TPMCafe
« Money and Political Cowardice | Home | Women As The Goalies »

Some Replies and Some Politics

user-pic

I do agree with Paul Krugman's view that the crisis is one of insolvency, not liquidity, also describable as one of impossibility to value assets rather than liquidity. Yes as well to William Black's analysis voiced on Moyers that Obama is continuing the failed approach of the Bush bail-out. Let me add that I agree with the Congressional Oversight group's Tuesday contention that failed banks should be liquidated and some, at least, of the failed bank top executives fired. Lastly, I would agree that Sheila Bair, another hold-over from the Bush-Paulson bailout, is jeopardizing the FDIC by her own rising taste for grandiosity.

Now let me turn to the politics raised by a few respondents. In the new sections added to this post-election edition of Bad Money, I allocated the financialization - or bubble and bail-out -- political blame over the last quarter century as 70% Republican, 30% Democrat. The 30% mostly came from Clinton - from Bob Rubin, Larry Summers, Geithner et al. This allocation was as of of Obama's inauguration in January. As of April 8, I would increase the Democratic party's national culpability quotient to 34% and drop the GOP to 66% based on the first seventy days of the Obama administration and the new president's perpetuation of a failing and miscalculated bail-out.

My own November vote was cast for Obama in considerable measure because of revulsion with the bail-out and the coddling of Wall Street. So I am not a happy watcher. But let me try to put Obama's continuation of this approach in historical and 2010 midterm election context.

Question one: Did FDR ever put his personal imprimatur on a 1933 continuation of Hooverism by coddling Wall Street and putting a Geithner into the Treasury? Of course not. Did he keep on the Hoover economic team at treasury? Did he happily co-exist with having Hoover's former chief economic adviser-- Ben Bernanke was chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers -- running the Fed and bailing out the Wall Street's worst excesses with trillions of dollars in commitments? Of course not. It all seems mind-boggling.

So my political calculus is that the Democratic blameworthiness quotient should tentatively be increased four points until Obama makes a sharp change in policy and begins to sound more like Andrew Jackson and less like Geithner, Summers and Bernanke. Worse, if Obama keeps on coddling and the economy remains mired in political failure to take a blowtorch to a failed financial system, there is a possibility that the political blame would approach 50-50. If so, it will be the Democrats' warmed-over Clintonian appointees and Geithnerian hand-outs to the financial sector (including the incredible PPIP) that will be freshest in voters' minds.

Some Democrats will say that voters will keep blaming the Republicans in 2010 because the mess developed on their watch. Yes,but in 1981, when Ronald Reagan took office, he inherited an economy that had turned into a stagflationary slump under Democrat Jimmy Carter. Neverthless, when the economy and unemployment were worse in 1982, Reagan was blamed enough that the GOP lost two dozen Congressional seats in the 1982 midterms. To add to the parallel, a lot of angry voters blamed Reagan and the Republicans for the unpopular monetary and interest-rate policies of the Federal Reserve even thought the Fed Chairman, Paul Volcker, was a Democrat who had been appointed by Carter.

In my tentative calculus of increasing the Democrats' long-term culpability share from 30% to 34% because of Obama's 2009 initial bail-out complicity, I added six percentage points because of Obama, Summers, Geithner and company, but subtracted two points for evidence of better perception in the Democratic Congress, not least the actions of the oversight group in lambasting the bail-out. And November 2010 is still eighteen months away.


97 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Bair must be holding on simply because there's no one else to replace her. No other explanation is conceivable. She's admitted to allowing Indymac to backdate deposits from Bancorp that allowed the failing bank to seem capitalized to regulatory standards in last year's first quarter. A few weeks ago, she said 98 percent of bank assets were well-capitalized. And... we... keep on... a-trusting. Taste for grandiosity, too. To the pasture with her.

user-pic

This is taken from Congressman Mcfadden’s 1934 speech. It explains why only the bankers get the money köpekler and all the bankers’ fal bak losses and debts are given to the people so as to impoverish all fal bak of us first off and then enslave us köpekler with higher köpek resimleri köpekler taxes to pay off the debt incurred when the money was given to the bankers. It türkçe köpekler explains what Obama will do in the future. This is the blueprint fal bak that Bernanke, Geithner and Obama fal bak are following.

Facebook

thanks for useful information!


