Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run casino

[don]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

“This is all about the American taxpayer. That’s all we care about.”:p>:p>

:p>:p>

“If it works the way it should work, this is not an expenditure, it’s an investment.”:p>:p>

:p>:p>

“I share the outrage …”:p>:p>

:p>:p>

All of the above are quotes of Mr. Paulson from today’s hearing. Sorry if you were eating.:p>:p>

:p>:p>

But they weren’t all lies. He did say::p>:p>

:p>:p>

“You ask me about taxpayers being on the hook? Guess what, they are already on the hook.”

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/200.../index.html?hp

[flintlock]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Looking at history as a guide to the future, when a system reaches a point of historical purity it usually means the next historical epoch is about to emerge. It's usually a big surprise. If we're around long enough, I guess we'll see.

If history is any indication, this will end up along the lines of the October revolution or the French Revolution, with violence and some politician heads rolling. I simply don't see the middle class sitting on its hands and watching its life savings evaporate to inflation, while the politician and special executive class gets a free "do-over". The lower class mob will throw their lot in with the bourgeoisie when the welfare checks no longer cut it.

Buy guns and ammo.

[phirang]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

If history is any indication, this will end up along the lines of the October revolution or the French Revolution, with violence and some politician heads rolling. I simply don't see the middle class sitting on its hands and watching its life savings evaporate to inflation, while the politician and special executive class gets a free "do-over". The lower class mob will throw their lot in with the bourgeoisie when the welfare checks no longer cut it.

Buy guns and ammo.

Right, guns do a lot against Blackwater mercs and guys with lasers.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Right, guns do a lot against Blackwater mercs and guys with lasers.

Being shot doesn't appeal at all and call me a wuss, but I really don't ever want to be blasted by one of those heat/laser "crowd control" beams that they've got now.

[phirang]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Being shot doesn't appeal at all and call me a wuss, but I really don't ever want to be blasted by one of those heat/laser "crowd control" beams that they've got now.

use tin foil shield...

[ASH]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Right, guns do a lot against Blackwater mercs and guys with lasers.

Don't buy into the paranoia about domestic use of Blackwater or other mercenary forces.

Small unrest (a couple of guys in a remote compound) are dealt with by the FBI or ATF.

Protests are managed by local law enforcement; protests which turn violent are dealt with by local law enforcement, backed by the national guard.

On rare occasion, major protests (thousands of protestors, such as the Bonus Army of 1932) are dispersed by troops. Out of 43,000 marchers, the dead and injured included, according to Wikipedia:

Two veterans killed.
Two infants asphyxiated with adamsite gas.
An 11-week-old baby suffered shock from the gassing.
An 11-year-old boy, David Barscheski, was partially blinded by the gassing.
A civilian bystander was shot in the shoulder.
Veteran Christopher Bilger's ear was severed by a cavalryman.
A veteran was bayonetted in the hip.
Twelve policemen were injured by the veterans.
More than 1,000 men, women, and children were gassed with adamsite gas, including policemen, news reporters, civil residents of Washington D.C., and ambulance drivers.

Contrast this to what happens when people riot in real totalitarian countries.

Widespread and popular anger would not, in my opinion, be met with force. Members of the armed forces are not -- I repeat for the n'th time on iTulip -- the robotic jack-booted thugs some of you imagine. There are two structural reasons why the American military cannot be used effectively against widespread and popular dissent. First, and foremost, the military is not a route to riches. In some societies, a job in the government -- and the security forces in particular -- is the only means of getting ahead, and the way one gets ahead is through graft and corruption. The principle draw for joining the military in such countries is the opportunity to victimize one's fellow citizens (and not be a victim oneself) -- that is most certainly not the case in the US. The second reason is that the members of the American armed forces are drawn from -- and sympathetic to -- the people. They are not from a single dominant ethnic or social class, and they are not the instruments of such a class's dominance.

If hard times persist, and the government becomes the only game in town, then eventually our civil service and military might become overtly corrupt. However, that is a cultural change which would happen over time. The way I see it, people are going to get angry and start protesting long before then. Thus, if we're talking about the government's response to widespread protest now, it makes sense to talk about the securities services now.

