Comments on: SUCKLING THE GOVERNMENT SUGAR TIT

By: P. Aaron

P. Aaron — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:12:41 +0000

Ugliness in the name of charity.

“Too big to fail?” Donald trump is suing folks he owes huge amounts of money to to “restructure” what he owes them, or he’ll default. A smart move he learned on the street…obviously.

Our representatives haven’t learned anything from us.

When will we learn?

By: Chuck Tucson

Chuck Tucson — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:48:57 +0000

I recently had a sit down with my Congressman. (Don Manzullo - R Ill)

I specifically asked him how much influence lobbyists have with him. He said that he would never find out about some issues, if not for lobbyists. He said, “how else am I supposed to find out what’s going on?”

I fully understand the role of lobbying, but Manzullo didn’t seem to want to differentiate between someone who is a paid corporate lobbyist, and someone, like me, who takes my concerns directly to him. I also kindly suggested the he read a newspaper or some news on the web from time to time to stay informed. He indicated that he had little time for this.

So, the question is then, is there a difference between me talking to him, and a paid corporate lobbyist talking to him? On the surface no, I guess not. But, I don’t have the power do pull in campaign contributions on the scale that a corporate lobbyist does. I would think that would have some definite effect on who he would listen to, even if it is subconscious.

I dunno. I have mixed feelings on the issue.

By: still liberal

still liberal — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:05:25 +0000

Lobbying is done under the Constituional right of citizens to petition the government. Is there anything in the Constitution that allows citizens to hire people on their behalf to petition the government? Is lobbying even Constitutional?

OK, I’m dreaming but the question remains.

1st Amendment couldn’t be clearer - citizens have the right to “redress greivances” - the very definition of a lobbyist in most cases. If an action by government - either through commission or ommission - is damaging, you have every right to hire a lobbyist to seek redress.

ed.

By: Allen

Allen — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 06:00:35 +0000

I suspect the next few generations are not going look at ours in a good light. No, let me ammend that, they will be royally pissed off. Their questions will fall into three basic categories:

1. How many mortgages did you take out on the place?
2. What the hell did you do with all the equity?
3. Did it ever cross your minds that we have to pay that debt?

The greatest generation is not what we will be known as.

By: Mark Antony

Mark Antony — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 04:40:29 +0000

All this to keep a Golliwog in the Chocolate House for 4 years?
Nah! Let’s bring the ‘Ides of March’ forward real quick this time round.

By: bobwire

bobwire — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 03:54:50 +0000

This situation is absurd.

Perhaps we can all agree that something should be done. I am not intelligent enough to figure it out. How can we get the biggest bang for our bucks? I hope the last gasp of the Bush administration will not exacerbate the situation.

Privatising profits and socializing costs: welcome to lemon socialism!

By: sota

sota — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 03:35:36 +0000

This display/spectacle/fiasco feels a bit like a giant piñata, except these industries didn’t even have to take a meager swing at the cash-stuffed prize. Congress cracked it open themselves, dumped it on the floor, and the kids have come running like…well…like kids do when they see free candy on the floor.

The whole thing is becoming a disgusting mess.

By: mark30339

mark30339 — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 03:08:08 +0000

When Paulson said he needed to set up a reverse auction for all the troubled mortgages so a market for them returned, and institutions could cash out their losses, Rick waivered and withheld support. Paulson, Bush, Pelosi and Reid all said a plan would be put together. The markets trusted those assurances. Rick waivered. I chastised Rick for his stuck posture, and referred him to Paul Samuelson who favored creating a market to let institutions cash out their losses. Well Paulson is screwing us all; Rick was right all along. Institutions are getting sweetheart equity boosts from Uncle Sam and never mind about that orderly reverse auction of toxic assets. Rick, I owe you a round of drinks. Paulson, since you’re gambling on the public tit, why not help out Las Vegas Sands Corp/Venetian/Palazzo and get some comps for all of us.

By: Mikeyslaw

Mikeyslaw — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:28:06 +0000

Rick
I have run to the mailbox every day since election day, but still no check from the government to make my house payment for me. Checked my gasoline credit card, every charge was still on it. Guess someone found out I did not vote for Obama.I am not behind on my house payment, and not under water yet, and since I live in Texas, probably won’t be except in the case of a depression, then we really all are in the same boat.
I guess I am in a minority around here, since I was originally for TARP because I have been in and out of the stock market for years, I read constantly about stocks and bonds, and have many friends in the financial industry, and I truly believe that the market was set for a free fall much, much worse than what we have seen so far, and much more rapidly than what we have experienced, if something wasn’t done.
However, as I began to learn more and more about the freaking mess the financial sector was in as a result of the quantum theory financial wizards uses of CDOs, swaps, insurance backed securities, and the fact that the ratings agencies joined in the game like a bunch of conventioneers chasing a two dollar hooker, I realized that the toxic debt buying scheme was not going to work. The fact is, Paulson panicked, and made some risky, and now foreseeable, assumptions. One of the biggest, and dumbest, was that he could place a value on the toxic assets. Since the banks still continue to avoid transparency at all costs, and because it would take a character smarter than the one in Good Will Hunting to figure out what is what, there is simply no way to determine what those assets are worth, and more importantly, what should be paid for them.
Subsequently, he promptly over-paid for what he got by injecting money into the banks. And forgot, purposely or innocently, to remember to place a sufficiently dragonian policy on the banks to begin lending the money, instead of hoarding it.
Now, we have companies like American Express, with very little exposure directly to the sub-prime/no doc liars loan mess, deciding they want to be banks for the sole purpose of sticking their heads into the public trough. When they get the money, they need to change their name to American’s Express. Or better yet, America’s Mess.

By: DAVE IN SOCIALIST CHICAGO

DAVE IN SOCIALIST CHICAGO — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:43:41 +0000

Let the failed businesses die quickly, so that we may recover faster.The new administration will not only make sure we have a full blown depression, but they will make it linger for years like a nasty relative you just cant throw out.