W's speech

[Supercilious]

Re: W's speech

Hi Sishya. You should be aware that opinion among regular posters to the iTulip forums is divided. As near as I can tell, one group perceives this as either an engineered -- or entirely phony -- crisis, for purposes such as the concentration of power and the enrichment of well-connected private parties. The other group (which I fall into) is that this is a real crisis, caused primarily by mundane mismanagement and short-sightedness rather than conspiracy, and that if one's goal is to keep credit markets functional, then some sort of massive intervention will mitigate the risk of a systemic failure of the credit markets. I think both groups generally agree that the outcome of intervention will be what the conspiracy-minded types suggest, which is to say an increase in government power and a decrease of freedom for both individuals and markets. Note that I am only saying I think an intervention actually is required to keep the credit markets functional -- not that I support the intervention.

I'm from the other camp but ASH did a great job in describing accurately the debate. I can think of nothing to add tho his words, other than the concept of of manufacturing "phony" crisis imply the intentional creation of real crisis situations that can be easily reverted only if the original plans are followed at the moment of burst.

I'm not as good as ASH as summarizing ideas therefore I'll try to use a plastic parable in explaining the concept of "phony" crisis:

It' like emptying fast a crowded elevator by breaking wind with passion. Of course everybody has to exit at the first stop. They all feel they will suffocate if those doors don't open soon, that's real,.... some of them may even have real heart attacks, especially if Hank and Paul consumed a lot of chili for breakfast.

But the solution to that phony crisis is not to require the taxpayer to pay for special respirators to allow bank managers use the lift in order to get to work in the morning. And in any case we should not let Hank & Paul to become elevator captains, giving them nice shiny uniforms, and make them responsible with distribution of respirators (paid by the taxpayer). Invariably, they will hand defective or empty respirators to chosen targets and when an old executive will have a heart attack and die, their buddies (equipped with good respirators and precise information about the imminent fart attack) will rob the corpse of all valuables.

Moreover, all hard working employees would be forced by the management (H&B's buddies) to pay for the removal of the body and pay for lavish funerals at which Hank&Ben will serve more chili with raw garlic.

Look what happens now with Lehman. Remember what happened when Mr Bear Stearns died. They didn't have time to rob the body. Therefore Ben had to open a little dark mechanical room, where JP brought the corpse and slowly started to remove all valuables. In order to be sure the loot is distributed fairly among all chili lovers, Mr Merill and Mr Blackstone are appointed as neutral observers (BlackRock = Merill + Blackstone) .

Now we see that a confused Board of Directors (Congress) is lied again by an idiotic building administrator (W) to vote for a rescue plan in which all employees have to take a pay cut, in order to buy more respirators (distributed by H&B) while continuing to serve every day chilli for breakfast.

I agree, that if all elevators stop now between the floors, all upper management will die suffocated in stench, the whole company will go bankrupt and, all mid- , low-level and all hard working employees will be dumped on the streets. But this is insane. We allow B&H to extrort us all for their farting scam. If we let them to be in charge with the distribution of respirators H&B will become de facto CEO's of the company and the board will be made irrelevant. All the employees (including mid-level management) will see their wages shrinking to nada, becoming nothing else than slaves of the chili club.

I believe in good corporate management. I don't believe that serving chili for breakfast is a sign of sound corporate management, because it's an unhealthy diet. If anybody is addicted chili, let them have it for dinner, pay for it themselves and sleep on the couch when their wifes kick them out from the bed room. Already the whole building stinks bad and we are deep in s]!t up to our knees, for now.

My plan for solving the crisis is simple:
1. Stop serving chili. Change the cafeteria menu to a healthy diet.
2. Confiscate all respirators leave open the doors of the elevators, and until the air cleans ask all managers to use the stairs. It's a healthy exercise and they may loose some weight. it will teach them to stop consuming something that produces toxic emanations
3. Kick out Handk&Ben from the elevator. They are maintenance & aux not elevator captains. Hank's duty is to make sure the floors are clean, the pipes are not leaking and that there is enough toilet paper in every stall. Ben is a private contractor greeter for the executive lobby. Actually I believe they should be fired altogether and never allowed to enter the building again. I have no doubt they'll find fast good employment with some circus.

And we actually don't need a private contractor to greet top management and help them find the elevators. If the those guys can't find their way to the elevators they shouldn't have a corner office on the 35th floor.

4. The employees (which are also small shareholders) should understand they can and should kick the members of the Board if those old farts are not doing their job and too corrupt and stupid. Being a boardmember (contrary to general belief) is not an annuity.

