Tweet
In his Cooper Union Speech, President Obama called for common sense financial reforms. He was talking to a bunch of the thugs on Wall Street, voracious zombies who don’t deal in common sense any more than the leeches at Wellpoint. They deal in profits, and there is absolutely nothing they won’t do to protect their ability to profit at the expense of every single human on the planet, including their cubicle mates.
The common sense reforms the President supports are meaningless in the face of the depredations of Wall Street which have destroyed the lives and fortunes of millions of their fellow citizens.
1. A liquidation authority for institutions of a certain size, which will shut them down with the “… least amount of collateral damage to innocent people and businesses”. I’m sure you and your grandkids can afford that.
2. “Some limits” on the size of banks and the kinds of risks they can take, set by regulators who are appointed by the same people who did nothing last time.
3. Transparency in derivatives. These apply only to “standard” derivatives, an undefined term, to be defined by regulators appointed by the same people who watched Wall Street set fire to your money.
4. Consumer protection. The President thinks banks want to compete offering better products rather than selling confusing and expensive products. OK, that’s funny.
5. Shareholder “say on pay”, and more power to act in corporate elections if the SEC allows it. Mutual funds own most of the stock of these giants, and they have their hands in your pockets just like Wall Street does.
I’m having trouble believing my eyes. This pathetic set of reforms is the change we get to deal with the worst financial disaster in decades? The economy was crushed by an industry which functions on fraud, cheating consumers, wasting money on obviously fraudulent loans, paying itself gigantic bonuses, setting up transactions to screw their customers, raising interest and fees to the sky at the expense of a damaged group of workers, and this is what we get?
This is pathetic. No wonder the Republicans are willing to negotiate from this ludicrous starting point. By the time the negotiations are over, we can expect a mandate that each of us open three credit card accounts and use them for all purchases, paying 30% interest compounded daily, with no grace period. And if you don’t, the IRS will collect a fee equal to 1% of your income to pay for the salaries of the banksters and their lobbyists.
112 Comments
Obama is just hot air. If he was for real, he would bring William Black and Simon Johnson on board in his financial reform fight with the Republicans and Wall St.
And you have the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City stating: “Unfortunately, the proposal for regulatory reform now before the Senate does not eliminate the concept of too-big-to-fail, and it deliberately narrows the central bank’s focus to Wall Street alone.
This undermines reform in at least two important ways.
First, the decision to close a large financial firm that is failing would depend on the Treasury Department’s petitioning a panel of three United States Bankruptcy Court judges for approval to place the firm in receivership with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The panel would have 24 hours to make a decision, and if it turned down the petition, the Treasury could re-file and subsequent appeals could be considered. So a decision to put the firm in receivership might not be timely enough under the circumstances. And experience tells us that the urgency of the moment would likely motivate politically sensitive officials to simply pursue a bailout.”
SEC. 203. SYSTEMIC RISK DETERMINATION – (LG. PDF)”Such recommendation shall be made upon a vote of not fewer than 2⁄3 of the members of the Board of Governors then serving and 2⁄3 of the members of the board of directors of the Corporation then serving.” ; so 2/3 of the FED’s Board of Governors AND 2/3 of the Directors of the receivership corporation to be set up for liquidating an entity that is seen to be a ’systemic risk’ must vote in unison.
Obama is more evil than either of the Bushes or Reagan. In some ways I’m beginning to believe he’s more evil than Nixon. And I didn’t think that was possible.
He is, hands down, the most devious man ever to occupy the Oval Office.
The evidence surely seems to bare that out. Drill baby drill! Like baby whale meat? Coming to a market near you soon.
Ha ha ha… Good job, Obama!
It’s hilarious to see some of you surprised by the raping you’re taking… just enjoy it! (Otherwise, it will just be worse for you.)
An openly criminal governing class. That’s your problem. It’s not partisan either. They are all criminal. The French knew how to deal with it. You’ve not learned yet. By the time you do, I think it will be too late.
True to form. After HCR what did you expect? Now what are you going to do about it?
Excellent post masaccio! Thank you.
