billionz dollar bail out

[Ladywriter 7,783]

"There is no nonsense so errant that it cannot be made the creed of

the vast majority by adequate governmental action."

-- Bertrand Russell

Subject: What the bailout means for our future

The first House vote, in which the Big Bailout failed, showed the

power of overwhelming pressure. The second House vote, in which the

Big Bailout passed, showed the weakness of waiting to apply such

pressure at the last minute.

Human psychology is such that we always want to wait to the last

moment, when a deadline looms, to take action. We must overcome this

aspect of our psychology if we are to prevail. If we do not, then we

will always lose.

It really is that simple.

Things would be vastly different if the same pressure applied to

Congress on the Big Bailout had been exerted much earlier to end the

government policies that caused the housing bubble.

Had the pressure citizens brought to bear on the Big Bailout been

applied earlier, and for a long period of time, to . . .

* Close the Department of Housing and Urban Development

* Liquidate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

* Repeal the "Community Reinvestment Act"

* Curtail or end the Federal Reserve's power to inflate credit

* And repeal top-down federal accounting rules such as mark-to-market

* Then there never would have been a housing bubble, a housing bust,

or a justification for the Big Bailout

There would have been no crisis that corporate America, the media,

and the politicians, could exploit to raid the Treasury and expand

government power.

It really is that simple.

And had the same pressure that Americans brought to bear on Congress

at the time of crisis, been employed earlier to pass the "Read the

Bills Act," the "One Subject at a Time Act," and the "Write the Laws

Act," then it's very unlikely that the Big Bailout could have passed

even after the crisis hit. Congress could not have . . .

* Larded the Big Bailout bill with favors to buy the votes needed to

secure passage -- the "One Subject at a Time Act" would have

prevented it

<https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/83>

* Endured the public reading of the 400+ page bailout bill -- the

requirement in our "Read the Bills Act" that all legislation be read

out loud before a quorum of the House and Senate, would have made

such a reading unendurable

<https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/27>

* Conferred power on the Treasury Department to determine so many of

the details of the Big Bailout -- our "Write the Laws Act" would have

prevented that, forcing Congress to make the bailout bill more

detailed, and even less conducive to passage

<https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/51>

Had the same pressure that was brought to bear when the crisis

struck, been brought to bear beforehand to . . .

* End the government policies that create bubbles, and . . .

* Pass the Downsize DC Agenda

* There never would have been a crisis, and no Big Bailout bill

either

It really is that simple.

We must stop playing defense at the moment of crisis, and start

playing offense, forcing Congress to change bad policies IN ADVANCE,

in order to AVOID crisis. This means . . .

* We must recognize and control our own psychology, which leads us to

put-off action until its too late. An ounce of prevention is worth a

pound of cure. Action in advance must become the psychology of the DC

Downsizer.

* We need a huge army to apply the kind of pressure that was brought

to bear against the Big Bailout bill, in advance, and relentlessly,

for a longer period of time

* The financial resources to make our proposals seen and heard by

everyone, everywhere, every day -- to counter the fear mongering of

the "drama queen" media and the crisis-exploiting politicians

It really is that simple.

In addition, the example of the Big Bailout fight does NOT mean that

we need to elect the "right people" to office.

* Many of the "right people" voted the wrong way on both the policies

that created the crisis, and on the Big Bailout bill.

* The "right people" will almost always be corrupted by the "wrong

ways" of Capitol Hill.

* Even if you can find that mythical beast known as the "right

person," and elect a majority of such persons to office, you will

still need relentless, overwhelming, resistance numbing pressure to

make the "right people" do the right thing.

* Many of the "wrong people" in Congress voted the right way on the

Big Bailout -- because of the pressure

So why not just cut to the chase and focus on the crucial

requirements -- a huge army, universal visibility, and relentless,

overwhelming, resistance numbing pressure?

It really is that simple.