Best regards, Mary, CEO of youtube to mp3

Facebook

This is a smart blog. I mean it. You have so much knowledge about this issue, and so much passion. You also know how to make people rally behind it, obviously from the responses. Youve got a design here thats not too flashy, but makes a statement as big as what youre saying. Great job, indeed.children health

Facebook

I do agree with all the ideas you have presented in your post. They’re very convincing and will definitely work. Still, the posts are very short for starters. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post.by healthy families and child health plus

user-pic

If one wants to compare the '30s to the present George W. Bush occupies Coolidge's seat while Obama is Hoover - meaning things have just started to go really bad and it will be the next President who has real freedom to attempt radical change.

As for bubbles and financialization I think Robert Reich - who I generally don't like - got it right; beginning in the '70s the American middle class began to lose ground to globalization and exponentially increasing productivity (due to rapid technological advance)...and everything subsequent has been a desperate attempt to prevent its total destruction and reduction of its life-style to third world levels (now fast approaching).

In short, I don't think good-paying American jobs that have been lost will ever be replaced.

user-pic

If Reich's view per your words is correct, America did exactly the wrong thing as it attempted to keep a sustainable and high enough quality of life. Going green 30 years ago (energy, living within our means, less quasi-imperialism,...), or at least taking it more seriously, might well have left us with a relative stable utopia compared to doom and gloom going around now.

Is it too late to make up for Reagan?

user-pic

Who knows?

That's the most disturbing thing about the present crisis - nobody really fully understands it or what to do about it. Krugman is upfront about his ignorance, Roubini is very direct too, Stiglitz less so and devotes most of his time to blaming.

If they don't know, who does?

user-pic

I disagree about your assessments of those three Names, but we can let it go.

My point would be that in general in politics nobody really understands things to the Nth degree. It's a battle of principles against venality, of ideologies vs. will, and so on. It's indeterminate "until the fat lady sings", and sometimes the fat lady gets killed before singing while other times she simply vanishes in a cloud of dusty rubble.

I am curious why you talk down Stiglitz. For the most part what I've seen of his ideas over the past 6 months has seemed quite aligned with my thinking (one recent exception).

Krugman is being his usual cryptic/snarky self, possibly wise but possibly just jesting.

Roubini has been quite consistent in support of the notion that banking firms will have to eat $1.8T in realized losses and that they are (were last fall) therefore undercapitalized by at least $400B as a whole (some banks may be fine but others may be totally rotten). I've never seen the details of his estimate.

My view: Insufficient meaningful public debate from the key principals as said nicely by Sachs: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/eds/2009/04/treacle-at-treasury---a-moral.php

user-pic

I wasn't talking down Stiglitz. I agree that he has had some very good insights and made some very good suggestions.

Roubini is excellent at pointing out inconsistancies in, and lousy interpretations of, the data. But he presents his own analysis and recommendations as probabilities and ALWAYS points out that we are in uncharted waters.

It's also true that, outside of the hardest sciences, uncertainty is a given. But the present crisis has called into question many previous "certainties" and is clearly more opaque and more dangerous than anything in our lifetimes.

My own personal understanding is that it will be impossible to return to our pre-crisis position, that unemployment in America will exceed 10% officially (15% real) soon and stay there for the foreseeable future, and that the real issues - the environment, species extirmination, overpopulation - are too difficult to address now but will dominate in the next 3 to 5 years and will result in terrible genocidal wars.

user-pic

Yikes.

"devotes most of his time to blaming"

Okay, I read that as "talking down" on Stiglitz, and I don't recall noticing that being dominant much less the majority of his talk. But it's not a bid deal.

There already are what amount to such genocidal wars, would you care (dare) to flesh out that part of your prediction?

The only prediction I'm confident making is that GDP needs to decrease by 8-15% for 1-2 years (8-32% net if compounded), based on my rough estimates of how much it was inflated by ill-conceived consumer borrowing and ongoing trade deficits.

If the Financial Sector funny money debts cannot be successfully unwound, it could be worse.

One draconian solution to unemployment part would be mandatory retirement 5 years early and without early retirement bonus (but maybe up the Social Security payouts a bit). That would greatly help with unemployment figures tho' it would put further burden on SS and Medicare. It's probably not politically feasible (to put it mildly), just "thinking out loud" here.

user-pic

It not that one can't think of solutions.

A universal one-child policy, ban on development of "virgin" land and confinement of development to areas already heavily urbanized, quick implementation of retrofitting to energy efficient buildings, transformation of all urban transportation to public transportation, and a few other policies in a similar spirit would go a long way towards addressing all my concerns and give us time to find better answers.

The real problem is that all such solutions require degrees of understanding and cooperation that are not attainable (not politically feasible is how you phrase it).

