Today the BLS released more bad news informing the public that 437,000 more American families faced uncertain and possibly disastrous economic conditions summing up that 7,200,000 million families in total have experience a similar fate since the Christmas season in 2007. This is not just a recession, it is not a correction or a result of financial manipulation it is a fundamental change or shutter in the global and American economy. Of all people I should know, I  have been a recruitment and hiring professional for almost 26 years, oh that is the same figure that the BLS is using when it says our unemployment is the highest in a quarter of a century.

But beyond the TV attempts of economic cheerleading the economic new is far more foreboding if you are really looking at the data: Air, trucking, and rail shipping is down 20% year-over-year., global trade is down about 30% in all major exporting countries if or when the recession or this depression is ending you will see some uptick somewhere in trade and shipping. In reality we are probably in relative terms what 1930 was and still we have 1931, 1932 and 1933 to go through. Get it.

The thing is the Great Depression was a complete While this change will entail a great deal of pain and a reduced standard of living for a large number of people, by the time the Crisis subsides, society will have pretty much remade itself in ways

Yesterday the Senate Banking Committee, with Democratic Senators joining a unified Republican base, killed a provision to allow bankruptcy judges re-negotiate home mortgages to stave off foreclosures. Yesterday Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois made an interesting a little reported charge on the Ed Shultz Show (MSNBC) stated:

"[Facing] 8 million mortgage foreclosures in America, that means 1 out of every 6 home mortgages will go into foreclosure, and that is not my estimate that is Moody's,..., sitting down and negotiating for months to find a reasonable way for people to keep their homes, to renegotiate the mortgage or have a bankruptcy judge make one last attempt----THE BANKS HAVE WALKED AWAY FROM THE TABLE, only CitiGroup is willing to work with us."

Ed Shultz quoting Durbin from another radio interview: "So after taking billions (if not trillions) of tax payer dollars, the banks are now so obstinate to refuse to negotiate and then qouted Durbin saying "THE BANKS OWN THE SENATE". 

Shultz repeating the question: "Do you believe the BANKS OWN THE SENATE?"

Durbin: "It is an uphill battle right now, and I cannot get 60 votes in the Senate."

Shultz: "So the lobbying power is that strong?"

Durbin: "It is hard to believe that they bring us this crisis, the crisis that has brought us this recession [err DEPRESSION], when they receive billions of dollars of taxpayer money, for mistakes they have made, billions of dollars, that they refuse to sit down and work out a reasonable compromise....the next thing we are moving on is credit cards..."

Now you have that, then you have the failed Chrysler negotiations where Obama stated that a few [Wall Street] creditors [again] walked away from the table and refused to participate.

Here is the deal folks. Wall Street pirates have created an illusion that they are essential to capitalism, that they are capitalism and they must be served WITHOUT hair cuts, compromises or changes. This of course is unsustainable and irresponsible, as well as, how mobsters, gangsters, and pirates would react with total obstantance and arrogance. In short it is class a developing class war. Just look how the Somali pirates reacted when they were cornered, they still thought they had leverage. Of course they aren't that stupid as the pirates on the Strait of Hormuz so they want out of the TARP money so they can't be fired or take pay cuts. Fire them---fire them all.

We as a society need to take them out---period. We don't serve Wall Street, no differently than towns folk and farmers served the ranch barons in the old West. Wall Street needs to be taken down into small pieces, reorganized to serve society, most of us have some pension, 401k or other investment---we own it. Unveil the illusion, pull back the curtain and force government to bring this to an end.

The opinions and cries to stop the investigation before we actually know anything are already singing like a chorus. The presumed effect are being postulated that this will only destroy America and distract it from the real life issues in front of us----namely not going broke, getting green, saving the planet and saving us from the threats emulating from Gunga Din.