[phirang]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Don't buy into the paranoia about domestic use of Blackwater or other mercenary forces.

Small unrest (a couple of guys in a remote compound) are dealt with by the FBI or ATF.

Protests are managed by local law enforcement; protests which turn violent are dealt with by local law enforcement, backed by the national guard.

On rare occasion, major protests (thousands of protestors, such as the Bonus Army of 1932) are dispersed by troops. Out of 43,000 marchers, the dead and injured included, according to Wikipedia:

Two veterans killed.
Two infants asphyxiated with adamsite gas.
An 11-week-old baby suffered shock from the gassing.
An 11-year-old boy, David Barscheski, was partially blinded by the gassing.
A civilian bystander was shot in the shoulder.
Veteran Christopher Bilger's ear was severed by a cavalryman.
A veteran was bayonetted in the hip.
Twelve policemen were injured by the veterans.
More than 1,000 men, women, and children were gassed with adamsite gas, including policemen, news reporters, civil residents of Washington D.C., and ambulance drivers.

Contrast this to what happens when people riot in real totalitarian countries.

Widespread and popular anger would not, in my opinion, be met with force. Members of the armed forces are not -- I repeat for the n'th time on iTulip -- the robotic jack-booted thugs some of you imagine. There are two structural reasons why the American military cannot be used effectively against widespread and popular dissent. First, and foremost, the military is not a route to riches. In some societies, a job in the government -- and the security forces in particular -- is the only means of getting ahead, and the way one gets ahead is through graft and corruption. The principle draw for joining the military in such countries is the opportunity to victimize one's fellow citizens (and not be a victim oneself) -- that is most certainly not the case in the US. The second reason is that the members of the American armed forces are drawn from -- and sympathetic to -- the people. They are not from a single dominant ethnic or social class, and they are not the instruments of such a class's dominance.

If hard times persist, and the government becomes the only game in town, then eventually our civil service and military might become overtly corrupt. However, that is a cultural change which would happen over time. The way I see it, people are going to get angry and start protesting long before then. Thus, if we're talking about the government's response to widespread protest now, it makes sense to talk about the securities services now.

I wouldn't bet on it... NORTHCOM has been mighty busy as of late.

All for our own safety, of course, just like the beyond-useless TSA.

[metalman]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Don't buy into the paranoia about domestic use of Blackwater or other mercenary forces.

Small unrest (a couple of guys in a remote compound) are dealt with by the FBI or ATF.

Protests are managed by local law enforcement; protests which turn violent are dealt with by local law enforcement, backed by the national guard.

On rare occasion, major protests (thousands of protestors, such as the Bonus Army of 1932) are dispersed by troops. Out of 43,000 marchers, the dead and injured included, according to Wikipedia:

Two veterans killed.
Two infants asphyxiated with adamsite gas.
An 11-week-old baby suffered shock from the gassing.
An 11-year-old boy, David Barscheski, was partially blinded by the gassing.
A civilian bystander was shot in the shoulder.
Veteran Christopher Bilger's ear was severed by a cavalryman.
A veteran was bayonetted in the hip.
Twelve policemen were injured by the veterans.
More than 1,000 men, women, and children were gassed with adamsite gas, including policemen, news reporters, civil residents of Washington D.C., and ambulance drivers.

Contrast this to what happens when people riot in real totalitarian countries.

Widespread and popular anger would not, in my opinion, be met with force. Members of the armed forces are not -- I repeat for the n'th time on iTulip -- the robotic jack-booted thugs some of you imagine. There are two structural reasons why the American military cannot be used effectively against widespread and popular dissent. First, and foremost, the military is not a route to riches. In some societies, a job in the government -- and the security forces in particular -- is the only means of getting ahead, and the way one gets ahead is through graft and corruption. The principle draw for joining the military in such countries is the opportunity to victimize one's fellow citizens (and not be a victim oneself) -- that is most certainly not the case in the US. The second reason is that the members of the American armed forces are drawn from -- and sympathetic to -- the people. They are not from a single dominant ethnic or social class, and they are not the instruments of such a class's dominance.