Are you suggesting that the left standing alongside the right to forcefully arrest power from Progressives is even remotely possible? Yeah… right… (rolling eyes).
The left will continue to get screwed (and look the other way). As distasteful as this might be, they really have no other palatable choice.
I knew we were screwed when he said he admired Ronald Reagan. Only retards admire Ronald Reagan.
Why would the left ‘look the other way’? What left are you talking about, koslings or the real left? Just curious what you’re attempting to communicate.
I’d like to make a suggestion.
Now that we understand exactly where we stand, could we stop discussing our grievences as if there were some question left, and get on with designing a plan of action?
We’re still stuck in an endless critique of what we’ve already admitted is total Kabuki. The MSM will continue to supply all the faux coverage of this charade, let’s break that cycle here amongst those with open eyes.
RhamObamaBushCo is gearing up to go to war with Iran as we spin our wheels discussing the details as-if we didn’t know for sure what is going on.
Yep, just more change we can believe in.
No.
If you thought Bush was bad with Enron, check out Obama and Goldman Sachs – the amount of money Obama took from GS makes Bush’s money look mild by comparison. Obama’s Treasury is loaded with GS people, Rahm took loads of Wall Street cash (as well as worked on Wall Street himself) and served as a consultant to GS and Obama’s head of the SEC used to run FINRA (Wall Street paid her millions). Major scams went on right under the nose of Mary Schapiro’s FINRA like Madoff and Stanford while she got paid millions to look the other way.
The reforms proposed wouldn’t have stopped what happened. There’s no explanation how this would have stopped AIG from getting bailed out and the credit default swaps paid at par nor is there any explanation how this would have stopped the Fannie/Freddie bailouts and trillion dollar backstops. Also since this is supposed to stop a TARP II from happening, how would this stop some other business bailout like GM (which GM was bailed out as part of TARP).
I am certain though that Rahm will be sure not to let a crisis go to waste and he’ll do his best to exploit the situation by playing off people’s fears in order to pass legislation that hurts people. It’s amazing if you go back and read the news from the time that Glass-Steagall was being repealed with how it sounds like what is going on today – Glass-Steagall was repealed in the name of modernization and reform and so it sounds like Obama is channeling what Rubin said back then.
And people are surprised by this how? Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush, Jr. all laid the destructive groundwork for Obama. All he had to do was step in, publicly blow Wall Street’s collective you-know-what, and assume control of the monster created by his predecessors. At no time was there any hope that he was he ever going to change anything for the better.
This is why we must end our abusive relationship with the Democrats and build up a progressive political organization that can win power while keeping its principles. It can be done. It’s really only a matter of will at this point.
Looks like all the $$$ Goldman Sachs gave Obama for his 08 campaign are paying off bigtime. Whores, they’re all whores.
Was there anything said about making it illegal for G/S to bet against their own case of betting against their own investments? Well?
As plenty of folks have pointed out the Rs, who are currently raking in more FIRE donations than the Ds, have every reason to negotiate because this, even more than HIR, is a nearly perfect starting point for earning lobbyist cash. The Ds, in order to increase their slice of the lobbyist pie will toss the few minor attempts to solve TBTF and regulatory reform in Dodd’s bill. The derivatives reform, paying the role of the public option in this version, will be a useless prop. Team Obama along with those parts of Wall Street who join him, at his request, in making the economy of corporate predators feel safe to hunt their prey without concern for legal or economic consequences, will rise to tell us how much good they have done.
One might even argue that handing the lead issue for the derivatives push to Lincoln was a stroke of genius. Almost as effective as handing it to Schumer or Dodd. Lincoln can now refill her reelection coffers by offering each of the tender morsels via the now classic lobbyist offer. A series of offers that provides pay-for-play but is somehow not a bribe and allows Team Obama to protect another blue dog. This may not be chess but certainly bears a strong resemblance to the ancient game of Go.