Yet for those of you who are close to or over 50 years old the cries to forgive and forget as eerily similar to those that cried out attempting to stem the tide of Watergate. Those Nixon officials were being prosecuted for political advice, for policy, or supporting the president et cetera. Then we learned after a grueling Sam Erwin that indeed it was all about politics----usurping all the presidents men and all the laws for the sake of power. If I recall we looked for the smoking gun where the president went over the line and attempted to cover up a covert political action group willing to use any means possible to expand and hold political power absence to the rule of law. In fact they sought to manipulate the law.

But that was all domestic law. Now we have both domestic and international law. Finishing Phillipe Sands book "Torture Team" and now overlaying his discoveries with the recent press clippings of timetables and released memos the picture is becoming clear. Torture was in, torture was not only sanctioned but demanded. Torture became policy but to make it "legal" it had to be defined. And yet now we learn that even before the OLC created their contorted and contested interpretations to suit the desired policy torture and rendition was already in full swing.

Few are actually why? The obvious is that we wanted, no demanded information about being hit in a second wave from the fear and paranoia of our leaders. Remember the run on plastic and duck tape? Remember how we had to have a month's supply of food, water and medicince?  I do. But torture is not nor has it ever been about getting honest information from its subjects, it is about getting a forced confession---propaganda.

Why would we want propaganda in late 2001 or through 2002? Oh let me recall that in the summer of 2002 suddenly our leaders sights were not on Gunga Din anymore but in the Fertile Crescent----Iraq. Could it be that they wanted forced confessions to justify the idea that Iraq was actually the state that perpetrated 9/11?  Of course for Michael Ledeen personally told me that even if there was no upcoming mushroom cloud over the skyline of NYC that Saddam was an attractive target in a sea of targets. Yes...torture...forced confessions...propaganda....political aims....political power a direct line?

Let me take the direct line backwards....Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld all part of the Nixionan Age....political power, unitary power....absolute power. Their trouble now is that we cannot pardon crimes against humanity. International Law is slow, unweilding and eventually forces the rogue country to come to terms and give up their criminals. Either we do it or they do it. Oh sure we are the only nation with extradiction on these crimes....FOR NOW....but being rogue is like an island, very lonely.

So now we are learning about timelines, justifications and lawlessnes. When we eventually learn about the real motives this will be over.....except for the few defenders.

I am in the final chapters of reading Phillippe Sands book, "Torture Team" which lays out in fairly simple stark evidential fashion that it was the Bush Leadership that brought about, fostered and desired torture to be used at Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and places unknown and operated by the CIA. The evidence that he has already gathered is quite convincing where these masters of the bureaucratic darkside manipulated every government check and balance to authorize torture as a means of interrogation.

These memos released today only lay more evidence to those already gathered. Torture was well defined and understood before Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld who are the biggest fish. The next level the underbosses so to speak; Feith, Haynes, Addington, Yoo, Bybee, Gonzales, Dell'Orto, Wolfowitz, and Cambone were the politco henchmen who worked their legal and bureaucractic magic to this done for the biggest fish. They found the mechanics, General's Dunleavy and Miller, willing soldiers along with secondary mechanics like the gulliable Col Beaver to actually show cover. Underneath this cover is a whole world of blind commited soldiers be they in special ops or the dark side of our civilian claudestine forces who carried out this stuff.

Ironically or not so, Sands states that they never got anything from their torture....nothing except Cheney's illusions or dreams.

This is my take Obama Administration. I think you will be faced with the inevitable. The Congress will have to do its dirty work and investigate not unlike Watergate. This will not be pleasant for many because what was done was Un-American and it will to many abroad that we were criminal in this regards. Once enough evidence is gained the Congress will have to call the bigger and bigger fish....do not offer any immunity. Then refer it to the Justice Department where Obama will not have any choice because simultaneously the World will be seeking retribution.

We will have to be big enough to prosecute our own for war crimes and crimes against humanity including torture---regardless of the intent to protect us from perceived evil that was and could be done to us. It will be a long dark chapter for much more will come out yet unknown. There will be those supporters regardless but so what.

So Obama stop talking and Congress get on with what you need to do. Call those who did this under oath and get it on record. 