So as the pressures mount I look for some tremendous blow-up...most likely in the Middle-East.

user-pic
If one wants to compare the '30s to the present George W. Bush occupies Coolidge's seat while Obama is Hoover - meaning things have just started to go really bad and it will be the next President who has real freedom to attempt radical change.

Like... who? We just elected a knight in shining armor. I don't think the electorate will be in any mood for another, should Obama's initiatives crap out. Developments like that could very well propel a viral demagogue into leadership. That has, unfortunately, happened before when hope is broken and change means anything; as text of that formula's consequences, we have the 20th century.

But you have a good analogy here, and perhaps, hopefully, Obama is going through a Coolidge "phase" before molting into a neo-Roosevelt. One big success that's just his could cleave him away from dead-wood Democrats and elite corruption.

user-pic

Thank you for being so responsive!

Here's another question for you as a seasoned participant and observer of the national political process. Why is it that regardless of party or ideology, politicians and the DC crowd in particular find it so hard to change course for the good of the country when it becomes clear to all that the policies they are pursuing are hurting the nation? Why are so few of them capalbe of any political courage at all? Obama promised to be different and unless, as you point out, there is a sharp change he appears to be just the same old thing literally in a different package. Are there any Andrew Jackson's left out there, let alone FDR's?

user-pic

It will soon be hard for even the staunchest conservative to deny reality that a theft has occurred. They of course blame the left, but the wealth transfer will to mostly their pockets. Compare this post to Taplin's and you can see what we are up against. Obama doesn't think he has to worry about getting this old lefty's vote. I've got new for him.

user-pic

This fairly recent comment from an old Washington insider continues to apply. "Washington is a town that pays more attention to loyalty and discretion than to vision or success."

user-pic

I think you have a valid point somewhere in that.

"when it becomes clear to all that the policies they are pursuing are hurting the nation"

But that's idealistic, "clear to all", and it's arguably wrong even if tempered. It looks like you might be ignoring genuine value conflicts. An "America First" bumpersticker does not mean the car owner is blindly altruistic, for instance.

As theatre: It's a big, dirty soap-opera.

One man's hurt might be another man's help.

user-pic

Because we are the change we've been waiting for -- or as Gandhi said, "Be the change you wish to see."

The problem is that "we" are not in charge. The "experts" are in charge and they operate in accordance with an accepted paradigm to which they all subscribe -- at least all those who don't want to wind up in Austin with Jamie Galbraith.

Only when they die off (or demonstrate irrefutably their error) is change possible. See, Thomas S. Kuhn

user-pic

Ellen
But do we really have a paradigm in economics or are we in the pre-paradigm stage at this point?

user-pic

From my studies of history and observation over the years, I see no evidence to disprove the thesis that both parties and business (sector not a differentiator)have been in bed forever. As time passes it is only a question of ebb and flow.

Corruption is a loaded word and using it without adjective creates a range of reactions, so I will not assign it,per se. That is, however, the word that jumps to mind.

user-pic

Politicians have a four-stage process.

1-Idealism 2-Compromise 3-Seeking Power 4-Corruption

Some politicians in their long careers go through each step. Some skip the first three and go straight to corruption. Others go for the power right away. The few and good politicians stay at step 1 and 2.

user-pic

And according to the great poet, Dante, they all end up in the eighth circle of Hell.

user-pic

In a piece on Yahoo right now, George Soros criticizes the adminstration approach very much along the lines of Phillips, Krugman, Black and others. There's a brief article and a video interview with Soros that's worth taking a minute to watch.

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/228458/Soros-Obama-%22Lost-a-Great-Opportunity%22-to-Fix-the-Banks?tickers=XLF,SKF,FAS,C,BAC,JPM,%5EDJI

user-pic

But did you listen? Here's the factors that Soros identified:

First, public understanding lags behind.

Second, it would require money--lots more money--from Congress.

Now analyze those two factors from a political standpoint and understand it simply is not going to happen right now. That's the reality that the financial folks (or those who think they are) absolutely fail to consider.

user-pic

Soros basically thinks Obama isn't being radical enough, that Obama's desire to find common ground is the root cause of a potential failure.

"
But President Obama "lost a great opportunity" by not taking a more radical approach in dealing with the banks, Soros says. "There's too much continuity with the bumbling and mishandling by the previous administration. Not enough discontinuity."
"
It does indeed look like that. But what is certain is that there is not enough evidence that various alternatives have been given sufficient attention.

The April 8 update here says it for me (in Sachs' words): http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/eds/2009/04/treacle-at-treasury---a-moral.php


user-pic

Again, ignoring the points, eds. The public is not there and Congress won't give the money. That's the bottom line. Soros outlined both.