We can prevail, if we do the right things. And you can do another

right thing right now by "thanking or spanking" your House

Representative based on how they voted on the Big Bailout. You will

find a list of the Roll Call vote below our signatures. You can send

your "thank or spank" message using our free Educate the Powerful

System. <https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/100>

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC army. Thank you

for being a part of the solution.

Jim Babka & Perry Willis

President & Communications Director

DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Executives Got Paid Millions While Asking for Bailout

9_KtWT6TaxU

[Crazy Gravy 100]

I saw that too, exectutive bonuses for failing companies. Is there a grass roots petition for congress to take the measures against this when they go back in session. we have a month or two to accumulate voices. They added no golden parachutes to bail out. how bout no profits, all profits pay back the 700 billion. No reason not to do this than corruption. Id be intersted in this. I see how some of the Take action things pay off. next time Im doing more than signing apetition, I will contact my reps like they say we should do.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

A look at what we could do instead with $700 billion to spend fixing up our world.

Anti-poverty and women's rights lobbyists are looking at the government's $700 billion bank bailout and seeing a way to talk about national spending priorities.

"It's obviously incredibly unfair," said Irasema Garza, president of New York-based Legal Momentum, a legal advocacy group for women. "We're willing to get ourselves in that type of debt to take incredible risk to bail out those industries but as a country we're not willing to take a fraction of that particular risk to make sure we have sound economic policies to give the citizens of our country the basic things they need to live: a place to live, health care, food, education for their kids and the creation of good jobs."

In his personal blog Duncan Green, head of research for Oxfam Great Britain and author of the 2008 book "From Poverty to Power," notes that $700 billion could eradicate world poverty for more than two years.

That would disproportionately benefit women, who make up 70 percent of the world's poor, according to Washington-based Women Thrive Worldwide, a group that lobbies for aid for women in developing countries.

"It's important that we help people here who are in need and have been hurt by this financial crisis," said Nora O'Connell, vice president of policy and government affairs at Women Thrive Worldwide. "But we also have to realize that the impacts of the crisis don't stop at U.S. borders."

$150 Billion for Global Poverty

Worldwide, Green estimates that about $150 billion each year could help governments meet the United Nations millennium development goals, a global set of anti-poverty guidelines -- including gender parity in education and improved maternal health care -- laid out by 189 nations in 2000.

The Institute for Women's Policy Research, a think tank in Washington, D.C., that focuses on women and the economy, is hosting an Oct. 30 panel discussion on the impact of the financial crisis on women featuring the institute's president, Heidi Hartmann; Erica Hunt, president of the 21st Century Foundation, which focuses on economic development in the African American community; and Legal Momentum's Garza.

"We all now recognize that the economic crisis is No. 1; severe," Garza said. "But before this crisis hit Wall Street, people on Main Street were already hurting. Within that, working women were taking a big hit and have been over the last five years."

Carrie Lukas, a budget analyst with the Independent Women's Forum, a free-market think tank in Washington, D.C., said she would use the money to simplify the tax code.

"Women need a growing economy which provides jobs, especially a wide range of jobs that offer women a variety of work arrangements, and a less burdensome tax structure would certainly help toward that end."

Other advocates said they would spend the money to enhance government.

The National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, a lobby in Washington, D.C., estimates that $759 million -- about 1 percent of the rescue plan total -- would enable the country's low-cost health care clinics to provide all eligible individuals with the full range of family planning services: access to contraceptives, counseling, testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.

• 1
  
• 2
  
• Next page »
  

View as a single page

[Crazy Gravy 100]

most americans would favor this or think this way. Its the elitist in power that are doing us in. But thats another of americas many issues.

[Myk JL 1,731]

I'd rather see an end to inflation than that.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

lookin through 1 of my playlists and found ...

Added: March 17, 2008

aqRsjie3Quc

Added: January 21, 2008

ivREYgodK4I

December 09, 2007

JLVTmYYTdO0

Added: February 24, 2008

_2KugGZotr0

theres more

lots more

some people have seen this shit storm coming

glad I was paying attention....