The solution may be so obvious that many people still have not fully realized it yet: leave the Democrats, then join or form a truly leftist political organization that can win and keep its principles intact. We already have the Green Party, the Progressive Party in some states, the Socialist Party, and a few others. Why can we not build them in like organizational fashion the way we have helped the Democrats to build their party? We can use models like that implemented in Vermont to build up Greens, Progressives, and others. We can go into the Democrats’ turf and win the support of labor. We can seize advantage of new opportunities for ballot access in states such as Ohio to raise awareness of these organizations. We can control the dialog, hone our rhetoric.
The biggest obstacle is two entirely hostile and well funded political parties owned lock, stock, and barrel by large corporations. The Democrats especially will be extraordinarily hostile toward us because we represent the left and when we run in their back yards, we win votes the Democrats unjustifiably think belong to them. So we’ll have to take things like this into account.
Surely there must be a progressive blog that allows us to use our independence from the Democrat Party toward organizing into a viable political unit.
Oh come on all of these bankers are smart guys, they deserve all the money they are getting.
thank you masaccio – I was only half snarking yesterday when I said Dodd’s final product would include a mandate X~o
general question – so there’s a Senate Vote early next week, and then is there Conference Committee to merge it with bill the House passed in December ???
no, I haven’t been paying close attention, because sadly, I knew we were getting the same ol same ol we got with HCR
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post up: FL-Sen: Republicans Will Choose Party Over Crist
Uh.. you’re not describing Progressivism. Progressives (which Obama is) goes about acquiring absolute power through any means necessary. This IS its principles.
Its about time that a few of you recognize that you are not Progressives. Of course, it’s too little too late (by a lot), and you’re on the losing side (unless you come to a Progressive way of thinking and get behind the movement). But I have more respect for you than those who are amazingly in denial about what is going on. Obama is not even trying to hide it… ha ha!
The Tea Baggers are utterly inconsequential, but even less of concern are pure liberals.
In your universe, maybe he’s a progressive. but not in this one.
We knew we weren’t getting a progressive, but we weren’t expecting Bush’s 3rd term. Or whatever it’s going to be called by the historians that survive.
Dick Durbin, in a moment of truth yesterday, told Dylan Ratigan that politics trumps good policy and it’s politics (aka money in the form of bribes) that is preventing real reform. The last minute of the following clip (apx 7:00 in) tells you all you need to know about the so called *Democrats* and the reform we WON’T get:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/ns/msnbc_tv#36720656
With all due respect, sir or madam, what the fuck are you talking about?
”We can’t begrudge savy businessmen just making a profit.” These are some of the famous quotes Obama will be remembered for.
I’d just like to ask who died and left you with the authority to define “Progressive”? You’ve come up with a completely different definition of it from those of us who have been calling ourselves Progressives for quite a while. Did you just make it up, or where is it written?
The only thing lacking from that statement from Obama was a nice villain ‘stache for him to twirl, a la Snidely Whiplash.
You know how it is funny to witness people getting played… completely fooled… and they only just start to “get it” when it is too late? That is what I am talking about. It’s hilarious seeing some of you pissed off and not able to do a thing about it.
Like I said, as meaningless and as pathetic the teabaggers are, liberals who thought they were Progressives are even more so. TOTALLY used and owned by Obama!
I’ve mentioned before that people with “principles” that are something other than the acquisition of power no matter what the cost ought to get with the program for their own benefit.
You bitch and complain about how the administration shouldn’t be “corporatist”?! Hello… where do you think the money is at? Who do you think has more power? Oh, I am sure that Obama should side with ideals that pawns hold. Do you think for a second that you couldn’t be bought off? Unfortunately, there is no reason for anyone to buy you off… it would just be easier to sweep the relatively dissenting opinions from the left under the rug.
The speech was a political speech to voters, not a governing speech to wall street. Wall street does not scare easily, they took the speech as a green light. The reform bill is even more wimpy. The only element the bankers are taking seriously at all is the government’s new resolution authority to unwind big failing banks instead of letting them fail. This protects creditors and therefore still serves as a de facto government safety net for the financial system. Ultimately, the new resolution authority may have the effect of increasing risk behavior in the markets, not decreasing it.
I see the trolls have come out to play on this fine sunny spring day.