It's a finance only or economics only point that you try to make.

Although important, these aren't the only considerations. Soros gets that.

And I think he's right that we can't go back to American overconsumption driving our own and the world's economy. I think that will go to the "green" stuff as Soros says. And that's why I want Obama's budget passed instead of pouring money into the financial institutions to recapitalize them.

It's all about priorities.

user-pic

I'm not blind to political "realities".

What exactly is the cost that you and Soros think is necessary but is politically impossible to pay, but neither of you have stated?

And watch your attitude, please. Defeatism is not a progressive attitude.


My point is precisely that the public is not well-informed, as my link said. That means that a well-informed public might develop the will to do what is necessary but "impossible". That is a political point.

user-pic

Stop ignoring the point about Congress giving out more money to recapitalize banks. Do you think the money is there just for Obama's asking or not?

Soros explains the costs. Banks (and other financial institutions if the new legislation ever wings its way through our sausage-making Congress) are nationalized, their assets wiped clean (perhaps placed in an RTC like structure as Black envisions), their management wiped out and then RECAPITALIZED and set free to prosper yet again.

Recapitalization takes money--perhaps cleanly the taxpayers, perhaps a mixture. Do you agree that Congress will provide the money? Do you realize that ALL programs Obama plans will be cast off into the wilderness?

Now, me, I'm willing to go with the Obama plans and let the financial institutions putter along while we shift this economy to a more sustainable engine--not the overconsumerism of the past (as Soros explains) but a green energy engine. I think that is our way forward.

It is radical. Essential. Progressive. And exactly where the public is.

user-pic

"Stop ignoring the point about Congress giving out more money to recapitalize banks. Do you think the money is there just for Obama's asking or not?"

You were arguing with Soros that Congress would NOT give out money, I'm saying that if the public gets better informed and develops a will, Congress could be pulled any which way. The Big Money people probably would like to be bailed out, so special interest groups would be aligned with this. Also it seems very likely that FDIC will get up to $500B if it hasn't already.

But I don't believe in throwing money at the problem, so it's not a "point" either way, to me. I'm a fiscal conservative who wants to see smart conscientious progressive government now.

What's your real problem here?

user-pic

The public is passive and the Congress is indeed forking over all the money they've been asked for. Where do you figure there will be no more money coming from Congress? There's no evidence of that at all.

user-pic

of course i made these same observations a month ago so nothing here is new to me.


but this is not business as usual and "they all do it stuff".

there is going to be a serious price to pay when the people realize they have been had and this is only a massive transfer of their money to the rich.
i give it all between 8-12 months before it exploads.

and its not possible to predict yet, what the people will do after they turn on obama.
but they will not support the republicans thats for sure.

stay tuned.......

user-pic

Jade, Which "this"?

"this is only a massive transfer of their money to the rich"

TARP, TALF, PPIP, Financialization in general, Capitalism in general or in America, ...

Are you talking about the disease, or about the band-aids as "this"?

user-pic

"this is only a massive transfer of their money to the rich"

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck...

user-pic

Phillips starts off with a pardoxical remark which reads more like a contradiction than a subtle truth in hiding:

"I do agree with Paul Krugman's view that the crisis is one of insolvency, not liquidity, also describable as one of impossibility to value assets rather than liquidity."

Valuation problems are a CAUSE of illiquidity, as are what amount to metaphysical value differences (people with different value systems might not agree on a price, thus there is no market - the Bid is too low and the Ask is too high). There isn't enough consensus on the value, so only the maringally desperate buy or sell.

Furthmore, the inability to value an asset does not make the firm holding the asset insolvent, yet Phillips presents his "impossibility" as a description of insolvency.

So that's two strikes in the first sentence. Help me out here, please. Am I missing some deep meaning in my superficial analysis based on plain language?

I'm not clear on Phillips' reference to Black and how Obama is merely continuing failed Bush policies. What Pauslon ended up doing was Stock Injection, and that was a success. What Paulson wanted to do was to buy up toxic assets at some imaginary inflated price. While PPIP does bear some clear resemblance to what Paulson vaguely outlined, it isn't quite the same policy, and of course it cannot be said to have "failed" since neither has been tried yet.

Another strike.

"Let me add that I agree with the Congressional Oversight group's Tuesday contention that failed banks should be liquidated and some, at least, of the failed bank top executives fired."

Well, duh, it's like ... the LAW, dude. The serious question is what to do with banks which have NOT failed but which are 1) too close for comfort, or 2) heading into #1 territory fast enough that if "momentum" means anything, they are likely to crash under reasonable future conditions.