If the employes don't get that fast, all their shares will be bough by asian investors and they will all (including mid and low level management) become slaves in a giant sweatshop doing sport shoes at $.25/hour.
5. The current building manager retires soon, but the employees have to make sure that the Board wil not be as gullible, corrupt and spineless in the next term, regardless how soothing is the voice of the Anointed One. Nobody cares to save us from anything if we don't try hard to save ourselves first.

ASH I would appreciate if you can summarize my long babble into a short and concise paragraph.

[ASH]

Re: W's speech

ASH I would appreciate if you can summarize my long babble into a short and concise paragraph.

Man, maybe I'll try later, but I actually think your "babble" is a thing of beauty. I love the extended metaphor. (And most of my posts are pretty long, too; I ain't the king of "brief".)

Right now I'm preoccupied with a letter that arrived at my home while I was at work. I haven't read it yet, but according to my wife, the letter says I'm being considered for recall to active duty (which is to say, activation out of the individual ready reserve, or IRR). I wonder if my jack boots still fit? Could be I see you on the other side of the barricade one day...

No, but seriously... I meant what I said elsewhere about the American armed forces being drawn from the people, and not a viable means of domestic oppression. I don't know any Marines who would allow themselves to be used to subvert the liberty of their own people.

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: W's speech

Man, maybe I'll try later, but I actually think your "babble" is a thing of beauty. I love the extended metaphor. (And most of my posts are pretty long, too; I ain't the king of "brief".)

Right now I'm preoccupied with a letter that arrived at my home while I was at work. I haven't read it yet, but according to my wife, the letter says I'm being considered for recall to active duty (which is to say, activation out of the individual ready reserve, or IRR). I wonder if my jack boots still fit? Could be I see you on the other side of the barricade one day...

No, but seriously... I meant what I said elsewhere about the American armed forces being drawn from the people, and not a viable means of domestic oppression. I don't know any Marines who would allow themselves to be used to subvert the liberty of their own people.

Oh, shit! I can imagine you are preoccupied. I hope it goes well for you, Andrew, and keep us apprised if that isn't too personal to ask. Good luck.

[ASH]

Re: W's speech

Oh, shit! I can imagine you are preoccupied. I hope it goes well for you, Andrew, and keep us apprised if that isn't too personal to ask. Good luck.

Well... it was a high "pucker factor" week already. ;)

Unless they tell me something different over the phone tomorrow, I won't know anything until after October 17th. That's when I am to be screened for eligibility at MOBCOM in Kansas City. Activation, if it happens, wouldn't occur for another 5 months afterward, according to the letter. Therefore, probably not much news for awhile.

[GRG55]

Re: W's speech

This is probably the first time a minister of the German government has referred to the "Anglo-Saxon" financial centers since 1945.

This is indeed a major change in the world, and further proof the post-war US/UK domination has come to an end. Of course, we'll only know this when the US occupation of Central Europe finally ends. But, it's going to be downhill from here.

"US occupation of Central Europe"??? I remember Reagan saying something to Gorby about tearing down a wall in Berlin, but other than that I was under the impression that the US had their hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan. Clearly I missed something.

Let's start a "Restore the Soviet Union" movement and put things back to their "natural state" in central Europe.:rolleyes:

[Guest]

Re: W's speech

Serge - if you think central Europe has been "occupied" by the "imperial US" you've just witnessed 50 years of the most extraordinary "self-determination under occupation" in the annals of empires stretching back to the Sumerians. All of these wayward EU countries veering sharply and erratically from Social Democrat to Conservative governments with bewildering rapidity through the six decades since WW 2 - Oh, I should qualify that observation - "Self determination" that is, unless the Soviets were providing these central European countries with a "strong and paternal guiding hand" at certain (long) intervals in their postwar history. America's foreign policy today is admittedly gross stupidity and trash, but the sort of talk you put forward about US "occupation" of Europe is more than a little self indulgent. A uniquely European brand of self indulgence too ( I know, I am like you, having spent half my life there ).

Even Poland and the Czech republic today are completely free to refuse siting of US missiles in their nations, and indeed if they were smart, they would have refused them. Tellingly, a large part of the reason why they did not choose to refuse them is because they have little faith in the commitment of Western Europe to guard their ultimate interests in a truly dangerous geopolitical situation. Bottom line - they know Western Europe would sell them out (again) at the drop of a hat if push came to shove. But all this talk of EU "occupation" by the US evidences an exceedingly ingenuous notion about geo-political responsibility for their own interests among Europeans. I say all of this as a great admirer of Europe, and I would leave the US and go back to live there tomorrow if the right working opportunity came up for me, as I love the great cultural variety of it.

