lorianne

Last active
3 years, 3 months ago
  • HOLY BAILOUT – Federal Reserve Now Backstopping $75 Trillion Of Bank Of America’s Derivatives Trades

    http://dailybail.com/home/holy-bailout-federal-reserve-now-backstopping-75-trillion-of.html

  • lorianne commented on the blog post That Giant Sucking Sound

    2011-10-15 10:42:11View | Delete

    China is spending gobs of money elarging the Panama canal complex.

    China and Colombia announce ‘alternative Panama Canal’
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12448580

    http://www.dailydem.com/articles/2011/10/11/news/news2.txt

    http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/us/2011-10/11/content_13875185.htm

  • lorianne commented on the blog post Aim Big

    2011-10-15 08:13:34View | Delete

    I could not agree more with Jon Walker.

    However, how can OWS ‘go big’ if they seemingly do not understand the big picture? We have had a fake economy for decades. Our economy is was not/is not sustainable. It was based 70% on debt based consumption, based on fake asset valuation rise. This could not go on forever, and it hasn’t. It’s coming to an end right now.

    Unless they understand the fundementals of what our economy was based on, I don’t see how they can propose BIG changes to it.

    Sure, getting rid of fraud and corruption (and government complicity in same) is always a noble goal as those are always factors in any system. But as near as I can tell, OWS is demanding minor reforms to a fundementally unsound, unsustainable economic system … an entirely debt based consumerist system.

  • Nancy Pelosi the bailout queen is down with OWS?
    That’s a laugh.

    Also the majority of Dems who voted for the bailouts and back-door bailouts and continue to do so, and are about to bailout Wall Street again?

    If OWS accepts their endorsement they and their movement are a fraud.

  • This is how it should be and should have been from the beginning.

    Only States shouldn’t have to ‘request’ a waiver from the Federal Government in order to implement their own health insurance system … or any other system

  • Employees pay for all their health insurance (always have)
    Your first graph shows that very clearly.

    Who is paying is not the problem. The problem is no competition and the runaway costs.

    Because employees have been duped into thinking that their employer is paying for some or all of the insurnace premium, they are not as aware of the rising costs. If employees had to pay the full cost of premiums every month on an invoice basis (rather than hidden in their compensation), there would be a hue and cry for more affordable options, more competition, price shopping doctors, hospitals, clinics, services, etc.

  • lorianne commented on the blog post Obama Administration’s Protest Hypocrisy

    2011-08-27 19:24:21View | Delete

    Get a grip.
    At least you weren’t labeled as ‘terrorists’

  • lorianne commented on the blog post Thoughts On Libya

    2011-08-23 13:22:40View | Delete

    Well said.
    Even if it turns out great, I still don’t agree on the same grounds you outlined.

  • lorianne commented on the blog post Economic Stagnation Leads to Anger

    2011-08-19 19:40:37View | Delete

    anger__ you mean over stuff like this?

    Peter Haller, also known as Peter Simonyi, a former Goldman Sachs VP now working for Chairman Issa to block regulations on Goldman Sachs

    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/18/298485/exclusive-goldman-sachs-vp-changed-his-name-now-advances-goldman-lobbying-interests-as-a-top-staffer-to-darrell-issa/

    Has Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) turned the House Oversight Committee into a bank lobbying firm with the power to subpoena and pressure government regulators? ThinkProgress has found that a Goldman Sachs vice president changed his name, then later went to work for Issa to coordinate his effort to thwart regulations that affect Goldman Sachs’ bottom line.

    In July, Issa sent a letter to top government regulators demanding that they back off and provide more justification for new margin requirements for financial firms dealing in derivatives. A standard practice on Capitol Hill is to end a letter to a government agency with contact information for the congressional staffer responsible for working on the issue for the committee. In most cases, the contact

  • We are going to be ‘downgraded’ no matter what.
    It is a tool of financial terror.
    They used it against Iceland, even telling them they wouldn’t be able to buy food … but Iceland said NO to the banksters. They have had a tough time of it, but they are slowly recovering.