Another strike. Really, this is terrible stuff, Mr. Phillips. And Sheila Bair, "grandiosity"?? Sheeesh.

Phillips is pandering weak trash food to some hungry choir here.

user-pic

Eds is pandering the weak trash of the neophytes who did the stealing....

user-pic

No, I'm speaking truth to power, silly Zeno.

And while my analysis involves reason, you provide neither specifics nor a theory in your simplistic personal attack.

"neophytes" is a curious way to describe any of the classes involved in a mass delusion gone bad. It could apply to homeowners who made out like bandits, in contrast to the jaded professionals who assisted and abetted the fraud. And yes, some investors were naive little guys (a friend of mine lost a bundle with Lehman on a "structured note", for instance) and possibly neophytes in that sense, but of course many were also professionals and highly experienced.

Got discussion?

user-pic

Thank you Kevin Phillips!

I recently read your 1993 book "Arrogant Capital" and have been telling anyone who will stand still that you were onto the crippling "finacialization" of America sixteen years ago.

I was particulary impressed with the last chapter which listed an array of possible constitutional/governmental reforms. They were creative and imaginative, yet practicable.

What strikes me in 2009 is how the problem has blossomed - like a mushroom cloud - into full flower - and yet in 1993 you were already lamenting the inescapable evidence that great powers that underwent "financialization" usually couldn't put down the narcotic of debt and change course.

I've been thinking that Obama should (and probably won't) try the "Ivan the Terrible" prescription. By letting the mega-banks collapse and then setting up Federal bodies that would make short term business loans (so called "commercial paper") and more manufacturing oriented loans, he might have, in effect "slaughtered the nobles" and consolidated federal govt power - I would even call it re-asserting U.S. SOVEREIGNTY of the state over the bond market and Wall Street.

But instead, he's continued to hand trillions to the very elites who caused the problem. He's giving money - which is power - to the super rich who can finance opposition to financial reform - let alone labor rights (EFCA) consumer protections and the like.

Every good politician is an opportunist. If Obama doesn't take this opportunity to push through a complete overhaul of US banking/credit system ( - an overhaul of 'capitalism' in a sense) he is a terrible politician. Worse - he will be remembered a kind of shlemiel who was tricked and swindled - and let the rapacious banking overlords raid the US like the pirates they are.

user-pic

"Question one: Did FDR ever put his personal imprimatur on a 1933 continuation of Hooverism by coddling Wall Street and putting a Geithner into the Treasury? Of course not."

Obama misunderstands the historical moment. He, Hillary, most of the Democratic Party profoundly misunderstood the historical moment throughout the entire very, very long 2008 campaign.

Obama only pulled ahead of McCain when the financial crisis hit critical mass in the Fall and the public could no longer ignore it. You would think that would mean the political writing on the wall was pretty clear, but then again if you stumbled upon victory perhaps you didn't really grasp what it took to get there. And maybe your enablers constantly facilitate that feel-good moment.

It seems entirely possible that without the Paulson panic, there would be no Obama Presidency. That's not to say that Obama should effectively be paying Paulson's cronies tribute monies and passing out get of jail free cards for the privilege of pretending to inhabit the Oval Office.

user-pic

Most of us here probably weren't around in 1934, but a rather interesting speech was given on the floor of the house. After endless hours on blogs, I kept asking myself what's wrong with this picture and then I found my answer. I would have provided the link, but I found this at a subscription site. Read this speech. Take it all in and then sit back and ask yourself if the old saying by Twain doesn't ring true. History doesn't repeat, but it sure does rhyme.

This is taken from Congressman Mcfadden’s 1934 speech. It explains why only the bankers get the money and all the bankers’ losses and debts are given to the people so as to impoverish all of us first off and then enslave us with higher taxes to pay off the debt incurred when the money was given to the bankers. It explains what Obama will do in the future. This is the blueprint that Bernanke, Geithner and Obama are following.

Roosevelt and the International Bankers

"Roosevelt did what the International Bankers ordered him to do!

"Do not deceive yourself, Mr. Chairman, or permit yourself to be deceived by others into the belief that Roosevelt's dictatorship is in any way intended to benefit the people of the United States: he is preparing to sign on the dotted line! "He is preparing to cancel the war debts by fraud!

"He is preparing to internationalize this Country and to destroy our Constitution itself in order to keep the Fed intact as a money institution for foreigners. "Mr. Chairman, I see no reason why citizens of the United States should be terrorized into surrendering their property to the International Bankers who own and control the Fed. The statement that gold would be taken from its lawful owners if they did not voluntarily surrender it, to private interests, show that there is an anarchist in our Government.