If hard times persist, and the government becomes the only game in town, then eventually our civil service and military might become overtly corrupt. However, that is a cultural change which would happen over time. The way I see it, people are going to get angry and start protesting long before then. Thus, if we're talking about the government's response to widespread protest now, it makes sense to talk about the securities services now.

hat's off to you for the patience to keep explaining this. the usa has the most professional mil in the world. if we're going to have totalitarian state the forces have to be built from private armies from scratch. there isn't an obvious candidate in the usa today.

[bart]

Re: Stock market falls 372. Ho, hum.

Y'all (Bart, marvenger, and T) need to find a different word for what this is, because "fascist" means something else:

Fascism is a totalitarian nationalist political ideology and mass movement that is concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence, and which seeks to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity.

The reason you need to find another word is because -- like any reference to Hitler or the Nazis -- you immediately dilute and discredit your message the moment you resort to the f-word for any political development of which you do not approve.

You are right about the statist undertones of a further power grab by the executive, but you are all kinds of wrong -- and rhetorically lazy to boot -- to use that word for this circumstance.

There are two issues with your view, the first being that both the images and my opinion are that fascism has not yet arrived - but the signs are unmistakable.



The second is the more difficult one, and is the word itself. Fascism (and most heavy political terms) has multiple meanings - just check out the different definitions from different sources:

Fascism:

Encarta: Dictatorial movement: any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism.

Cambridge: a political system based on a very powerful leader, state control and extreme pride in country and race, and in which political opposition is not allowed

American Heritage: A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism.

Wiktionary: 1. A political regime based on strong centralized government, suppressing through violence any criticism or opposition of the regime, and exalting nation, state, or religion above the individual.
2. A system of strong autocracy or oligarchy usually to the extent of bending and breaking the law, race-baiting, and advocating and supporting violence against largely unarmed populations



In other words, do some homework instead of making accusations and assumptions... and you might even consider asking for clarification if you wonder about someone's opinion... and then I also recommend you also try for a solution (in this case, an alternate word that you like better) in addition to being critical.


But at least you got the real point about power grabs and similar, and which EJ was writing about. That is the point, and quibbling over a word takes away from that very real and serious point.





As far as your mention of Blackwater and similar in another post, have you ever heard of posse comitatus?
And regarding the military, are you familiar with what happened to Rome when the legions were betrayed?

My point here again is not that either are imminent, but that the signs and portents are quite clear.

[Guest]

Re: Stock market falls 372. Ho, hum.

Bart - I think you are overreacting. ASH's observation is spot on.

I also fully endorse your concern, but he's making a clear and necessary distinction. This may be the stirrings of fascism, but it is not the full article yet. ASH points out that it is risky to over-employ the term, as it really denotes the 'full bloom' article, and that the term has been very heavily overemployed as it is. We still have an electoral system that leaves multiple open doors for the populace to take back their Republic. The doors may be increasingly hidden by smoke and a bought press, but they are there, and they are manifestly open. Fascism does not display any open doors - it describes a transition which is "all sewn up". That should resolve any difficulties in the parsing of the term, which has as noted above for many years been heavily overused. In every other respect I offer full solidarity to the principles or Republican government threatened, which you are sounding the alarm for here. The process does indeed well and truly begin with the degradation of the free markets, so you point to the absolutely classic initial stirrings with your comment.

Respectfully.

Y'all (Bart, marvenger, and T) need to find a different word for what this is, because "fascist" means something else:

Fascism is a totalitarian nationalist political ideology and mass movement that is concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence, and which seeks to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity.

The reason you need to find another word is because -- like any reference to Hitler or the Nazis -- you immediately dilute and discredit your message the moment you resort to the f-word for any political development of which you do not approve.

You are right about the statist undertones of a further power grab by the executive, but you are all kinds of wrong -- and rhetorically lazy to boot -- to use that word for this circumstance.

[Guest]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Spot on once again ASH.