Of course there will be no meaningful financial reform out of a prez & congress owned by Wall St. But (though I didn’t watch), I’d be willing to bet that O’s demeanor was stern at his CU speech.
You spew like you’re saying something unique that no one has considered. We have, and we’re not buying it. Cower under a rock if that’s your way, it’s nothing to me.
Reasonable question. Progressivism precedes me and you. You probably called yourself liberal before Progressive. Liberals were allowed to call themselves Progressives as it gave more power to the Progressive movement and the “liberal” title wasn’t exactly popular. But, the ideals of the two were never the same.
You still can’t see it with Obama’s actions? Keep drinking up the Hope and Change you can believe in, trans! ha ha
I am not the one with hands covering eyes and screaming “LA LA LA LA LA”… pretending it’s not happening.
Some of your own have expressed how you’re getting bent over. Yep! You are.. you really are!
Yeah, authoritarian trolls at that! The kind that think they can define us, yet don’t bother to define themselves.
Who are you addressing exactly? No one at FDL has any illusions about what is happening here…trust me, I have been lurk-trolling here for going on a year now…there are no fights to pick here.
I see progressives fed up with corporatism, and many independants who are forced to come here to escape the hypocritical “I told you so” bullshit from folks like you.
Contribute to the discussion or STFU.
Well wtf, you gotta do better than this. You can’t just walk in stick your tongue out, roll your eyes, shake your ass and do the chicken dance and expect anyone to be anything but embarrassed for you. You’re not even reaching troll status, dude, step it up!
The fact that I cursed doesn’t indicate anger on my part, more incredulity that someone could write something that makes such little sense. In fact, it’s almost the most amusing thing I’ve seen all day, since you’re commenting in a post that is the exact opposite of “Kool Aid drinking”
As bad as the highlights of the Dodd bill appear it apparently also has a nifty negation of recent Grayson – Paul legislation aimed at auditing the Fed. Ryan Grim via Huffington Post
Fixed:
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post up: FL-Sen: Republicans Will Choose Party Over Christ
It’s only a typo. No big deal. :-)
I am going to keep repeating this until it sticks. Obama and the Democrats are Blue Dog status quo corporatists. Understand this and their Potemkin financial reforms become instantly comprehensible and predictable.
Ann, Progressivism has been defined. It is a movement devoted to acquiring power and then utilized to control. It is not driven by secondary principles (which you foolishly seem to adhere to)… that is THE principle. Got it?
Mostcromulent, I am not saying “I told you so”, and I am not picking fights. I am trying to help people see beyond their dogmas and get with the program that is well underway. This is much more of contribution than your effort to stifle any expression that is not the exact same as what the chorus is singing. Ha ha … your hypocrisy is just like everyone elses.
“Progressives” fed up with corporatism are not really Progressive.
Recent update to that article:
UPDATE — Friday, April 23 — 12:33 p.m.:
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) intends to introduce an amendment on the floor effectively adding the Grayson-Paul language to the Senate bill.
Please elaborate opn the following:
“I am trying to help people see beyond their dogmas and get with the program that is well underway.”
What program? Lead us laker, oh fearless one!
Your trollish ways are clearly a waste of time. So long as you have your own private set of words to define whatever it is you imagine to be true you will always be correct in your own reality. Debate is not useful so long as you pick words like liberal or progressive and redefine them at will. The general problem is that your particular reality and its vocabulary exists only within your mind. Whether this is sociopathic or psychopathic set of delusions probably doesn’t matter very much to the outside observer. Sadly all rest of us are observing.
Bleh, he’s just playing with semantics and throwing shit around. I’ll say it again, everyone here has already considered what you are attempting to communicate, laker. You’re the one who needs to catch up, not us.
Damn.
I am not leading. Obama is. It is not fear vs no fear… it is stupid vs smart.
Progressivism is neither liberal, conservative, democrat, or repub. It simply uses the most expedient path towards amassing power and control over the people. What else is there?! There is no loyalty to any group used in acquiring power/control. When it becomes more practical and beneficial to throw a person, group of people, or entity under the bus, this is what will be done. Those who have in the past been reasonably effective at making their voice heard have been completely muzzled. Ha – it’s incredible! There are all these teabaggers and their idea of a protest is to make sure the area is cleaner than when they arrived.. what tools!
