|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:06 am Post subject: We have been saved! |
 |
|
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93J5NJO0&show_article=1
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON (AP) - With the economy on the brink and elections looming, Congress approved an unprecedented $700 billion government bailout of the battered financial industry on Friday and sent it to President Bush for his certain signature.
The final vote, 263-171 in the House, a comfortable margin that was 58 more votes than it garnered on Monday. The vote capped two weeks of tumult in Congress and on Wall Street, punctuated by daily warnings that the country confronted the gravest economic crisis since the Great Depression if lawmakers failed to act.
Bush was poised to make a statement on the historic vote.
"We all know that we are in the midst of a financial crisis," House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, said shortly before casting his vote for government intervention in private capital markets that was unthinkable only a month ago.
"And we know that if we do nothing, this crisis is likely to worsen and to put us into an economic slump like most of us have never seen."
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the bill was needed to "Begin to shape the financial stability of our country and the economic security of our people."
Stocks were up on Wall Street, where there was a lot of anticipation of the vote but where investors also were buffeted by a bad report on the job market. The Labor Department said employers slashed 159,000 jobs in September, the largest cut in five years and further evidence of a sinking economy.
Even before the measure cleared Congress, the White House sought to dampen optimism of its immediate impact on the economy. "This legislation is to fix a problem in our financial markets," said spokesman Tony Fratto. "It's not sold as giving a boost to the economy, but rather preventing a crisis in our economy... If it works as we hope it will, credit will be able to begin flowing again."
The House vote marked a sharp change from Monday, when an earlier measure was sent down to defeat, largely at the hands of angry conservative Republicans.
Senate leaders quickly took custody of the measure, adding on $110 billion in tax and spending provisions designed to attract additional support, then grafting on legislation mandating broader mental health coverage in the insurance industry. The revised measure won Senate approval Wednesday night, 74-25, setting up a furious round of lobbying in the House as the administration, congressional leaders, the major party presidential candidates and outside groups joined forces behind the measure.
It worked�augmented by a sudden switch in public opinion that occurred after the stock market took its largest-ever one-day dive on Monday.
"No matter what we do or what we pass, there are still tough times out there. People are mad�I'm mad," said Republican Rep. J. Gresham Barrett of South Carolina, who opposed the measure the first time it came to a vote. Now, he said, "We have to act. We have to act now."
Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., another convert, said, "I have decided that the cost of doing nothing is greater than the cost of doing something." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Too many elderly and soon-to-be elderly depend on their returns on the market for retirement. That's what this is about: their anxiety. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, it passed. Good. It's only a week after Paulson said the economy could collapse, which brings his judgement into question. But anyway.
We now have one more thing to watch on Election night: How many, if any, candidates will be punished for voting for/against this bill. Only about 30 of the 435 House seats are competitive (which is a separate scandal all its own).
I was startled to hear Palin say gov't is not always the answer and it should get out of the way of markets (at least twice). McCain is calling for more regulation, from the clips I've seen. I'm curious to see if the Republicans drop the Reagan mantra or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are "vulture fund" buyers who would have rescued some of this but as long as the investment firms and mortgage holders think they can get a better deal from public dollars there's no motivation for the private sector to work it out.
Vulture funds are not bad, either, despite the name. I think Buffet is largely a vulture fund guy. Korea Exchange Bank and Daewoo and lots of Korean assets were the target of "vulture" type buyouts but these funds saved them and grew them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has anyone actually read the bailout law? So it passed without providing for judicial oversight?
And is it true that it is for $700 billion at a time, meaning multiples of $700 billion?!?!?
Bailout - Devil is in the details
| Quote: |
10-3-08 | I find it interesting that among all the talk today about the bailouts that most people think we have no choice in the matter. That without the government stepping in all would be lost and America would go down the tubes. But how many of us have actually read the actual verbiage of the bailout act. I got the following email from the Ron Paul organization highlighting a few points that should be of interest to all Americans.
The bill states that: �The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time.� Most of us have been told that this is the total amount of the bailout, but as you can see it is the amount available �at any one time,� meaning they can do it again and again without any further legislation or consent of the governed.
The act also designates financial institutes as �financial agents of the Government.� In effect nationalizing the banking system whereas prior to this event banks were only a �chartered� government entity, meaning they could be regulated. Now if you are an agent of the government, how easy is it going to be for the government to look at all the books of the bank and have access to every bank account for every person in the banking system? With one foul swoop they have entered every banking account in the country to know exactly what you and I are doing with our money.
And to make sure no one can question anything they do in this regard the bill states: �Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.� Now they have set themselves outside of the ability of anyone, inside or out of the government, to question what they have done. There actions cannot be questioned in court or by any �administrative agency.� How would you like to have that kind of power.
I find it quite interesting that the very problem that was caused by government involvement in the financial market is now looked upon as the answer to resolve that problem. By increasing government involvement and regulation, which caused the problem in the first place, and then place themselves in a position of immunity by not allowing their decisions to be reviewed, even by the courts.