Are you unemployed? Well for many of you if you are not you will be. Yesteday I learned that my family is expecting to see a rash of unemployed siblings all with college degrees, advanced careers, houses, dogs, children, cars, et cetera.

Since December 2007 I have kept track on my own computer the job loss and now I think this illustrates the obvious what Roubini, Johnson, Krugman are all saying---this is a depression brewing. Job loss progression:

• December 2007 = <19,000>
  
• January-February-March 2008 (1Q '08)  = <232,000> av bleed 77,333 monthly
• April-May-June '08 (2Q) = <206,000> av bleed 68,666 ('08 av  73,000 mo.) <457,000 t>
  
• July '08 = <60,000>
• Aug '08 = <127,000>
• Sept '08 = <284,000> (3Q '08) = <471,000> (av bleed 157,000) <928,000 ttl>
  
• Oct'08 = <423,000>
  
• Nov '08 = <584,000>
• Dec '08 = <681,000> (4Q '08) <1,688,000>(av bleed 562,666)<2,644,000 ttl>
• Jan '09 = <655,000>
• Feb '09 = <706,000>
• Mar '09 = <742,000> (1Q '09) <2,103,000> (av bl 701,000) <4,719,000 ttl)

If you understand progression analysis the first 2 quarters the recession was garden variety and manageable, but then the dike began to break in August cascading to a level that the monthly bleed basically doubled the bleed of the first two quarters, where in October we lost almost as many jobs as we did in the first 6 months, where in the 4th quarter we lost 1 1/2 times more than lost in first 3 quarters. Now the bleed continues to grow where the first quarter of 2009 is almost 40% of the 4th quarter, though like a flood it is slowly leveling off.

At this rate the 2nd quarter will probably see April reach 800,000 job loss, where then one can ably project that May might see us hitting 840,000, June growing to 880,000 or eclipsing 2,500,000 amassing 4.6M for 2009 already and therefore passing 7M for the entire crisis.

The reality is that the job loss will continue at some rate, and if Roubini and Johnson are correct that we have to nationalize the banks and break up the financial elite the job loss will probably regress at a level that it reached like the inverse of the bell curve. So rosy let us presume that job loss of another 2M in the last two quarters so we could be between 9-10M job loss by Christmas 2009. Happy Holiday everyone!

The earlier recession of 2001 the best year in hiring was 2004 where 2.1M jobs were added. At that rate it would take five years just to catch up the job loss if it stopped in Dec 2009. But that is not reality. Now this does not include the necessary 150,000 jobs needed to include increased population growth. This equates to another 3.6M jobs or a deficit of 13M jobs and a hiring rate of 2.1M takes us into six years of recovery where another 9M jobs have to be created during that time to also incorporate the population growth. All told that is 22M over this period that have to be created to simply come back to zero. Now remember Bush Administration was 7M  in the deficit creating jobs to incorporate population growth in his 8 years.

I just thought you all should know these macro numbers. My actual fear is that the jobloss will not end until sometime in 2010.  So it is a Depression. And that is only the US.

This is a response to The Atlantic's provocative essay by Simon Johnson titled "The Quiet Coup" regarding the political and financial imbalance by Wall Street and how and why it contributed to "The Great Collapse" or "Great Global Recession". Thank you Simon for your overview and penetrating piece. The result again is a forewarning that are also the tidings that Roubini and Krugman are exclaiming right now in different ways.

The conventional wisdom among the elite is still that the current slump "cannot be as bad as the Great Depression." This view is wrong. What we face now could, in fact, be worse than the Great Depression--because the world is now so much more interconnected and because the banking sector is now so big. We face a synchronized downturn in almost all countries, a weakening of confidence among individuals and firms, and major problems for government finances. If our leadership wakes up to the potential consequences, we may yet see dramatic action on the banking system and a breaking of the old elite. Let us hope it is not then too late.

Now here is the simplest quotient: It is the elites who caused this. It is the elites who have benefited to date. It is the elites who are being made whole without hair cuts or other redistribution's or punitive measures while just look at the auto industry and the Midwest's systemic unemployment where fundamental reorganization is being demanded as a prerequisite for any effort.