Obama artfully used democrats, liberals, and liberals who thought they were Progressive in gaining power, and the VAST majority (like just about everyone on this site) to gain the presidency. If you think he will stand for you, though, you’re kidding yourselves. But, don’t believe me, look at what he is doing.
That is the program… Stop complaining and get with it. It’s your best/only option.
Ummn, where’s the change I can believe in? This is unbelievable.
Can FDL sponsor this guy to attend remedial trolling class?
What a great refutation! Way to set things straight.
Keep sticking up for Obama! He DOES stand for you… Hope and Change! Ha ha.
We are getting with it. We oppose everything they are doing and won’t vote, donate or volunteer to the dems. Beyond that, we are still spitballing.
I’d be a troll if what I was saying wasn’t true.
Keep on believing that you define Progressivism. Obama did not been use you like cheap toilet paper… he just isn’t standing for his principles. Yeah – I am the one that’s trolling.
Ok, I get it laker. Trying a different tack huh?
these people keep redefining evil. They release some seemingly big fury on Goldman Sachs which just happens to coincide with the dodd bill going through the senate. Oh, this will not end well.
Yeah, no.
May I suggest that you learn more about “progressives”. Check out the following site “The Progressive” magazine which has been publishing since 1909.
The Progressive Magazine
President Obama is NOT a progressive.
You’re choosing the losing side, and your spitballs don’t even register as a distraction. But, at least (unlike most of the other “contributors”) you see clearly.
Maybe you’ll call yourselves Greenies… that will put the fear in the administration!
Finally, we have something we can agree upon.
If you weren’t arguing with some imaginary blind follower of the Democratic party, which you then believe represents all other non-conservatives, you might have something to contribute. Only a troll would put me, or most of the folks at FDL, down as a blind defender of either the Ds or Team Obama. Other than the fact that they would shut you down there are plenty of those kinds of sites, some blue and some orange.
“You’re choosing the losing side”
So what does the “winning” side represent? Do these people have names? What ideals do they represent? Policy suggestions? Anything substantial other than your bizarro-world views on “Progressivism”.
Your “program” seems to be pointing out the blindingly obvious. Thanks for contributing.
What? This site has been a LEADER in fighting corporatism. But I agree TF did make a great refutation, although Obama was not mentioned in TF’s comment.
You might be referring to those OFA sycophants at Daily Kos. But they are a minority even there. If you want to play with the cool kids, you need to be nicer.
For those here who are motivated to take part in direct grassroots action, there are plenty of opportunities to get involved. I plan to take the day off from work and take part in the protest on Wall Street next Thursday, where an anticipated 10,000 people will be gathering to express their outrage.
Thank you for those links CarolynC, bookmarked. I’d be there if I wasn’t 700 miles away from the scumbags, but I’ve no doubt you’ll kick ass.
We “won” the last two times and it didn’t do jack shit for us. I don’t think any of us are concerned about winning. I think we’d be happy with the Dems losing and getting the message that we aren’t going to be rolled anymore.
We’re pretty hip to the reality of who is running the show….maybe best case scenario right now is we keep our time and our money for ourselves, for better recipients down the road.
People who do not have the acumen to follow a basic argument ought to be the ones subjected to peasant status (or worse).
CarolynC, good idea on the gathering! Obama will use it (you) to say, “Look, the people demand my Progressive Wall Street reform!” You’ll make it even more of lay-up than it already is!
I agree , their all a bunch of friggin criminals. Where is Madame Defarge when we need her?
Jake, at least you understand, but I am not talking about winning and losing an election. I am talking about who ultimately gets rid of the outdated democratic process in the US and establishes real control over the people.
Yes, indeed, the French knew how to handle it. So did the Roumanians not too long ago. How absurd it is, though, that the Moderators guidelines will not even permit us to discuss here how the French and the Roumanians dealt with it, so we will all just continue our mental masturbation about the innside baseball” aspects of the totally rigged political system.