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Added: August 11, 2008

JXNVVWhszfY

[Crazy Gravy 100]

One govt world bank one currency, this is their chance to do it. Asses

[Ladywriter 7,783]

RECESSION? DEPRESSION? HOW DEEP, HOW FAR AND WHAT CAN BE DONE?

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet

A survey of what some of the best thinkers believe we're

facing in the coming months and years -- and the best ways

to prevent complete disaster.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/102379/

THE WOMAN WHO COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS FINANCIAL MESS WAS SILENCED BY GREENSPAN, RUBIN AND SUMMERS

By Katrina vanden Heuvel, TheNation.com

A sad tale emerges of willfully arrogant behavior designed

to undermine a wise woman's good judgment.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/102559/

[Ladywriter 7,783]

States warned about impending mortgage crisis

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Like most people I know in their 20s and 30s, it takes a stretch of the imagination to understand that I have a stake in the national economy.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Everything you ever wanted to know about the biggest economic meltdown since the Great Depression but were afraid to ask.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

D o w n s i z e r - D i s p a t c h

Subject: The Fed is destroying your money, RIGHT NOW

In a continuing effort to rescue and reward those who made bad

financial decisions, the Federal Reserve is making you pay yet again,

in another way, on top of the Big Bailout.

Apparently, the $700 billion Big Bailout wasn't a large enough payout

to America's poorly run companies. Still more of your hard earned

money is needed. The federal government will take this new pound of

flesh in the form of a massive inflation tax.

You pay an inflation tax whenever the Federal Reserve creates new

dollars. This causes every dollar you hold to be worth less than it

was before.

Those who get this new money first will become vastly richer, at your

expense, because they'll get to spend the money before it causes

prices to rise.

Who gets the money first? The banking system -- the very institutions

that profited from the government policies that inflated the housing

bubble. First they profited from the bubble, and now they're going to

profit from the bubble bursting too.

How many new dollars has the Fed created? Nearly half a trillion

dollars in the space of just two weeks. This increase in the money

supply is unprecedented.

<http://news.goldseek.com/SpeculativeInvestor/1223395882.php>

The Federal Reserve is taking this action because the Big Bailout was

constructed on an inherent contradiction. How could the government

solve the supposed problem of tight credit by borrowing $700 billion

to bailout the credit system? Money borrowed by the government cannot

be borrowed by others, which must inevitably tighten credit in the

private economy. Of course . . .

The $700 billion will flow back into the credit system as the

government buys up distressed assets from banks and mortgage

companies, but only after a delay, and what if, as many have

predicted, the $700 billion isn't enough? The Federal Reserve intends

to "solve" and "forestall" these potential problems by creating

massive amounts of new dollars.

But this won't change the fact that too many house have been built,

and that houses are overpriced -- both of which occurred because of

government polices that focused previous credit inflation in the

housing sector. They won't cure the disease by re-introducing the

bacteria that caused the disease in the first place.

Expanding the money supply will do nothing to clear the housing

market. Only time and falling prices can do that. Instead, all this

new money will simply flow into other sectors of the economy,

creating yet another bubble.

Of course, those who support this monetary inflation claim that the

Fed will be able to reabsorb the new dollars later. They're right,

the Federal Reserve adds and subtracts from the money supply all the

time. But here again there is another contradiction . . .

We're told that the Fed must inflate the money supply in order to

combat deflation, but if the Fed reabsorbs the new money later, THAT

WILL BE DEFLATION. Why would deflation be bad now, but good later?

This kind of sloppy thinking is how we got into this mess in the

first place. The Fed, under Alan Greenspan, inflated the supply of

money and credit in 2001. This helped cause bubbles in the stock

market and the housing market, which then burst when the Fed later

reduced the flow of money and credit to avoid a general rise in

prices.

We're about to repeat the whole process over again. And you will once

again pay the price.

It's a simple fact, if not for the Federal Reserve and the federal

government you would be vastly richer than you are now. Instead,

you're constantly robbed by government policies that reward those

with political influence -- influence gained as a result of riches

obtained at your expense. We must redress this imbalance.