William Greider of The Nation and WaPo stated so succinctly on Friday night on Bill Moyer's PBC Show that Obama (and his Administration) must eventually make a decision between America's Elite and America's ordinary person. That the social, political and financial reorganization that will emerge will either further institutionalize the financial corporate oligarthy as America's government or will fundamentally re-democratize America. The problem for Obama is not his instincts, as he already twice chose ordinary Americans over Wall Street's elites in his adult life. His instincts to get out of the DC Beltway even in his first 60 days is commendable. But the trouble is, the very basic thing about DC and the Presidency is that we go out and place elites in all those positions----elites think first about being an elite and staying an elite.

This is no different than the fabled stories like The Acts and Deeds of Sir William Wallace, Knight of Elderslie by the minstrel Blind Harry that found Robert the Bruce, the eventual King of Scotland conflicted between incrementally increasing his noble gains and uniting the clans and repelling the scourge from England and its Longshanks. In that fable poem Robert the Bruce yearned for the feelings of real leadership that William Wallace demonstrated and finally Robert chose to stand with the ordinary clansman and not the nobles winning the Battle of Bannockburn and Scotland's freedom.

These and other lore's like Robin Hood all point to the overthrow of the elites corruption and unsustainablility. In our modern times this too must be understood and yet as Simon Johnson prophesizes is that the "Great Collapse" cannot be stopped. Within the suffering will also provide the opportunity and necessity to actually reorganize and rebuild the global society.

In my mind, throw them all out. I know we have smart enough people who can reconstitute our society's new capitalism instead of crony capitialism. It is the simple solution to a complex problem that is complex by only trying to keep whole insolvent banks, bankrupt finance companies, corrupt governing bodies, self-serving elites who want to be bail out while we bail.  It them who drove society off the cliff, they don't get the keys anymore.   

  

I am stunned and shocked that Senator Grassley from the civil State of Iowa, a Bona Fide self-righteous "Jesus Saves" follower has called for the "suicide" by the AIG [and possibly other barons of Wall Street]. Is Grassley patronizing the growing "populist" mob virtually brewing in the countryside and "Main Streets" of America or inciting it?

Well this much is certain, these corporate types, the capitalist oligarchy where quiet fiscal cronyism and corruption is the actual unwritten "By-Laws" that govern their secret alliances forged in MBA Schools and country clubs are not going to have a soul to commit them to self-inflicted mortal wounds. I should know I used to "place" them, as in executive search and when the deals came down to the final negotiations they all were uninterested in actually having any form of reciprocal "merit pay" and knowingly seeking to grab their advantage.

These types feel entitled---period. They are no different than the legendary mindsets cast in Shakespeare comedies or tragedies, yes the Prince John's from the fables of "Robin Hood". This is the modern plutocracy, made of marble [banking] castles and armies of accountants and financial analysts virtually swashbuckling through hordes of other people's financial statements as if it is the fruit of their labors.

This is just the beginning folks. I still read the Hedge Fund newsletters and the future is not what is was from 1982 to 2000, nor is it going to be like 1948 to 1970. Don't worry about inflation---deflation will be the by word and these guys know it. Get what they can now, raid the treasuries like pirates and hunker down in the Bahamas. But no one is going to do the Japanese samurai code for these guys don't have a conscience. 

What Grassley is doing is trying to save his own "phoney baloney job" as paraphrased by the fictional Governor in the movie "Blazing Saddles". So here is the deal folks, we need to call in the marines, the legal marines and not the Jag Corps but real prosecutors and real investigations into each one of them. Not just in Wall Street but throughout America where the money trail led, those mortgage brokers who signed off on "stated incomes" and bogus appraisals, the investment counselors who hid incomes in foreign banks and the investment bankers who knew they were part of the largest Ponzi Scheme.

No we don't need some "Hari-kiri" we need to know who got what, when and how. Who stole our country? 