"The statement that it is necessary for the people to give their gold- the only real money- to the banks in order to protect the currency, is a statement of calculated dishonesty!

"By his unlawful usurpation of power on the night of March 5, 1933, and by his proclamation, which in my opinion was in violation of the Constitution of the United States, Roosevelt divorced the currency of the United States from gold, and the United States currency is no longer protected by gold. It is therefore sheer dishonesty to say that the people's gold is needed to protect the currency.

"Roosevelt ordered the people to give their gold to private interests- that is, to banks, and he took control of the banks so that all the gold and gold values in them, or given into them, might be handed over to the predatory International Bankers who own and control the Fed.

"Roosevelt cast his lot with the usurers. "He agreed to save the corrupt and dishonest at the expense of the people of the United States.

"He took advantage of the people's confusion and weariness and spread the dragnet over the United States to capture everything of value that was left in it. He made a great haul for the International Bankers.

"The Prime Minister of England came here for money! He came here to collect cash!

"He came here with Fed Currency and other claims against the Fed which England had bought up in all parts of the world. And he has presented them for redemption in gold.

"Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of compelling the Fed to pay their own debts. I see no reason why the general public should be forced to pay the gambling debts of the International Bankers.

Roosevelt Seizes the Gold

"By his action in closing the banks of the United States, Roosevelt seized the gold value of forty billions or more of bank deposits in the United States banks. Those deposits were deposits of gold values. By his action he has rendered them payable to the depositors in paper only, if payable at all, and the paper money he proposes to pay out to bank depositors and to the people generally in lieu of their hard earned gold values in itself, and being based on nothing into which the people can convert it the said paper money is of negligible value altogether.

"It is the money of slaves, not of free men. If the people of the United States permit it to be imposed upon them at the will of their credit masters, the next step in their downward progress will be their acceptance of orders on company stores for what they eat and wear. Their case will be similar to that of starving coal miners. They, too, will be paid with orders on Company stores for food and clothing, both of indifferent quality and be forced to live in Company-owned houses from which they may be evicted at the drop of a hat. More of them will be forced into conscript labor camps under supervision.

"At noon on the 4th of March, 1933, FDR with his hand on the Bible, took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the U.S. At midnight on the 5th of March, 1933, he confiscated the property of American citizens. He took the currency of the United States standard of value. He repudiated the internal debt of the Government to its own citizens. He destroyed the value of the American dollar. He released, or endeavored to release, the Fed from their contractual liability to redeem Fed currency in gold or lawful money on a parity with gold. He depreciated the value of the national currency.

"The people of the U.S. are now using unredeemable paper slips for money. The Treasury cannot redeem that paper in gold or silver. The gold and silver of the Treasury has unlawfully been given to the corrupt and dishonest Fed. And the Administration has since had the effrontery to raid the country for more gold for the private interests by telling our patriotic citizens that their gold is needed to protect the currency.

"It is not being used to protect the currency! It is being used to protect the corrupt and dishonest Fed. "The directors of these institutions have committed criminal offense against the United States Government, including the offense of making false entries on their books, and the still more serious offense of unlawfully abstracting funds from the United States Treasury! "Roosevelt's gold raid is intended to help them out of the pit they dug for themselves when they gambled away the wealth and savings of the American people.

Dictatorship

"The International Bankers set up a dictatorship here because they wanted a dictator who would protect them. They wanted a dictator who would protect them. They wanted a dictator who would issue a proclamation giving the Fed an absolute and unconditional release from their special currency in gold, or lawful money of any Fed Bank.

"Has Roosevelt relieved any other class of debtors in this country from the necessity of paying their debts? Has he made a proclamation telling the farmers that they need not pay their mortgages? Has he made a proclamation to the effect that mothers of starving children need not pay their milk bills? Has he made a proclamation relieving householders from the necessity of paying rent?

Roosevelt's Two Kinds of Laws

"Not he! He has issued one kind of proclamation only, and that is a proclamation to relieve international bankers and the foreign debtors of the United States Government.

"Mr. Chairman, the gold in the banks of this country belongs to the American people who have paper money contracts for it in the form of national currency. If the Fed cannot keep their contracts with United States citizens to redeem their paper money in gold, or lawful money, then the Fed must be taken over by the United States Government and their officers must be put on trial.

"There must be a day of reckoning. If the Fed have looted the Treasury so that the Treasury cannot redeem the United States currency for which it is liable in gold, then the Fed must be driven out of the Treasury.