You must gain political influence of your own. And the only way to do

that is to build a huge army with which to overwhelm Congress and end

the policies that rob you of the wealth that would otherwise be

yours. Meanwhile, as our army grows, we must continue to apply

pressure on Congress to adopt better policies. Congressman Ron Paul

has provided us with two bills that would move things in the right

direction.

The "Honest Money Act" and the "Free Competition in Currency Act,"

would end the Federal Reserve's monopoly control over what American's

use as money. This would force Federal Reserve Notes to compete with

other potential forms of money, such as gold, and thereby constrain

their ability to create new dollars. Please send Congress a message

supporting these bills. <http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/85>

Use your personal comments to tell your representatives that you're

aware the Federal Reserve has recently inflated the money supply by

nearly half a trillion dollars. Tell them that you know that this

will create new bubbles, and make your own wages and savings worth

less. Tell them you want to end the Federal Reserve's monopoly

control over your money.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Hank Paulson and His Wall Street Cronies Move to Plan B

By Nomi Prins, The Nation. Posted October 15, 2008.

How do you stop a ship from sinking, and simultaneously rebuild it to prevent its future destruction? That was the question in the minds of the world's central bankers as they sat down over the weekend to figure out how to right the global financial Titanic.

European leaders came up with a plan to inject "unlimited short-term funds" into the system in addition to $2.3 trillion of guarantees and various emergency measures (pledged by Germany, Britain, France, The Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and Austria). This could be like dumping money into a black hole, since most of these funds will be given in the form of loans, which means banks must come up with adequate collateral to back them, which is in short supply these days. But it's more decisive than anything the Treasury or Federal Reserve has done so far.

Indeed, the coordinated efforts of the European central banks have had a more positive initial impact on the markets than the bipartisan passage of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's $700 billion rescue fund did. That announcement preceded an eight-day market selloff and the global freezing of credit. This one sent the Dow zooming up 11.1 percent, its biggest percentage gain since 1933. But the week is young.

Meanwhile, the question addressed by Paulson Monday is what to do with that $700 billion? To answer this, he sat down with his friends, the leaders of the largest financial institutions in America that got us into this mess. Namely, Ken Lewis, CEO of Bank of America; Jamie Dimon, CEO of J.P. Morgan Chase; Lloyd Blankfein, Paulson's successor at Goldman Sachs; John Mack, CEO of Morgan Stanley; and Vikram Pandit, CEO of Citigroup.

These men have shown themselves to be far more interested in preserving themselves than in stabilizing the general economy for American citizens. And it's a safe bet (probably the safest out there) that their philosophy remains intact.

Economists and media pundits over the weekend optimistically hoped that Paulson might get a clue that his initial idea of purchasing $700 billion of toxic assets would not stabilize the financial system. Having worked on Wall Street, I remain cynical about the notion that purchasing assets was off the table.

And it turns out that Paulson's Plan B is not to completely abandon plan A. So far, he has decided to spend $250 billion of that $700 billion to buy equity stakes in banks whose future losses are still unknown. The rest could conceivably be used to buy up toxic assets.

These, and other related decisions are to be made, in large part, by Paulson's former protégé at Goldman Sachs (and now interim assistant treasury secretary) Neel Kashkari. Kashkari described the equity purchase program as "voluntary and designed with attractive terms to encourage participation from healthy institutions."

But encouraging participation hardly seems an issue. There's not a bank around that wouldn't want its stock price boosted by a Treasury purchase of its bleeding shares. Equally, every bank has a bunch of toxic assets good to go.

There are equally eager participants running this plan, too. No fewer than seven policy teams and five veteran government officials have been culled to figure out which banks will receive the most help. (This comes as the leaders of the top five cozy up to Paulson.)

There's also no shortage of firms wanting a piece of the action of the bright new Treasury hedge fund. Seventy financial firms have made bids (i.e., asked for money) to become master custodian of the fund, managing inflow and outflow.