Stewart has used his medium and position to clearly show how utterly naked the entire illusion of the US Financial Market has become---it is the Emperor's Clothes in real time. The game was clearly simple; the derivative market was simply about the largest raid on the US savings assets that included the home market, 401K, IRA and pension funds. It was an unspoken conspiracy and collusion where they held the propaganda machine with all the business news, the agents of sales, the actual holders of banks, the ratings services, and the government.

How is 35-to-1 leverage sane? The bubble was "30% return from 1999 to 2007" the cheerleader's  response. Selling the idea that you don't have to do anything is the big lie.  Is US  wealth our collective labor (meaning hard work) or the collective paper value of the illusion?  Yesterday I had a conversation with a former mortgage broker who said that you have to make your money work for you?

I said money does not work, that is a metaphor!  People work, labor is hard work, money can be a result of hard work if someone buys it and you invest in things that are based on hard work---hoping it results have an added value. Added value is not about a zero sum game, there is loss value to zero sum transactions the only increased value in society comes from non zero sum efforts where collective efforts create greater results. He was still too addicted to understand, he wanted the casino to reopen, he didn't want to work anymore he simply wanted to make money off of other people.

Yes, I hope we as a society to go out and fully investigate the entire ruling class that has raped our society over the past decade, Cheney's hit squads, all the war crimes and unconstitutional surveillance activities, but also the financial robberies constituted by Wall Street and beyond. Funny thing, I recall that in the late '70's and early '80's there was a call for "ethics classes" in business and college schools. It didn't materialize and this is the generation outcome---Cramer and his ilk who still can't see that they are naked cheerleaders.

Cramer for all his attempt at mea culpa was actually unrepentant, he was still cheerleading the cause----he didn't get it even though he was as naked as a patient in a doctor's examining room. Kudo's to the comedians who see all the hypocricies. What has really got the attention is that Stewart's ratings are going up like a rocket.   

I just finished Krugman's "A Return to Depression Economics" where he provides a nice college course in ever changing dynamics of banks---to their core weakness----speculation and over-extension.

In the book he reveals Geithner's June 2008 speech to the insider's club known officially as Economic Club of New York where he was discussing the damage due to the housing bubble. What Geithner revealed was essentially how UNREGULATED the US and International banking system had become growing to about $4T of the $10T banking system. Meaning after learning through grief, hardship and plausibly a World War how important it was to regulate "other people's money" and essentially regulate stability we allowed what became known as the "shadow banking system" of hedge funds, asset backed commercial paper, structured investment vehicles, auction rate preferred securities, tender options and variable rate notes, assets financed over night in something called triparty repos et cetera was essentially 40% of the credit market and supporting a $14T economy.

Now as this world essentially was acting as banks even though they weren't chartered and regulated to hold cash reserves were unable to respond orderly to what was nothing else as bank runs. Essentially they set up a toxic situation where they  used a fake insurance scam to securitize the system of speculating on the US housing market.

How far this accelerated the dollar is still unknown but essentially we might be 2 or 3 times upside against actual value. The thing is there were warnings in the Bush Administration and I believe the real person who knows is Paul O'Neil who left in 2003 where one can even go back how the Bush Administration blocked state-level efforts to impose oversight in the subprime market.

The whole thing appears to have real international implications as the US basically underwrote its own deficit through international monetary systems where it seems that Goldman, JP, AIG and Citigroup are steeped. This thing is very deep and I wonder how deep.  

He has a blind devoted following that is ever marginal to the marketplace, but still lucrative. Yet like every Super Nova he is burning up at an escalating pace---no different than than another balding, big belly baffoon---Joe McCarthy who proved to be senseless and useless once things got to be serious.

The he draws the vacuum and the real GOP realize that he is nothing but a bully that is out of control he will find some leveling agent...like some unexpected bust out----oh another ponzi scheme or some drug bust but worse.

Let him flame out, I have friends who listen to him and they now have a common disorder---intellectual autism---just political screaming and tantrums.

As Josh Marshall is reporting the potential political outcome of the Franken-Coleman election where he speculates:

"Are the Republicans trying to lay the groundwork for filibustering any effort to seat Franken..."