Anybody see the agency rating hearings conducted by Levin today. Absolutely disgraceful, and completes the picture that every single player in the financial markets was doing all they could, under the guise of trustworthy advisor, to take full advantage of investors with less knowledge and information. And all we do in response is continue our feeble efforts to shame them.
This comment is awaiting Moderator approval. As always.
Try convincing Jane.
Laker –
Have you taken your meds this morning?
The article ends with:
“…we can expect a mandate that each of us open three credit card accounts and use them for all purchases, paying 30% interest compounded daily, with no grace period. And if you don’t, the IRS will collect a fee equal to 1% of your income to pay for the salaries of the banksters and their lobbyists.”
Funny. No, but Obama and his deficit commission is going to start pumping more payroll taxes directly to WS with his “Social Security” reform.
Then they can finance more foreign occupations (see, their solution for climate change crises is a military one) and further extract wealth and hand over to the upper 1%.
I just called Senator Schumer and told him that the dems aren’t movitating me to go out and vote for them. Progressives, true Progressives, this is the time for us to open a third party…the Progressive Party. I am so frustrated.
That looks good. I’ll try and make it down there on Thursday. Thanks for the reference.
It is not about being evil. It is about getting things done…right. He hasn’t accomplish that because he is big business. President Obama is not a progressive. But evil, let us use our words correctly. He is for big corporations and until we build our own Progressive Parties, we are going to cry.
21stcentury, you are correct! Go Obama go!
bigjess, when you’re subjagated, you’ll always have the comfort of your murmurings and thoughts. But, you just won’t be able to say them against the wrong people too loudly.
greygret, true progressives are running the show. You’ll need to be the “greenies” or something like that.
You are reasonably accurate about the dynamics taking place, but Progressive in normal use denotes a concern with social justice. By focusing on the LABEL and giving it a definition that seems unique (even to a wordsmith), you are alienatig your audience to no purpose. Wwe all understand that those who value powe most highly will do anything to keep and increase it. OK?
Now, can you stop mind-fucking us by using the Progressive label in a strange way, and tell us what your beliefs are and what your proposed solution is to the problems we all agree we are facing. As is, we don’t know where you’re coming from, whether you are laughing because you think you are a member of the wining team (in which case we don’t need to waste time on you), or just trying to sharpen our awareness. You see how that is?
This is an attempt to be constructive, not an attack.
Do you think getting “real control over the people” is a good goal, or a bad goal? Answer that question, and we’ll all know how to react to you.
BigJess,
Absolutely, I agree with you. And I thought I was the only person thinking this. Obama seems by now to be pretty devious. For example, scolding Wall Street in public, while winking to them and doing their bidding in the actual substance of “reform”. Will people start to call him a crook one day? He is very machiavellian. Afterall, he himself admitted that he knows a thing or two about Chicago politics? He also seems cynical. Most people don’t seem to see that.
Mussolini?
Yeah! Except Mussolini had a relatively short tenure.
Obama is utterly predictable. He’ll sell this financial “reform” like he sold health care “reform.” And Digby and Marcus Kos will eat it up and ask for seconds.
Exactly. This speech is precisely the tactic used when he dished up the public option in that phoney speech way back at the start of the healthcare “debate.”
It was a lie. The plot was already set with the results pre-cooked in the back room deal with the ” stakeholders.
Ralph Nader describes O as a “concessionary” politician. Yeah, no shit. He concedes the whole game before it even starts. What a mannequin.
I appreciate the constructive criticism. I do agree that most are getting hung up on the terminology. I continue to think that liberal democrats were fooled into thinking that using the word Progressive would be accurate and good for them, but anyway…
If it makes it easier to understand, for the purpose of this thread we can call Obama (and myself) nihilists. Morality? Purpose? Right and Wrong? It’s all relative… no one has the authority to define these for everyone, unless one can gain the power to force it. So, unless it is helpful for Obama to stand for what you want, why would he?
In conclusion, 1) most of the left (and right) is screwed (and the left helped out so much, thank you); and 2) you can continue to proceed with your ideals, but I think you should get in line and support the administration in order to best position yourselves to get the most benefit. Dissenting opinions from the left will not be tolerated.