One hundred firms have bid to become one of the five master program operators that will decide which assets to buy and how to manage them. Let's see if Goldman Sachs makes the cut.

The outcome of Monday's meeting included no request for more stringent banking regulations going forward. That would require a complete restructuring of the financial landscape into transparent, manageable parts à la the Glass Steagall Act of 1933, which separated commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies.

The meeting did not provide a much-needed disclosure of the dangers that still lurk on the books of these firms, in a painfully transparent manner that will illuminate future losses, a move that would help alleviate the uncertainty that has been dragging down the market and freezing corporate and consumer credit alike.

As Paulson waffles on action and plans, always weighing Wall Street demands first, European leaders are taking more decisive action with their coordinated capital-injection moves. But it remains to be seen whether these will work. Perhaps their actions are an admission of responsibility; British and European institutions also made reckless bets with inadequate capital backing them.

But they all of the world's central bankers should really consider injecting more transparency and regulation, to restore international confidence, not just money. They must create a global financial structure that will both contain the fallout and avoid a repeat performance--one that never again will be so opaque, over-leveraged and dangerous.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Subject: Do you know who the "Primary Dealers" are?

There's a lot of evidence that we've been scammed. Treasury Secretary

Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke told us they needed to

spend $700 billion of your money to buy supposedly toxic assets that

were crippling major firms and for which there was no immediate

market. This was a lie even when they said it, because . . .

Merrill Lynch was able to sell it's most troubled assets back in

July. <http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080729/merrill_lynch_sale.html>

If Merrill could do it, other firms could do it too. They might not

have liked the price they got, but it could have been done. The Big

Bailout was purposely designed to give favored firms a better deal

than they could have gotten in the market.

We've also been told, constantly, that credit markets are frozen.

We're still being told that today, constantly, around the clock, on

the cable business channels. It wasn't true before, and it isn't true

now. We could point you to many places for the evidence, but here's

one great graph from the blog Carpe Diem to give you the evidence in

one pretty picture.

<http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/10/total-commercial-bank-loans-reach-new.html>

The hysteria mongers would tell you that even if consumer credit is

okay (and you would have to hammer them with the evidence to get them

to admit it), commercial credit is still in big trouble. But that

isn't true either. Here's a good summary from the great scholar

Robert Higgs, at the Independent Institute . . .

<http://www.independent.org/blog/?p=289>

"Looking at the data for the first four business days of the past

week, I find that firms sold from $179 billion to $205 billion of

commercial paper per day; the number of separate issuances per day

ranged from 6,761 to 7,298. Both the total amount borrowed and the

number of issuances per day increased steadily throughout the week

(data for Friday have not yet been reported)."

Higgs goes on to compare the current numbers with past periods and

finds NO CREDIT FREEZE!

But what about the stock market? Doesn't its fall tell us there's a

crisis? Perhaps, until you consider what's causing stocks to fall.

The really big drops began when Paulson and Bernanke began peddling

their fear to Congress. And since then, nearly every time some

government official has opened his or her mouth, with some new claim

or some new plan, the stock market has taken another nose dive. A

good chunk of the decline appears to be driven by fear mongering.

Want more evidence?

This is the season when firms report their earnings, and many

companies are beating the estimates, but their stock prices are still

falling. This is about fear, not fundamentals.

Who is responsible for this scam? Who are the con artists?

One big culprit in every supposed crisis is the media. They always

blow everything out of proportion. Doing so is good for business.

CNBC's ratings are soaring.

<http://tvdecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/ratings-at-cnbc-the-bad-times-keep-coming/>

Another culprit is the politicians, who gain power from hysteria. In

the last supposed crisis (terrorism) it was the Republicans who

primarily benefited. This time it will be the Democrats, who have a

decade of pent-up desires to re-engineer American society. These

dreams may now become reality in the wake of the current fear

mongering.

And last, but not least among the con artists, are a group of

businesses with an official government relationship that earns them

the designation of "Primary Dealers." Here's what Wikipedia has to

say about the Primary Dealers . . .