"Mr. Chairman, a gold certificate is a warehouse receipt for gold in the Treasury, and the man who has a gold certificate is the actual owner of a corresponding amount of gold stacked in the Treasury subject to his order.

"Now comes Roosevelt who seeks to render the money of the United States worthless by unlawfully declaring that it may No Longer be converted into gold at the will of the holder.

"Roosevelt's next haul for the International Bankers was the reduction in the pay of all Federal employees.

"Next in order are the veterans of all wars, many of whom are aged and inform, and other sick and disabled. These men had their lives adjusted for them by acts of Congress determining the amounts of the pensions, and, while it is meant that every citizen should sacrifice himself for the good of the United States, I see no reason why those poor people, these aged Civil War Veterans and war widows and half-starved veterans of the World War, should be compelled to give up their pensions for the financial benefit of the International vultures who have looted the Treasury, bankrupted the country and traitorously delivered the United States to a foreign foe.

user-pic

I think the approach of Obama and his financial advisers to the economic downturn will be his downfall. He is leaving it, as much as he can, to the markets to sort out. The markets will work but they work at their own pace. On this course the economy will recover...in about 10 or so years, once Obama has been voted out after one term and the Democrats are back to being the minority party in Congress.

Obama had (still has?) the opportunity to make real and meaningful changes in an economy and to break the stranglehold that the oligarchy has on it. Has he thrown away his chance for real change? I knew Obama was setting himself for failure when he allowed $250B in non-stimulative tax cuts for the wealthy be included in the 'stimulus' package just so he could have a handful of 'R's' say they supported it.

user-pic

I now regret voting for Obama.

In my view we will have a severe inflation and significant dollar depreciation.

Savers, and all who use dollars will suffer.

Since workers have no pricing power, wages will not keep up with the inflation.

Obama made the sorry appointments of Summers and Geithner. It is his responsibility.

He also is at fault for not pressuring Bernanke to resign, and appointing Volcker (as old as he is) in his place.

user-pic

You now regret your vote for Obama? You'd prefer McCain right about now? Can't say I agree...that would have been an unmitigated disaster. And if you are talking about the democratic primaries...Hillary is farther to the right on the economy than Obama is.

Nope, no regrets here about supporting Obama even if I have issues with his current economic policies.

Facebook

We all feel let down by Obama. Once upon a time, we all felt he can change things. But our love of all good things and a chance for change seems to have taken us nowhere. Will my life or yours improve under him? We'll just wait and see.

user-pic

Posted by gamebookers : Good post and a fantastic read. You have raised some valid points. Great work, keep it up. I love returning back to this site and reading the quality content you always have on offer.

Facebook

thanks ı like it its rel who use dollars will suffer.

Since workers have no pricing power, wages will not keep up with the inflation.

Obama made the sorry appointments of Summers and Geithner. It is his responsibility.

He also is at fault for not pressuring Bernanke to resign, ally good topic

mobilya
dizi izle

Facebook

thanks admın its realintments of Summers and Geithner. It is his responsibility.

He also is at fault for not pressuring Bernanke to resigly good topic

dizisini izle

Facebook

thanks admın ı like this website

geciktirici sprey

Facebook

Thanks for this topic

şikiş

Facebook

thank admın ı like this

mkv filmler

user-pic
user-pic

second oldest player on the 2008 Team's roster. The Redeem Team has six players 24 years old or younger. pornoElgian Baylors case

user-pic

2008 Team's roster. The Redeem Team has six players 24 years old or porno türk pornosu about the fact that journalists aren't doing anything about it

user-pic

of.. sex porno izle gelmedi.

user-pic

hadi bakalım.. branda branda nerden baslasam ki.

user-pic

if you are a fashion man,you must heart the abercrombie and fitch or the vibram

user-pic

if you are a fashion man,you must heart the abercrombie and fitch or the pandora

user-pic

Feel good, thank you on the article。by the way,Upstairs is a suckerAbercrombie Fitch London
rosetta stone

user-pic

Thanks for this post. Very informative.

James
chef shoes | navy shoes

user-pic

Thanks for this post. Very informative.

James
chef shoes | navy shoes

user-pic

Savers, and all who use dollars will suffer. Windows 7 Ultimate
Windows 7 Ultimate

Facebook

Who knows?

That's the most disturbing thing about the present crisis - nobody really fully understands it or what to do about it. Krugman is upfront about his ignorance, Roubini is very direct too, Stiglitz less so and devotes most of his time to blaming.