    There is no easy painless way out of this mess.
    That is the LIE that both political sides are promoting in one form or another.

    But a lot of us know this is a lie and expect things to get worse, a whole lot worse, before they get better. Even if we would like to believe the lie that we can get out of our situation with some form of financial voodoo, we know that’s not going to happen. So we can’t take either side very seriously.

    Ratings agencies and the IMF are financial terrorists. We’ve already been warned about them in the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman.

  • lorianne commented on the blog post Obama: Cut Spending to Spend More

    2011-07-17 17:55:23View | Delete

    I get what the President is saying (as garbled as it is) but I don’t buy it. Not because of him .. I’m sure he is sincere in his belief that once we get our fiscal house in order, Congress would then focus on helpful spending legislation.

    The problems are:

    1. Congress will spend on unproductive pork projects, subsidies, bailouts,
    and create tax loopholes for their donors … and get us right back into the situation we are in today.

    2. Even if Congress did, in some alternative universe, narrow down spending to projects that would help ‘win the future’, there would be plenty of disagreement on what those FEW items are.

    Fortunatly, we’ll never have to worry about #2. What we need to do is focus our spending more locally … at the State and lower levels. Raise the monies locally, spend the monies locally, with Congress getting their hands on as little taxpayer money as possible.

    We can ‘win the future’ more locally. Not only is it more in keeping with our Constitution, it’s a hell of a lot more likely to happen.

  • Obama’s attitude is entirely consistent with his entire administration; advisors,agency appointments, cabinet appointments as well as the former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who all have a “minority report – department of future crimes” attitude about anyone who challenges their policies or exhibits any kind of dissent.

    Quite honestly, I don’t think this attitude originates from Obama himself, but he seems to have assimilated it.

  • This whole health care debate is a minefiels of lies, distortions, propoganda, half truths, misleading information.

    At the top of the heap is the duplicitious Kathleen Sebelius

    ObamaCare’s Campaign of Misinformation
    http://blogs.forbes.com/merrillmatthews/2011/03/28/obamacares-campaign-of-misinformation/

  • What do you mean “killed moral hazard”?

    The Federal government has CREATED more moral hazard by bailing out the big banks and failed corporations. The moral hazard is that now everyone expects to be bailed out, all the time. No one takes any responsibility for whether the succeed or fail.

    I think you are using the term moral hazard backwards.

    Moral hazard occurs when a party insulated from risk behaves differently than it would behave if it were fully exposed to the risk.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

  • Welcome to the future.

    Well, actually more of the same. Government CREATES monopolies, it’s what it does best.

  • Exactly.
    Exactly why there is not such thing as a ‘free market’.
    There are free-er markets (comparatively speaking) but not a totally free market. Goverment collusion is a big part of the un-free nature of markets.

  • There was never any “free market” in health insurance.

  • More often, though, in America, they seek corporate welfare from the government. They make huge donations to politicians in hopes that, in exchange, the politicians will give them hugely profitable government subsidies or special government-protected monopolies

    Which is exactly what was/is happening on the State level with health insurance companies.

    There was never any “free market” in health insurance.

  • I applaud Vermont.
    But why haven’t they (or other Dem majority states) enacted single payer health care before now?

    This is the way it should have been from the start, State by State.

  • Some interesting thoughts Jon, very much appreciated.

    For your files, here is Delaware Senator Ted Kaufman on the Daily Show explaining the role of the Senate

    America’s founders designed the Senate to be the place where everything stopped. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-october-26-2010/ted-kaufman

    I see no reason the same role (brakes on what the House of Reps do) could not be set up as you propose. I do think that people with longer terms are less susceptible to “heat of the moment” type legislation. Facing election every 2 years (actually every 1.5 year is you take off 6 months for campaigning) has got to have a big effect on how house members vote.

    “Senate is the saucer that cools the hot tea of the house” Thomas Jefferson

  • Load More