Appears to be that political tactical "line in the sand" where the Republican Party uses "a manufactured prejudice and false claim in order to gain power" in the name of "Republican Nihilism". The thing is this will take some severe and draconian discipline in the "old boys club & cloak room". If one looks at this through a prism of retrospect does this also give light to Snowe and Specter's reaction to possible primary challenges from the far right in their party.

Like anything the Republicans might be able create some mythology that some in the public domain might eat up and try to digest, where even the echo chamber will find some fascination, but the reality of a filibuster?

This of course is a smoke screen to stem the tide of the budget and then future initiatives regarding labor and healthcare----duh!  Get ready Harry, be ready to call them on their bluff, but be prepared. Make them squirm, make them work, make them scratch and naw....expose them as nihilists that they are---useless and senseless. In short force the moderates in the party to reject further the radicals right.

The despair seems to be permeating through the opinion-makers, leaders and commentators from the Right. I mean this goes far deeper than the urban slang offered by RNC Chairman Michael Steele when he gave the mia culpa;

"[W]e know the past, we know we did wrong. 'My Bad'".

I mean come on, your BAD? That is not going to cut it Mr. Michael "card-carrying President of the 'Stockholm Syndrome' Club of America" Steele, taking over for the absolutely looney tunes charactor Alan Keyes. By the way what do they put in the water in Maryland to produce caricatures like this but....

Back to Brooks who is a bona fide intellectual who can self examine with some objectivity, which has always made him dangerous. When Brooks reacted to Governor Jindal's "Official GOP Response", he said it was a:
 

"to come up in this moment in history with 'the stale government is the problem, we can't trust the Federal Government', is just a disaster for the Republican Party....but the idea that the government is going to have no role in this when in a moment only the Federal Government is big enough to do stuff, just to ignore all that, government is the problem, corruption, earmarks, wasteful spending is just a form of nihilism, It just is not where the country is...".

Now when you start to really think what Brooks is trying to say he offers a genuine  'self-realization' a look in the mirror so to speak, that his Republican Party of the last 30 years, has evolved to this point, where its core values and beliefs are in reality---unfounded. That the existence of the Republican Party, as it stands right now, being senseless and useless. If you extract the penetrating and revealing irony from the definition of, nihilism you have to ask yourself the question; Is Brooks beginning the discussion for the call of the destruction of the post-war conservative movement and the Republican Party that it has consumed, as the only desirable path for America's sake?

If you really look what Brooks said Tuesday off the cuff: The Republican Party at this critical time in our nation's history, lacks the ability to look at the world in any rational manner, as demonstrated in Jindal's speech, denying any objectivity as understanding basic self-evident political truths, that right now only the Federal Government can do " stuff"  

To me, it was a strange, even premeditated use of an unusual term on national TV.  Taken in that context, coupled with the comments from Olympia Snowe along with the apparent reactionary primary challenge to Arlen Specter in PA, Snowe simply stated to RNC Chair Steele when he proposed systematic primary challenges to those who broke with the the Republican Party to pass the Stimulus Bill, "that the GOP was in the majority when they had moderate members and is not in the majority now when it has but a few.

Are we seeing the collapse of the Republican Party? I will say this, some 20 months out from the 2010 mid-terms, if the Democratic Party majority expands in the Congress and correspondingly, in the state legislatures, the GOP will probably start to break up. It has happened before in our history.

I am working on a book about the Colorado and Colorado Springs and the story behind the story of the 2008 election. What has jumped out is that outside of two counties, the 2nd and 8th largest in Colorado, Barack Obama and Mark Udall carried 57% of the 2008's popular vote. This is a state where only voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate in only 5 presidential elections since 1920; (FDR in '32 &'36, Truman '48, LBJ '64, & Clinton '92) 5 out of 22 elections, and yet outside of those two hardened Republican base counties which comprises about 17% of CO's population, the Democrats have grown to polling 57% for Obama and Udall. No wonder 5 of 7 Congressional Representatives are Democats, CO has both Senators from the Democratic Party as well.