Don't buy into the paranoia about domestic use of Blackwater or other mercenary forces.

Small unrest (a couple of guys in a remote compound) are dealt with by the FBI or ATF.

Protests are managed by local law enforcement; protests which turn violent are dealt with by local law enforcement, backed by the national guard.

On rare occasion, major protests (thousands of protestors, such as the Bonus Army of 1932) are dispersed by troops. Out of 43,000 marchers, the dead and injured included, according to Wikipedia:

Two veterans killed.
Two infants asphyxiated with adamsite gas.
An 11-week-old baby suffered shock from the gassing.
An 11-year-old boy, David Barscheski, was partially blinded by the gassing.
A civilian bystander was shot in the shoulder.
Veteran Christopher Bilger's ear was severed by a cavalryman.
A veteran was bayonetted in the hip.
Twelve policemen were injured by the veterans.
More than 1,000 men, women, and children were gassed with adamsite gas, including policemen, news reporters, civil residents of Washington D.C., and ambulance drivers.

Contrast this to what happens when people riot in real totalitarian countries.

Widespread and popular anger would not, in my opinion, be met with force. Members of the armed forces are not -- I repeat for the n'th time on iTulip -- the robotic jack-booted thugs some of you imagine. There are two structural reasons why the American military cannot be used effectively against widespread and popular dissent. First, and foremost, the military is not a route to riches. In some societies, a job in the government -- and the security forces in particular -- is the only means of getting ahead, and the way one gets ahead is through graft and corruption. The principle draw for joining the military in such countries is the opportunity to victimize one's fellow citizens (and not be a victim oneself) -- that is most certainly not the case in the US. The second reason is that the members of the American armed forces are drawn from -- and sympathetic to -- the people. They are not from a single dominant ethnic or social class, and they are not the instruments of such a class's dominance.

If hard times persist, and the government becomes the only game in town, then eventually our civil service and military might become overtly corrupt. However, that is a cultural change which would happen over time. The way I see it, people are going to get angry and start protesting long before then. Thus, if we're talking about the government's response to widespread protest now, it makes sense to talk about the securities services now.

[Charles Mackay]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

I don't think Bart's graphics are hyperbole. These words in the bailout bill mean something to every student of history and are non-trivial ...

"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"

[ASH]

Re: Stock market falls 372. Ho, hum.

There are two issues with your view, the first being that both the images and my opinion are that fascism has not yet arrived - but the signs are unmistakable.

The second is the more difficult one, and is the word itself. Fascism (and most heavy political terms) has multiple meanings - just check out the different definitions from different sources:

Hi Bart. I'm sorry -- I probably should have phrased my post in more deferential terms.

I don't think I'm a particularly poor student of 20th century history. You're right that I should have been more explicit. I think you will find that militant nationalism in addition to totalitarianism is a theme common to the various alternative definitions which you cite. I don't yet detect that nationalistic character in these events, although they are doubtlessly statist.

My point about rhetoric was serious. People are so used to fascists being trotted out as the quintessence of evil that their eyes glaze over when you bring them up. Unless the specific historical correspondence to conditions prevailing in Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany are obvious to the reader -- and I mean the specific features most likely to stick in the mind of the reader, viz goose-stepping, flags, xenophobia, and suchlike nationalist regalia -- they will assume you are engaging in an overwrought exageration meant to demonize, rather than making a well-informed historical point. What you want them to do is engage their brain, but use of that word at this stage is unlikely to serve that end.

[Charles Mackay]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

The President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said on Thursday, September 18, that he has watched with "sadness" the collapse of Wall Street firms that made economic policy recommendations in emerging markets "as if they were the super intelligent and we were the poor souls."

http://www.brazzilmag.com/content/view/9933

The rest of the world considers those who run this country (Goldman, Morgan, FED, etc.) as self-interested morons. THEY ARE RIGHT!

[dcarrigg]

Re: Stock market falls 372 points, gold back over $900. Another ho-hum day at the government run cas

Can Secretary Paulson be trusted? Maybe so or maybe not. But if Congress passes this measure to give him even a fraction of the power he is asking for, they may as well cancel the upcoming presidential election in the same vote.