Anyone here concluding also, that US active efforts to derail a Russo-German oil pipeline initiative presents evidence of the US "sabotaging peace-engendering pan-European integration" would be coming to some remarkably ingenuous conclusions as well, given the quite evident Russian propensity to politicize energy supplies. Germany investing heavily in a pipeline for oil from Russia today is roughly the equivalent of "tickling trout" in a stream. It is a preamble to putting the trout in your net, and the trout here is Germany, not Russia. This is a curious malady that has sprung up after 50+ years of having the national fear / national survival instinct systematically anaesthetized by the NATO umbrella covering their strategic interests. It is a myopic vestige which will come to a rude awakening soon enough, as the US is potentially within a hair of reneging on a large chunk of it's global security obligations.

Hyperinflation and catastrophic foreign creditor repudiation will not exactly fit well with America's continuing to guarantee pretty much of anything to anyone. Particularly in light of approaching Peak Oil, EU's wake-up call to devising a credible geopolitical strategic positioning is moving nearer with alacrity.

Europeans have a tremendous approaching burden of responsibility, to learn to develop a strong geo-political defense of their own which will be credible. After 60 years, they have lost the very instinct as to how to go about this. My $0.2C after 25 years living in Europe .

This is probably the first time a minister of the German government has referred to the "Anglo-Saxon" financial centers since 1945. This is indeed a major change in the world, and further proof the post-war US/UK domination has come to an end. Of course, we'll only know this when the US occupation of Central Europe finally ends. But, it's going to be downhill from here.

Here is another contributor's view of the myopia prevalent in Western Europe as to the extent of their "occupation" by the US.

Optimists among them should learn Chinese, pessimists should learn Russian and realists should learn AK47.

The idea about "vampirical American oil interests" is just as ridiculous as "bringing democracy to the Middle East". When I hear people propagating this nonsense, I usually ask them 2 questions:

Q1. What is the US doing in Europe? It has no oil whatsoever, and does not need us (US) to bring them any more democracy, than they already have.
Q2. What is Carter Doctrine?

As a rule, they can hardly answer Q1 and absolutely cannot answer Q2.

I seriously doubt, US will ever bail out of the Middle East, Iraq or no Iraq. If it does, I would recommend to be consistent and leave Europe too. In this case I want to give Europeans a good advice (similar to an old Soviet joke) about some planning for their future. Optimists among them should learn Chinese, pessimists should learn Russian and realists should learn AK47.

[Supercilious]

Re: W's speech

the letter says I'm being considered for recall to active duty (which is to say, activation out of the individual ready reserve, or IRR). I wonder if my jack boots still fit?

That stinks... well ... maybe someone believes that additional crowd control is needed. Don't tell me about Constitution and Pose Comitatus. The Constitution has been transformed into a joke:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/0...eland_090708w/

Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1

3rd Infantry’s 1st BCT trains for a new dwell-time mission. Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active Army

http://www.amconmag.com/article/2007/apr/23/00026/

Section 1076 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 changed the name of the key provision in the statute book from “Insurrection Act” to “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” The Insurrection Act of 1807 stated that the president could deploy troops within the United States only “to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.” The new law expands the list to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition”—and such “condition” is not defined or limited.

It should be obvious that by jumping in the elevators a "condition" can be created every time needed

Could be I see you on the other side of the barricade one day...

That's not possible. Always on the same side. The wording is clear: " foreign and domestic", and you know it. ;)

No, but seriously... I meant what I said elsewhere about the American armed forces being drawn from the people, and not a viable means of domestic oppression. I don't know any Marines who would allow themselves to be used to subvert the liberty of their own people.

Now, that is the big question... Anyway, 5 months from now, I don't believe you will be needed anymore.

[c1ue]

Re: W's speech

"US occupation of Central Europe"??? I remember Reagan saying something to Gorby about tearing down a wall in Berlin, but other than that I was under the impression that the US had their hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan. Clearly I missed something.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/i...1worldwide.htm

Apparently the spin is working on you, GRG.

In Europe, there are 116,000 US military personnel including 75,603 who are stationed in Germany.

And this is how many years after the Cold War ended? :eek:

Or perhaps they're there to protect against Poles, Czechs, and what not coming through the Fulda gap?

[GRG55]

Re: W's speech

http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/i...1worldwide.htm

Apparently the spin is working on you, GRG.



And this is how many years after the Cold War ended? :eek:

Or perhaps they're there to protect against Poles, Czechs, and what not coming through the Fulda gap?