The government created the mechanism whereby people who normally would not qualify for a mortgage were given a mortgage. They knew that these loans were risky and in many cases knew outright that they would end up in default but the banks were forced to comply. How were they forced? Banks are rated by the Fed. to determine how much money the bank may have to loan and thus determines how much money the bank can make. If you comply with their monetary schemes then you get access to more money. More money to loan by the bank means more profit potential, and what the heck the government is guaranteeing the loan.
All the while the housing boom is happening and house prices are going up and Freddie and Fanny are underwriting more and more bad loans. The housing prices keep going up due to the gluttony of buyers, unqualified buyers, and the ratio of good to bad loans hits the breaking point and it all comes crashing down.
The house prices fall, people now are upside-down on their mortgage and they won�t be able to sell because they owe more than it is really worth. You see the increase in property values was propped up by the government with all the bad paper that they forced on the market. Now they offer to �bail out� the market to allow the bubble to continue and the opportunity to create even more debt by the American people. The exact same reason that got us in trouble to begin with.
And we haven�t even tackled the question of which Article 1, section 8, enumerated power gives them the authority to do this in the first place. Hint, it doesn�t exist � this was totally unconstitutional.
Welcome to the new age of fascism! |
In addition to his argument regarding constitutionality, is any law constitutional which claims to be above judicial review? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beeyee
Joined: 29 May 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Please tell me this thread title is sarcastic.
The house just signed the death certificate for the dollar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Most of us have been told that this is the total amount of the bailout |
This is not true. They've made it clear all along that this is just the first 'installment' and that there are more bank collapses to come. If someone does get that, they have not been reading/listening for the last two weeks.
(I stopped reading at that point. If there are other errors, let someone else find them.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Beeyee wrote: |
Please tell me this thread title is sarcastic.
The house just signed the death certificate for the dollar. |
Is this such a bad thing. Seems like it will be necessary to allow American industry to compete with China and India. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beeyee
Joined: 29 May 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This whole sorry mess is classic 'Problem-Reaction-Solution'.
People actually believe that they are being saved by the very people who perpetuated this downfall. The ignorance of the average American is both worrying and astounding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most of us have been told that this is the total amount of the bailout |
This is not true. They've made it clear all along that this is just the first 'installment' and that there are more bank collapses to come. If someone does get that, they have not been reading/listening for the last two weeks.
(I stopped reading at that point. If there are other errors, let someone else find them.) |
No. I recall it was something like $250 billion to immediately buy up failing assets, another $100 billion the president could authorize, and then $350 billion for Paulson to use at his discretion.
Anyway, now we know why it passed:
Martial Law Will Be Declared If Bailout Bill Not Passed In House
Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet
Friday, October 3, 2008
In House debate on the banker �rescue� bill, Rep. Brad Sherman told his fellow Congress critters the government will declare martial law and the stock market will drop 3,000 points if the bill is not passed. �The panic-mongers were to the point of telling people the market would drop 3,000 points and there would be martial law,� said Sherman.
Sherman�s comment was not in the same context as a comment issued by Rep. Michael Burgess earlier in the week. Burgess, who appeared on the Alex Jones Show, said Pelosi threatened to invoke House rule XIII(6)(a), described as �martial law,� intended to suspend normal procedures and safeguards and thus allowing the House leadership to operate in a more authoritarian fashion. Sherman, however, said martial law would be declared on Wall Street, not in the House.
Rep. Sherman said the �exaggerated fear-mongering turned out not to be true� and the House �can draft a good bill,� regardless of the pressure put on representatives to pass the banker bailout bill.
The bailout plan is not only �economic fascism,� as Richard Viguerie has correctly noted, designed to loot the U.S. Treasury and reorganize and further consolidate elite control over the economy, but it is also a brazen effort to impose a martial law and dictatorship. Paulson�s role as financial dictator, not answerable to Congress or the American people, fully compliments additional steps taken over the last few years.
As former California congressman Dan Hamburg said earlier this year, the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act gives the executive the power to invoke martial law in case of �major public emergencies,� not limited to �a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack,� but also �any other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order.� Obviously, a financial crash and ensuing social chaos of the sort now being implemented by the ruling elite would be characterized as a dire emergency and a near perfect excuse to impose martial law, a long standing goal of the elite.
As well, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, codifying indefinite imprisonment of dissidents, and the National Security Presidential Directive 51, ensuring the �continuity of government� in the event of a �catastrophic emergency,� are tools the government will most assuredly use after the economy implodes, now a foregone conclusion according to many economists.
Numerous Bilderberg pronouncements, dutifully reported here at Infowars and Prison Planet but ignored by the larger corporate media, reveal what the global elite have in mind for us � an engineered economic crash followed by a consolidation of wealth under fire sale conditions. In order to successfully accomplish this, the elite must impose martial law and �maintain public order,� that is to say force the public to accept their terms by military force.
As the Army Times reported last month, a battle-hardened �homeland� brigade is now �going domestic� after spending time in Iraq. It appears this illegal deployment (under Posse Comitatus) is designed to respond to �public disorder� as the economy is deliberately and cynically dismantled at the behest of our rulers who are now investing in the Treasury and the executive, with the complicity of Congress, dictatorial powers heretofore unheard of in America.
video at link
Last edited by bacasper on Sat Oct 04, 2008 7:33 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd like to see mainstream sources for the above. Citations etc.