It won’t matter anyway.

__________________

I figured that taking a look at the proposed legislation might be helpful. My comments in bold.

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY
TO PURCHASE MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS


Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

May I suggest, "We could pay for all tuition of all college students in America this year, but we'd rather do this act of 2008."

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.--The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the Treasury. No surprise there.

The term “mortgage-related assets” means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

That casts a pretty wide net.

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

I can think of a few folks from Goldman Sachs who are looking for work...maybe the good Secretary will hire them?

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

Here come the high-paid contractors.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...9----000-.html

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them;

Because why shouldn't Morgan Stanley be able to buy junk mortgages from itself with the federal checkbook? Actually, maybe you could deem them contractors at the same time they're drawing a private sector salary if you combine this with the provision above...there's a good deal.

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue obligations; and

If there is anything we should take from this crisis, it's that self-regulation is always the best way to go, and never leads to abuse of power.

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

Because you wouldn't want to list specifics right in the law, would you?

Sec. 3. Considerations.

In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration means for--

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.

Again, self-regulation is always best.

Sec. 4. Reports to Congress.

Within three months of the first exercise of the authority granted in section 2(a), and semiannually thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committees on the Budget, Finance, and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with respect to the authorities exercised under this Act and the considerations required by section 3.

Since self-regulation is best, we wouldn't want congress or the CBO to have direct oversight...they must merely be reported to. Besides, semiannual reports cannot override the two year life of this bill.

Sec. 5. Rights; Management; Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Exercise of Rights.--The Secretary may, at any time, exercise any rights received in connection with mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act.

Reestablishing the executive authority of the secretary over trillions of dollars (ahem...bonars).

(b) Management of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary shall have authority to manage mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act, including revenues and portfolio risks therefrom.

Ibid...plus a little shout out to self-regulation.

(c) Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary may, at any time, upon terms and conditions and at prices determined by the Secretary, sell, or enter into securities loans, repurchase transactions or other financial transactions in regard to, any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act.

Ibid

(d) Application of Sunset to Mortgage-Related Assets.--The authority of the Secretary to hold any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act before the termination date in section 9, or to purchase or fund the purchase of a mortgage-related asset under a commitment entered into before the termination date in section 9, is not subject to the provisions of section 9.

The two-year limit of the bill might be a little constricting on the powers of the secretary, but two years should be enough time to negotiate decades-long commitments that the American people are stuck with long after the bill's potential expiration.

Sec. 6. Maximum Amount of Authorized Purchases.

The Secretary’s authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time

With any luck, we should be able to keep a sustained balance sheet of $700,000,000,000 at any one time for a good long time through long-term negotiated deals.

Sec. 7. Funding.

For the purpose of the authorities granted in this Act, and for the costs of administering those authorities, the Secretary may use the proceeds of the sale of any securities issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which securities may be issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, are extended to include actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses. Any funds expended for actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses, shall be deemed appropriated at the time of such expenditure.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...III_10_31.html

Sec. 8. Review.

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.

There can be ABSOLUTLEY no questioning the self-regulating ability of the secretary. We would not want the courts to review laws, would we? That might be constitutional.

Sec. 9. Termination of Authority.

The authorities under this Act, with the exception of authorities granted in sections 2(b)(5), 5 and 7, shall terminate two years from the date of enactment of this Act.

The authority's gone, but the damage can remain for a good long time.

Sec. 10. Increase in Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.

Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000.

$10 Trillion strong...and growing. Take that flinstone's vitamins!

Sec. 11. Credit Reform.

The costs of purchases of mortgage-related assets made under section 2(a) of this Act shall be determined as provided under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as applicable.

http://www.dunwalke.com/gideon/legal...Bk/credref.htm
OMB can budget for the damage...hurray!

Sec. 12. Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.--The term “mortgage-related assets” means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

(2) Secretary.--The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the Treasury.

(3) United States.--The term “United States” means the States, territories, and possessions of the United States and the District of Columbia.