Maybe you should ask the Poles and Czechs and Hungarians what they think about that. A little history goes a long way...

[Guest]

Re: W's speech

You are seizing on a populist argument C1ue and your conflating the "Poles, Czechs and what-not, streaming through the Fulda Gap" in an attempt at caricature is specious. What exactly are US troops in Germany and Italy actually doing there? Nothing. They patrol nothing, they police nothing, they offer a long since merely implicit deterrent, but their function within the EU states is strictly quarantined from all of that state's own internal security functions. Your assertion is right in the mainstream of the populist pablum that equates the presence of these military bases as "equivalent" to the Soviet garrisons which "protected" the East European countries during the era of the Soviet Bloc.

In those instances the presence of Russian Garrisons was a clear hint that if any government hostile to the Russians were to have emerged, they were there to provide direct and pro-active backing to the local pro Soviet armed forces (does the name "Jaruselski" ring a bell to you in the Russian's presumably "equivalent" function to Nato troops today?). If you wish to employ this analogy for the US forces stationed in Europe you are grasping for some really flimsy arguing points. The US troops stationed in all of these EU countries would cause widespread outrage on the part of citizens in any of these nations were they seen to make any smallest intrusion into the civic affairs of those countries. You employ precisely the sort of coddled arguments about US "rank imperialism" in Europe which would have benefited immensely from spending your childhood growing up in Hungary, Poland or Czechoslowakia in the 1950's and 1960's.

Just because you feel strong partisan inclinations to your mother country Russia does not mean you need pander to such flim flam comparisons of the US troops in Europe with the active "political overseeing" which the Russian troops engaged in all over Eastern Europe during the cold war. Defenestrating Alexander Dubček, in Czechoslowakia, while the Soviet Army oversaw the Czechoslowak street to ensure that popular uprisings would not then get out of hand. Please point to an American European theatre commander who would entertain such "political machinations" in his worst fever ridden nightmares, while on a tour of European duty.

The comparison of US Nato troops in standing bases in Western Europe, to Soviet personnel ensuring Eastern European nation fealty to such an involved extent that they engaged in such acrobatics as defenestrating a Czech premier or crushing student uprisings in that same country in '68 is obscurantist flim flam about what constitutes genuine occupation of a country. Today, "long after the cold war ended" as you put it, everything east of Poland, Hungary and Czechoslowakia must be regarded by these three nations as the warm bosom of security for them? Why don't you ask the Poles, Czechs and Hungarians? Why have the US Nato forces not been firmly invited to leave by their host nations? Any sort of quid-pro-quo there at all that you might reluctantly discern?

No one is saying the Americans are a model ally any more these days, particularly under this administration, but this sort of fundamental conceit which drives one to conflate US NATO troops in Europe with "blatant occupiers" does not impress me with it's scrupulous regard for comparative truths.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2007/0701worldwide.htm[/url]

Apparently the spin is working on you, GRG. And this is how many years after the Cold War ended? :eek: Or perhaps they're there to protect against Poles, Czechs, and what not coming through the Fulda gap?

[Supercilious]

Re: W's speech

Maybe you should ask the Poles and Czechs and Hungarians what they think about that. A little history goes a long way...

GRG55 please stop annoying our resident RussiaToday correspondent.

Just shout loud: Slava Putin! Slava Putin!

Really c1lue, we all know Russia is wonderful and Putin is a Great Leader, you made your point very clear. Please vote for Gloria laRiva... but can we discuss other subjects too and be allowed to have our own opinions that Putin and Russia are not OK?
Just today I've talked with a bulgarian student who told me that the ordinary bulgarians are pretty upset they don't have a missile shield in Bulgaria too. Maybe we can continue this discussion at rant and rave where you can tell us about your experience with every country in the Eastern Europe and your visits in Russia's country side. Sorry for getting too personal, but there are other more important problems than defending Komrade Putin and the siloviki regime no matter what. It's getting annoying to hear non stop the same and the same RussiaToday bull.

[Supercilious]

From Yves Smith we have a wonderful, romantic and heart moving story of Wall Street greed, corruption and collusion involving Credit Default Swaps and CDO's, that would convince any taxpayer how important is to rescue the poor bankers in distress

This is what the bailout is for (please read the whole story):
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/...things-to.html
[quote]
The short form of this sorry tale is that as losses mounted on this dodgy CDO, Paramax stopped putting up collateral as required in the contract and UBS sued. Where this gets interesting is that Paramax countersued, arguing that they had been reluctant to go into the deal and UBS had given them assurances that they would be lenient in marking losses to market.