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_dealers>

"A primary dealer is a bank or securities broker-dealer that may

trade directly with the Federal Reserve System of the United

States.[1] They are required to make bids or offers when the Fed

conducts open market operations, provide information to the Fed's

open market trading desk, and to participate actively in U.S.

Treasury securities auctions.[2] They consult with both the U.S.

Treasury and the Fed about funding the budget deficit and

implementing monetary policy. Many former employees of primary

dealers work at the Treasury, because of their expertise in the

government debt markets, though the Fed avoids a similar revolving

door policy.[1][2] Between them, these dealers purchase the vast

majority of the U.S. Treasury securities (T-bills, T-notes, and

T-bonds) sold at auction, and resell them to the public."

Who are the Primary Dealers? Look at this roster (which used to

include Bear Stearns) . . .

* BNP Paribas Securities Corp.

* Bank of America Securities LLC

* Barclays Capital Inc.

* Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.

* Citigroup Global Markets Inc.

* Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC

* Daiwa Securities America Inc.

* Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.

* Dresdner Kleinwort Securities LLC.

* Goldman, Sachs & Co.

* HSBC Securities (USA) Inc.

* J. P. Morgan Securities Inc.

* Lehman Brothers Inc.

* Merrill Lynch Government Securities Inc.

* Mizuho Securities USA Inc.

* Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated

* UBS Securities LLC.

We should notice several things about this list . . .

* These are among the primary firms that collaborated with the

government to create the housing bubble

* These are the primary firms that profit from the financing of the

national debt and who are benefiting from the current explosion in

the federal debt and the Federal Reserve's massive inflation of the

money supply

* These are probably the primary firms that will work with the

Treasury Department to manage the auction of toxic assets

* These are also probably the primary firms that have toxic assets to

sell (they will be both sellers and brokers in the Big Bailout)

* And most of these firms have been made "too big to fail" through

their business dealings with the government

These Primary Dealers are the primary players in the Big Bailout

con-game. And they are part of the crowd who are looting the country.

You can sit back and accept the Big Bailout and the on-going Big

Interventions as an accomplished fact, or you can rage and protest to

Congress. If we fall silent then the con-artists will be emboldened to

do more and more. We must not fall silent. We must protest constantly.

We've created a new generic campaign to oppose all government

bailouts. Please use this campaign to send Congress another message.

Ask them to reconsider the Big Bailout. Ask them to roll-it-back. Use

your personal comments to mention some of the facts described in this

article. You can send your message using our Educate the Powerful

System. <http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/106>

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC army.

Jim Babka & Perry Willis

President & Communications Director

DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

AIG spent thousands on execs’ hunting trip

UK vacation happened as insurer asked for billions more in federal loans

CHARLOTTE, North Carolina - First there was the $440,000 American Insurance Group Inc. spent entertaining executives days after receiving an $85 billion lifeline from the Federal Reserve, now it’s $86,000 for a hunting trip in England as the faltering company reaped another $37.8 billion in taxpayer funded loans.News of the hunting trip emerged Wednesday as New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo ordered AIG to do away with golden parachutes for executives, golf outings and parties while taking government money to stay afloat.

“Even after the taxpayer-funded bailout of AIG, the company paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for luxurious retreats for its executives, including an overseas hunting party and a golf outing,” Cuomo wrote in a letter to the New York-based insurer.

He said the spending could be “fraudulent conveyances” under a state law regarding debtors and creditors and noted that beyond those excesses millions were paid to executives who were running AIG as it faced dissolution with government help.

Cuomo said he has the power under state business law to review and possibly rescind any inappropriate AIG spending as long as the Federal Reserve is propping up the huge insurer with almost $123 billion in loans announced since Sept. 16.

Company officials said the hunting trip in the English countryside was an annual event for customers that had been planned months before the bailout. The company pledged — as it did following the September trip — to do everything possible to end such extravagances. They declined to say which AIG executives attended.