Rothbard, in 2001
| Quote: |
At some point in the possibly near future, perhaps in the next recession and the next spate of bad bank loans, it might dawn upon the public that 1.5 percent is not very safe either, and that no such level can guard against the irresistible holocaust of the bank run. At that point, ignoring the usual mendacious assurances and soothing-syrup of the Establishment, the commercial banks might be plunged into their ultimate crisis. The United States authorities would then be faced with two stark choices. One would be to allow the entire banking system to collapse, along with virtually all the deposits and depositors in that system. Since, given the mind-set of American politicians, and their evident philosophy of "too big to fail," it is certain that they would be forced to embrace the second alternative: massive, hyper-inflationary printing of enough cash to pay off all the bank liabilities. The redeposit of such cash in the banking system would bring about an immediate runaway inflation and a massive flight from the dollar.
Such a future scenario, once seemingly unthinkable, is now definitely on the horizon. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
basplar
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
The same people that caused all of these problems(the 13 international banking families that want to have a New World Order and a one world government and currency) also OWN ALL OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!. The alternative media is the only place to get what's REALLY going on. We need to get over this false left-right paradigm and start waking up!!! Do your homework folks. There are congressman that were on CSPAN saying that they were threatened with MARTIAL LAW in the U.S. if they didn't pass one of the most criminal laws ever passed in the history of the U.S.
A great source for information....and I don't agree with everything he says, is Alex Jones. I don't share a lot of his political opinions, but he does make a very valid point that the Democratic-Republican, Left-Right paradigm is in fact a farse. I've researched things stated in almost all of his documentaries and all of them are VERY well documented and most of his predictions have come true. As much as I disagree with him on some issues, I believe there are MUCH greater things at stake, like the utter destruction of the U.S. constitution, illegal torture and detention of HUMAN BEINGS, violation of the posse comitatus act, the illegal surveillance of normal Americans, the destruction of the U.S. economy and the devaluation of the dollar, and finally, the implementation of the New World Order one world government. It's true. It's true. It's true. Do your freakin' homework and research it for yourself before it's too late.
www.prisonplanet.com
www.infowars.com
www.truthnews.us |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Obviously, a financial crash and ensuing social chaos of the sort now being implemented by the ruling elite would be characterized as a dire emergency and a near perfect excuse to impose martial law, a long standing goal of the elite.
|
So Bush only has 30 days left to pull off his coup, is that what you are claiming? Or is he going to declare martial law between the election and the inauguration and refuse to hand over power to Obama (as it looks now)? Could you be saying Bush and Obama are playing for the same team?
Let me indulge in a little paranoid conspiracy theorizing of my own: It's more likely the flakes on the anti-government far right will pull some violent stunt and interfere with the election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mmarshalynne
Joined: 23 May 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| �Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.� Now they have set themselves outside of the ability of anyone, inside or out of the government, to question what they have done. There actions cannot be questioned in court or by any �administrative agency.� How would you like to have that kind of power |
It is my understanding that the language of this portion of the bill was changed to require participation of both the executive and legislative branches in decision making. The language you are quoting is from the original legislation proposed by President Bush. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like the bailout won't be used to the extent previously thought:
| Quote: |
Fears are mounting that many Wall Street banks and financial firms will refuse to participate in the US government's $700bn bail-out package, leaving global markets and world economies in a perilous state for months to come.
'There is a growing feeling that banks ... might instead decide to tough it out,' said Thomas Caldwell, chairman and CEO of Caldwell Financial, a $1bn-plus fund manager.
For the past two weeks all eyes in the market have been focused on US Congress and its attempts to pass Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's bail-out package - a bill to allow the US government to buy up to $700bn of toxic mortgage-related assets from American banks, which would in theory free the credit markets and set the gears of global commerce spinning once more.
Last Monday, after the bill was thrown out by the House of Representatives, more than $1 trillion was wiped off the value of US stocks as the market was gripped by panic. The bill was passed on Friday afternoon, however, after the inclusion of $149bn of tax breaks and strict rules for participating banks.
But Wall Street analysts, believe the addition of so many terms to the bill might deter potential participants.
One of the least attractive elements is a section designed to curb executive pay at banks that participate in the bail-out package. These include limiting stock-related pay and banning 'golden parachutes' for executives.
'I think this hodge-podge of regulations and rules will be enough to put many [chief executives] off participating,' Caldwell said.
Sources close to Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch indicated the banks might choose not to participate in the bail-out as there is a growing view on Wall Street that the market may be bottoming out.
Analysts also believe that the mere presence of the government as buyer of last resort will be enough to get credit markets moving again, and that a large number of banks would not need to take part for the legislation to succeed.
Wall Street ended its worst week in seven years with another tumble on Friday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down more than 157 points on Friday at 10,325.38. |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/05/wall.street.bailout
810 billion bailout for an economy that would collapse in "two days" not being used by those firms it is supposed to bailout? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