If they don't know, who does?
Forex BulletProof Review

Facebook
Facebook

Yorumların amına koymuşlar arkadaş brava...


porno izle

olmazsa girinde izleyin bari :)

Facebook

The article is very interesting, but some issues still remained less affected. I hope that a future article and will reveal things behind the scenes, things that show us the true face of this.
piese auto dacia

Facebook

thank you for post
sikiş izle

Facebook

buy generic viagra online

Thanks for the article Kevin! It explained a lot to me

Facebook

Thank you for wonderful post! It is very informative for me.

Best regards,
Sofia by
Iscsi Target Software

Facebook

not clear on Phillips' reference to Black and how Obama is merely continuing failed Bush policies. What Pauslon ended up doing was Stock Injection, and that was a success. liberar samsung

Facebook

I like it Viagra UK

Some replies and politics - Well done

Facebook

viagra online uk Your blog posts are superb. Please keep them coming. Greets!!!

Facebook

stomach ache cytotec as

Facebook

What an amazing content is this and surely it makes realize each and everyone who read this. Thanks for providing so fantastic and sweet suggestions ....i really appreciate it.advokat stavanger

Facebook

perhaps this is one of the most interesting blogs that I have ever seen. Interesting article, Funny comment. Keep it up Charterresor

Facebook

Nice information, valuable and excellent, as share good stuff with good ideas and concepts, lots of great information and inspiration, both of which we all need, thanks for all the enthusiasm to offer such helpful information here.


Grekland Resor

Facebook

Go through the whole content of this blog which is very informative and knowledgeable stuff, I would like to visit again.


charter till side

Facebook

Definitely it was not easy to collect and present all this information on this way for the readers. I'm sure that anyone who was read this article find something useful from mentioned definitely memorize this web destination for future articles. Nice presentation and great knowledge here! mrsa pneumonia

Facebook

Its great news after long time. I use ubuntu and I hope I these kind of problem will be resolved with this too. Thanks for pointing out...


Köpenhamn

Facebook

I have read all the posts and i found very unique information
on this blog good work by your side thanks for your views these
are very helpful for those who don't know as much whenever i
wanna share or discuss something i surely come back and
discuss on this blog.
Regards
Cheap Article Writing Services .

Facebook

I enjoy reading post secrets and i think that your analysis was a good one. I feel that it is healthy for people to be reading some of the informative and new things that can be found on post secret. you shared your point of view in easy way. Nice job.
24 hour fitness class schedule

Facebook

I definitely desired to deliver a quick concept to thank you for the nice tips and hints you’re posting on this website. I really feel really grateful to get discovered the webpage and appear ahead to a lot of additional entertaining moments reading right here. Thanks a good deal again for a good deal of things. Alicante hotels

Facebook

So informative web site! Large thanks! Thanks for a good time visiting your site. It is really a pleasure understanding a web site like this filled with nice information. Thanks!
Innsbruck hotels

Facebook

You helped me a lot indeed and reading this your article I have found many new and useful information about this subject. the diet solution program

Facebook


Great stuff, very impressed, it's a great talent to be multi-lingual and very useful these days I should think.


casino en ligne

Facebook


That is some inspirational stuff. Never knew that opinions could be this varied. Thanks for all the enthusiasm to offer such helpful information here.

high school scholarships

Facebook


That is some inspirational stuff. Never knew that opinions could be this varied. Thanks for all the enthusiasm to offer such helpful information here.

flyg till london

Facebook


This article gives the light in which we can observe the reality. This is incredibly nice one and gives in-depth information. Thanks for this nice article

hotell i Paris

Facebook


I have been searching all over for this blog site...i thought I had book marked it a week ago but could not find it and it was a pain to get your website once again..google sucks.

Cursos de ingles en el extranjero

Facebook


It's a great niche for posting a comments as well , i need it from longtime..

affordable auto insurance

Facebook
Facebook


cheap pocket folders are useful for delivering your presentations, press kits and other promotional materials in a professional and organized fashion.

Facebook


I recently found many useful information in your website especially this blog page.
car insurance quotes online
Among the lots of comments on your articles. Thanks for sharing.Thanks Once Again tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com

Facebook

love this article,thanks
all clad anaerobic respiration

Facebook

Internet Marketing, search engine optimization, search engine marketing, sem, seo services, local seo, link building, Internet Marketing.

Facebook

auto transport, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, auto transport.

Facebook

auto transport, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, auto transport.

Facebook

It's a niche for posting a comments as well , i need it from longtime.. RAN แรน t's a great talent to be multi-lingual and very useful these days I should think.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address