“This was an annual event for customers of the AIG property casualty insurance companies in the U.K. and Europe, and planned months before the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s loan to AIG,” company spokesman Peter Tulupman said Wednesday morning.

In a prepared statement later in the day, the company said, “We will continue to take all measures necessary to ensure that these activities cease immediately. AIG’s priority is to continue focusing on actions necessary to repay the Federal Reserve loan and emerge as a vital, ongoing business.”

The company said last week it would stop “all nonessential conferences, meetings and activities that do not clearly maximize value and service given the current conditions.”

Last month, and just days after the U.S. government stepped in to save AIG with the $85 billion taxpayer-funded loan, the company picked up a $440,000 tab for a weeklong retreat at the posh St. Regis Resort in California for top-performing insurance agents.

Lawmakers investigating AIG’s meltdown said they were enraged that executives of AIG’s main U.S. life insurance subsidiary spent a lavish amount on the retreat, complete with spa treatments, banquets and golf outings. Last week, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino called the event “despicable.”

At that time, AIG issued a statement saying that the “business event” was planned months before the Sept. 16 bailout and that it was held for top-producing independent life insurance agents, not AIG employees. Of the 100 attendees, only 10 worked for the AIG unit hosting the event, it said.

The insurer said Chief Executive Edward Liddy sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson “clarifying the circumstances” of the event. In the letter, Liddy assured Paulson that AIG is “reevaluating the costs of all aspects of our operations in light of the new circumstances in which we are all operating.”

More on this story

Ex-AIG boss says terms of loan are too tough

The insurer then said it canceled a future California retreat that was to be held later this month.

Regarding the recent hunting trip, “We regret that this event was not canceled,” Tulupman said Wednesday.

Shares of AIG fell 37 cents, or 13.2 percent, to $2.43 in trading Wednesday.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Our animal instincts demand Wall Street blood

[Ladywriter 7,783]

ICELAND'S ECONOMIC MELTDOWN IS A BIG FLASHING WARNING SIGN

By Toby Sanger, AlterNet

Iceland followed the prescriptions of a right-wing

ideologue, and its economy paid a severe price.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/103525/

HOW THE BANKSTERS MADE A COMPLETE KILLING OFF THE BAILOUT

By Pam Martens, CounterPunch

It's going to take about 20 years to repair the damage from

the huge rip off created under the guise of "free market"

capitalism.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/103836/

[Ladywriter 7,783]

HOW BIG OIL'S LOBBYISTS CONTRIBUTED TO BIG FINANCE'S CRASH

By Antonia Juhasz, AlterNet

Working Americans are reeling from the "unintended

consequences" of their relentless war against regulation.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/104133/

[Ladywriter 7,783]

THE LONG ROAD AHEAD -- ARE YOU READY FOR THE WORST THE ECONOMY HAS TO OFFER?

By James Howard Kunstler, Kunstler.com

Are we headed for a deflationary period followed by a tidal

wave of inflation?

http://www.alternet.org/environment/104059/

THE DEBT TRAP: HOW BANKS PUSH TROUBLED BORROWERS DEEPER INTO DEBT

By Brad Stone, The New York Times

Big Finance's pursuit of struggling American consumers is

one of the overlooked causes of the debt boom and the

resulting crisis.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/104338/

[Ladywriter 7,783]

Subject: Greenspan's Final Betrayal

In 1967 Alan Greenspan wrote an essay titled "Gold and Economic

Freedom." <http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion/greenspan.html>

If you read the essay you'll see in the intro that he once told a

Senate committee he favored an end to the Federal Reserve and a

return to gold money.

When Greenspan gained the power to run the Federal Reserve he changed

his tune. He stopped singing the sound-money song, though when pressed

in interviews he would still say that gold was the most stable money

system.

If you accept what Greenspan said in interviews, then he still

believed in sound-money and he still opposed centralized banking. But

his actions betrayed his professed beliefs. He was now the

Counterfeiter-in-Chief, and he played the role with gusto. He

inflated and deflated the money supply, doing exactly what he had

criticized before. As a result . . .