WOW. I never expected you to openly declare yourself as a nihilist. Morally bankrupt by definiton and preference. Now, we can ignore you without worrying about hurting your feelings or being unfair to you. You just don’t expect anyone to be fair unless they have a gun pointed at them. That pretty much tells us you have nothing constructive to contribute here, but are just trying to be a disrupter. Forgive me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Now I know not to piss on you should I see you afire.
Clearly we have someone in our midst who is a candidate for the rubber room. However he/she does lean toward a point. That being, viewpoints on our end of the political spectrum have no power or influence because the USA values greed over ALL else. Prog/libs are all about moral justice, not making money. Right wingers are all about making money (and maintaining dominance with said money,) and don’t give a fig about moral justice.
So it is no surprise that one side has all the power and the other stands on the side wringing it hands over all the injustice. There just isn’t any money in social justice.The question is: what can be done about it? I have not been able to come up with an answer other than to look at the very few American models that have resulted in change for social and economic justice and they are the Great Depression- New Deal, and The Civil War.
My fear is not that the elites will drive us into abject serfdom. My fear is that they will keep us hovering just above abject serfdom and never quite desperate enough to start taking the measures that Razorbrain whispers about.
All I can say is I can relate to the question “why bother?”
Didn’t Dick Durbin tell us all last yr. that the banksters on Wall st. essentially own DC? We can forget about anything more then another elaborately staged for political purposes Kabuki theater. The Gop will even play it’s roll once as again as Faux opposition. Nothing much will change except whatever reforms passed will entrench the same criminals even deeper into our pockets. Obama is a menace and a liar, he’s worse then Nixon, Reagan and BVSH 2 all put together.
Good analysis. It reminds me of a line form the movie Gangs of NY where one of the wealthy characters says We’ll be ok as long as we can count on half of the poor killing the other half for us. The half that will willingly blame and kill us are the tea baggers ( aka brown shirts).
Ha ha… I am getting lessons on morality by razorbrain. I love it when liberals try to proselytize. Hypocrites.
Regardless, it is right that I do not care what is said. All bark and no bite, and it won’t be long until even the bark is silenced as well.
Ha Ha Ha Ha… how naive! At least repukes are more honest!!!!
Yes, he did. They were some of the most prophetic words spoken by a Senator in the last decade.
Good work, seaglass. In one post call Obama a liar and menace. Then, in the next talk about the need for those in control (in a movie) for one dissenting group to kill off another. And, then call the teabaggers (who are anti-Obama) brownshirts. You’re brilliant, and the administration loves you!
This is what galls me. A really “free” market depends on customers being informed about the decisions they make. If people can’t trust financial institutions, nor the organizations that are supposed to watch them, they won’t give them their money. Ultimately, it’s in the financial industry’s best interest to be regulated adequately, and it is in society’s best interest as well. That’s not a “liberal” issue, though it might be a progressive one. It’s certainly something that conservatives ought to be able to understand.
Please, go back to Kos or whatever hokey blog you came from.
Yep.. the antiquated free market is going away.
I am sure it’s just that Obama just doesn’t know what he is doing and/or is doing a “bad” job at executing his plan.
Thank you for finally serving a purpose.
I hope all the pacifists and within-the-system junkies here will take a good hard look at this guy, and realize that he represents the essence of what we are really fighting against. “All bark and no bite . . .” he says, and he means it. The bite is all he can understand. And he is typical, not unusual, in that attitude among those on the authoritarian side of the spectrum. Take a good look, and do some thinking.
Who are you speaking for? And how do you see this “silencing” being carried out? What’s the plan, man?
Thanks for the link, rant and Chris Hedge’s appearance. Is that your site?
That’s right. I’m a total market guy, a trader, and I don’t want the public to lose trust in markets per se. But they should, if they’re going to be what they have been in recent decades.