What surprises me is that Morgenson doesn't make more hay about what seem to be an obvious fraud perpetrated upon the investors. UBS used a hedge fund group with only $200 million in equity to insure a $1.3 billion%2

[c1ue]

Re: W's speech

GRG,

Those troops were originally there to keep Soviet tanks from rolling through the Fulda Gap.

What is their purpose now? Note that they were there even BEFORE the latest Iraq deal.

Sure, I know that its all part of the NATO troops for European financial support deal.

Merely pointing out that if it is the Hungarians and whatnot that want security, perhaps it is they who should be hosting the military bases. Rheinmain et al are simply a relic of the 'Keep Germany Down' post WWII deal. After all, Germany is one of the few European nations that HAS a respectable national defense force.

As for the Hungarians and Poles' feelings now: somehow the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe post WWII cannot be understood as a potential reaction to having 20M dead in that conflict. It is perhaps easier to understand the relative viewpoint differences when comparing the American 'most difficult' experience of the Battle of the Bulge vs. Russia's: the siege of Stalingrad.

Certainly the Soviet government did terrible things there. But all of those 'conquered peoples' in Eastern Europe have similarly done terrible things are some time in their past.

What Americans continue to fail to get is that Europe isn't like America.

There is no cleaning of slates.

People in Europe still remember things that happened centuries ago - like Polish pancerny invading Russia and trying to set up a Catholic kingdom in concert with Lithuania.

Of course, there were more recent memories like the Hungarian 2nd Army in Stalingrad.

And of course, Allied approved ethnic cleansing in WWII: Germans and Hungarians booted out of Czechoslovakia, etc.

The git (Brit sense) I will remain in ignore mode.

As for $#*, your continuing pathetic attempts to label me as a Russia Today correspondent are doing nothing but showing your own background. As they say in Russia, we don't punch your passport, we punch your face. If you have any real understanding of Russia and Russians, you'll know what I mean. If not, then you're just talking nonsense you've been spoon fed.

If you cannot objectively understand the good things Putin in the past has done by taming the Jewigarchs, while Putin at the present doing ill by not simultaneously fading into the (perhaps fully in control) background and keeping up a nice image of Russia and letting the US hang itself, then you'll just have to content yourself with your own ramblings about an oil bubble.

Clearly too immature to understand the whats and whys of the real world.

[Supercilious]

Re: W's speech

Something is wrong . Part of my previous post has disappeared. I'll try to post it in fragments. I hope it is not Fred again changing my messages. Just a small quote from another Yves Smith bog entry:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/...y-bailout.html

But here is the truly offensive section of an overreaching piece of legislation:

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.

This puts the Treasury's actions beyond the rule of law. This is a financial coup d'etat, with the only limitation the $700 billion balance sheet figure

[Supercilious]

Re: W's speech

Part 2: How we are lied:

Confirmation of our view came from a reader by e-mail:

I worked at [Wall Street firm you've heard of], but now I handle financial services for [a Congressman], and I was on the conference call that Paulson, Bernanke and the House Democratic Leadership held for all the members yesterday afternoon. It's supposed to be members only, but there's no way to enforce that if it's a conference call, and you may have already heard from other staff who were listening in.

Anyway, I wanted to let you know that, behind closed doors, Paulson describes the plan differently. He explicitly says that it will buy assets at above market prices (although he still claims that they are undervalued) because the holders won't sell at market prices. Anna Eshoo pressed him on how the government can compel the holders to sell, and he basically dodged the question. I think that's because he didn't want to admit that the government would just keep offering more and more.

I don't think that our leadership has been very good during this negotiation (or really, during any showdowns with this administration) at forcing the administration to own their position. If Paulson wants this plan, then he needs to sell it to the public, and if he sells a different plan to the public (the nonsense buying-at-market-price plan) then we should pass that. I'd rather see the government act as a market maker for the assets to get them transferred over to private equity firms and sovereign wealth funds and other willing holders. And if we need to recapitalize these companies, it seems like the cheapest way for the taxpayer is to go in and buy up the distressed debt and then convert that to equity.

So unlike the Resolution Trust Corporation, which took on dodgy assets which had fallen into the FDIC's lap due to the failure of thrifts, and the Home Owners' Loan Corporation, which was established in 1934 after the housing market had bottomed, this program is going to swing into action with the clear but not honestly disclosed intent of buying assets at above market prices when future markets and the analysts with the best track records on forecasting this decline (you can add Robert Shiller, CR at Calculated Risk, and Nouriel Roubini to the list) believe it has considerably further to fall.