Alan Greenspan was one of the many contributors to the boom and bust

cycle in general, and to the current boom and bust in particular.

Greenspan clearly knew better, so what are we to conclude from his

actions other than that . . .

Power corrupted Alan Greenspan.

The final betrayal came last week when Greenspan told a gleeful

Congressional committee that the current economic mess effectively

repudiated his previous ideology.

<http://cafehayek.typepad.com/hayek/2008/10/alan-the-penite.html>

This last betrayal was the cruelest of all, given that it was really

Greenspan's own violation of his supposed ideology, and not his

adherence to it, that contributed to the mess. The free market

philosophy was the victim of Greenspan's betrayals, and now, like a

battering husband, Greenspan has blamed the victim for the

consequences of what he did.

The politicians will use this final betrayal to further expand their

power, reduce your freedom, and increase government meddling in the

economy. They will be able to use the words of the "great free market

guru," Alan Greenspan, to justify their actions.

We must counter Greenspan's betrayal.

Please use our Educate the Powerful system to send Congress a message

in support of Ron Paul's "Honest Money" bills.

<http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/85>

Use your personal comments to tell your elected representatives that

Alan Greenspan's actions were a major contributor to the housing

bubble, and that his policies argue for a return to sound money, and

less economic meddling by government.

But before you act, take a moment to consider what Greenspan's

betrayal teaches us. Greenspan knew what was right, but did the wrong

thing anyway. If we think we can change the government by placing the

"right people" in power we are very likely to be disappointed.

For every Ron Paul there are likely to be one hundred Alan

Greenspans, for the simple reason that power tends to corrupt. The

only counter to this is to create an outside force, a social power to

counter and fight against government power.

[Myk JL 1,731]

I'm not surprised by Greenspan's final betrayal...

[Ladywriter 7,783]

its a long one

IT'S TIME FOR A TRILLION-DOLLAR TAG SALE AT THE PENTAGON

By Nick Turse, Tomdispatch.com

When we want to get serious about a long-term bailout

strategy, we'll start dismantling the American empire and

Pentagon programs.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/105106/

Today, the Pentagon acknowledges 761 active military "sites" in foreign countries -- and that's without bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, and certain other countries even being counted. This "empire of bases," as Chalmers Johnson has noted, "began as the leftover residue of World War II," later evolving into a Cold War and post-Cold War garrisoning of the planet.

With those bases came a series of costly wars in Korea in the 1950s, Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s, and the Persian Gulf in the early 1990s. An extremely conservative estimate of their cost by the Congressional Research Service -- $1 trillion (in 2008 dollars) -- tops the present economic bailout. Add in brief cut-and-run flops like Lebanon in 1983 and Somalia, from 1992-1995, as well as now-forgotten hollow victories in places like the island of Grenada and Panama, and you tack on billions more with little to show for it.

Since 2001, the Bush administration's Global War on Terror (including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) has cost taxpayers more than the recent bailout -- more than $800 billion and still climbing by at least $3.5 billion each week. And the full bill has yet to come due. According to Noble Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University professor Linda Bilmes, the total costs of those two wars could top out between $3 trillion and $7 trillion.

While squandering money, the Global War on Terror has also acted as a production line for the creation of yet more military bases in the oil heartlands of the planet. Just how many is unknown -- the Pentagon keeps exact figures under wraps -- but, in 2005, according to the Washington Post, there were 106 American bases, from macro to micro, in Iraq alone.

If you were to begin the process of disentangling Americans from this world of war and the war economy that goes with it, those bases would be a good place to start. There is no way to estimate the true costs of our empire of bases, but it's worth considering what an imperial tag sale could mean for America's financial well-being. One thing is clear: in getting rid of those bases, the United States would be able to recoup, or save, hundreds of billions of dollars, despite the costs associated with shutting them down.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

NAOMI KLEIN: BAILOUT = BUSH'S FINAL PILLAGE

By Naomi Klein, The Nation

The bailout has been designed to keep stealing from the

Treasury for years to come.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/105452/