An additional point that I dwell on is the total absence in the discussion of the concept of “price” and the central role and purpose it plays in markets. The whole idea of lots of people making decisions based on a common set of facts is that the average of all their opinions will result in the proper price at any given time. (Just like the marketplacee of ideas and freedom of speech.) Bubbles can only happen if the price function is distorted over time, which means there has been a continuing imbalance in the information flow. Overt governmental interference also distorts the natural functioning of markets. And then, short-sellers are just as remedial to the process as those who are smart enough to recognize reality by buying at the bottom. Both are correcting the misperceptions of the uninformed herd.
The trolls will overwhelm us with BS, and we will be lost in the volume.
You’re welcome. That’s Chris Hayes, BTW, and yes, it’s my site.
I don’t see how selling short is corrective, I’m afraid. Some people who are either smart or privy to inside information will win out, but beyond that, there’s not much benefit that I see, unless there’s a reliable and well-known source of information about who is selling short and why.
Good question. I think we need some balance coming from the people’s House of Representatives.
Obama’s administration doesn’t seem much interested (and it doesn’t surprise me) in really fixing things and Chris Dodd’s work with Republicans hasn’t so far generated enough real substance.
Who in the House can yell loud enough to make it clear to everyone that the Senate is wasting our time with their half-done product?
The Supreme Court doesn’t believe it’s possible for politicians or bureaucrats to be bought off, so you’re obviously wrong. Shame shame. /s
Of course, we don’t all ascribe to the same thing as the Radical 5.
We didn’t get the public option in the HCR. That’s disappointing, but we did get HCR.
Now it appears Wall St. Reform (WStR) is weak. That’s disappointing and we need more megaphones to get their attention. The nation, whatever one’s political position, needs this reform. It isn’t really a political position at all. It’s just ‘common sense’. The trouble is that Obama’s ‘common sense’ on this is really Chris Dodd’s bill and that isn’t ready for prime-time. It’s incomplete.
I don’t think “prophetic” is the word you’re looking for. He wasn’t being a prophet. He was being ‘insightful’.
Those were insightful words.
I know, people are conditioned to think short-sellers are evil. But that means everything should just go up all the time. Not rational, is that? Short-sellers are just the mirror image of buyers, gotta have sellers to match every buyer, or you have no market. Think about it. There is a correct price for everything at any given point in time. Selling or buying on inside info is illegal and wrong. But buying lows or selling highs because you make an honest and correct judgment that price has gotten seriously out of whack is the only way to bring a misinformed market back to reality. I do both, and both are equally helpful in educating the market that it is in lala-land. So, when I sold the top in October,2007, it was my way of telling the market that housing was way out of whack, and it was, having been artificially inflated. And when I bought the low in March, 2008, it was my way of telling the market that the selling was overdone and prices would go higher. And I do the same thing several times in a day, telling the market that I think prices are a couple of points too high or too low for the moment. The purpose of the market is to keep prices where they belong, and every buyer and every seller is just voting, expressing his opinion of what the correct price should be. It never becomes a moral question until someone cheats by intentionally distorting the information flow.
Remember the people Michael Lewis wrote about? Some of them were just ordinary individuals who had a bit of money to invest and they saw something strange happening in the mortgage market. Usually you would just short-sell the stock of a company you thought was going cuckoo, but in that case there was no company to short. Instead they bought CDSs to ‘bet’ on the fall of the mortgage assets. When they corrected in price (dropped like a rock) these investors were proven right and they made a killing.
By adding their voice to a stock market via a short sell there would be transparency and more people noting the consensus wasn’t all rosey. By buying a non-transparent CDS they won, but the market couldn’t register their voice and even consider there were people like John Paulson betting against mortgages. Transparency would’ve helped the market find the right price a lot faster (instead of cruising along and then crashing).
Administration backs phony ‘reform’. Republicans howl in outraged opposition to phony ‘reform’. Secretly, Republicans are OK with phony ‘reform.’ It’s corporate, regressive and people will hate it. Democrats will pay political price for phony ‘reform’.
I want my money back. I’ve already seen this flick.
To me, they’re prophetic in that they foreshadowed what’s happening now. They were also insightful, of course. No reason they can’t be both.
x2