committee’s meeting of state chairmen at posh Tamaya Resort, McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said those voters will play a major role in this fall’s general election.
He urged GOP officials to familiarize themselves now.
“Go to Wal-Mart and stand next to the greeter for 20 minutes,’’ he said. “Go see the voters we’re targeting. If you see them, you’ll understand them.’’
Such political and cultural talk rises every four years, when campaigns identify groups that are evenly divided over which presidential candidate to support, as well as the issues those people view as most important.
This year, Davis said it’s not just McCain’s White House bid that stands to benefit from securing support from targeted groups, but also GOP candidates for federal offices and state legislative seats further down the ticket.
Davis listed the targeted voters in this order:
_ Wal-Mart moms. The description sounds like an updated version of soccer moms, battling a sluggish economy. “They shop at Wal-Mart,’’ Davis said. “They don’t have expensive tastes. They are suburban by nature.’’
_ Rehab Republicans. Longtime GOP members “who are not so enthusiastic over the last few years,’’ Davis said. “We’ve got to get them back.’’
_ Youth. Davis acknowledged the energy and enthusiasm Democratic candidate Barack Obama is drawing at rallies attracting thousands of young voters.
“We’ve got to go after this segment,’’ he said, suggesting outreach and education efforts through improvements to campaign Web sites.
“Obama’s site looks like a Calvin Klein commercial, very hip,’’ Davis said, adding that McCain’s site, while quite productive for campaign fundraising efforts, “is like a Buster Brown commercial.’’
_ Facebook independents. Tech-savvy, social networkers who are fiscally and socially conservative. “A critical, growing group,’’ he said. “They spend a lot of time on the Internet. When they pick a candidate, they tend to become activists.’’
_ Hispanics. “This group is critical to our party, not just in the Southwest or Florida but the whole nation,’’ Davis said.
Spanish-language versions of McCain television advertisements will air in key markets, Davis said. “We’re putting our money behind this effort. We’re putting our time behind this effort,’’ he said.~~~ (VIA Wake Up Walmart)~~~~~~~~~~~~~Note: I hope ALL these targeted groups are looking and listening VERY closely now,in light of the Imperial Welfare for Wall Street-but with a goodbye and fare thee well to Main Street.

This year, Davis said it’s not just McCain’s White House bid that stands to benefit from securing support from targeted groups, but also GOP candidates for federal offices and state legislative seats further down the ticket. ~~~~~~~~~~NOTE: Stand to benefit,now?

Dave,

CRA:

Clinton Administration Changes of 1995

In 1995, as a result of interest from President Bill Clinton’s administration, the implementing regulations for the CRA were strengthened by focusing the financial regulators’ attention on institutions’ performance in helping to meet community credit needs. These revisions with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995 were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. These changes were very controversial and as a result, the regulators agreed to revisit the rule after it had been fully implemented for seven years. Thus in 2002, the regulators opened up the regulation for review and potential revision.

Part of the increase in home loans was due to increased efficiency and the genesis of lenders, like Countrywide, that do not mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks using the new subprime authorization. This is known as the secondary market for mortgage loans. The revisions allowed the securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages. The first public securitization of CRA loans started in 1997 by Bear Stearns.* The number of CRA mortgage loans increased by 39 percent between 1993 and 1998, while other loans increased by only 17 percent.

* Note: The first public securitization of CRA loans started in 1997 by Bear Stearns.  Wasn’t Bear Sterns, also the second to fall?

George W. Bush Administration Proposed Changes of 2003

In 2003, the Bush Administration recommended what the NY Times called “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.” This change was to move governmental supervision of two of the primary agents guaranteeing subprime loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. However, it did not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enabled them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. The changes were generally opposed along Party lines and eventually failed to happen.**

** Note: Failed to happen!!  Makes one wonder what would have happened if it DIDN’T fail to happen!!