Why?  How did this come about? Well in short, it is the full outcome from the Republican Agenda that was completely played out in Colorado in the 1980's and 1990's. It has a hardened state and local government budget process than cannot respond to the Depression Era Economics and must cut government services by a constitutional statute. It has blithering idiots like State Senator Schulheis who makes statements about AIDS that are revengful and absolutely ignorant, even yesterday! And still the GOP simply offers up the same belief and values that Jindal promoted in his response speech----adjunct nihilism.

Fascinating David, fascinating self awareness of the movement you fostered and promoted.  

The Great Depression began on October 24, 1929 when after hitting a peak of 381.14 in September 1929 where upon  the market eventually found its first basement of 198 on November 13th, it had fallen 51% of its high. Today, some 79 years later, basically my parent's lifetimes, the DOW hit a high of 14,164 on October 2007 to fall to 7552 yesterday or 53% of its high water mark. Both highly speculative markets were fueled by bubbles in the real estate markets, generations apart. I think the most daunting picture is an overlay someone made on September 15th from the StockCharts.com.


Now things are not exact but it remains clear that every educated economist and observer understands that the stock market is a reflection to the cumulative and underlying securities value that is based on land or real estate values. Almost all other securities are basically virtual be it corporate and government bonds, shares, currencies, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.  except land or physical property. My father an old timer cynic who  is moaning seriously about the fact that his assets are eroding around him after a lifetime of amassing a small fortune always maintained that property value has two sets of books was at one time an expert in emenent domain.

If the property is improved or not  there is a market value of what someone will pay for the piece today in relation to the projected value of what someone will pay for it someday in the future if one can hold on to it.  It a speculative value.

Then there is a second value, where if improved what is the cost of replacing that improvement if something tragic occurred like a fire or storm. Regarding raw or unimproved land the first value again applies but the second is a value of what one could do with the land as in developing it.

Once deflationary trends begin they don't stop until there are more buyers coming into the market seeing that there are bargains that far outweigh the risks. This is the same with stocks as it is with land.

Eventually the stock market actually did hit bottom in 1932 at 42 from 381, just 11% of its high three years earlier. It the took the US until 1955 to reclaim that 89% on paper. To me so many things are so similar, like the maestro of Alan Greenspan who schooled America in new-laissez faire economics not unlike the shadow-president from 1921-1932 by the then, Treasury Secretary, Andrew Mellon, once considered the 3rd richest man in America.

Mellons famous four main points fiscal plan (does this sound familiar?)

1. Cut the top income tax rate from 77 to 25 percent
2. Cut taxes on low incomes
3. Reduce the Federal Estate tax
4. Efficiency in government

Is this not Reagan and Bush? Well it gets better when you understand the recent Treasury Secretary Paulson in light of the Lehman Brother's failure the precipitated the most recent market crash: Paulson called it the "Moral Hazard" as a basis not to reward bad banking behavior where Mellon possessed a similar ideal  as the "liquidationist" thesis: weeding out "weak" banks.

The question than is regardless of the macro economic tactics, no matter what someone does how does the economy make up for a Trillions of lost value on land and business securities when actual money was loaned on it?  Somewhere, somehow the books have to be balanced unless you have an entire reset or restart and that is not going to happen unless all the governments fail.

From Think Progress

In recent days, several of President Bush's closest advisers have been attacking President Obama. Vice Preisdent Cheney, for example, said that there was "high probability" of a WMD attack if Bush's policies were reversed, and former chief of staff Andy Card said that Obama has turned the White House into a "locker room" because he isn't requiring staff to wear jackets at all times. Axelrod sharply responds to the "tasteless" criticisms in a new interview with the Washington Post:

"I was disappointed in the Vice President's comments, ...

You know, the last thing that I think we're looking for at this juncture is advice on fiscal integrity or ethics from Karl Rove, anyone who's read the newspapers for the last eight years would laugh at that.

...I mentioned Andy Card saying that we were somehow denigrating the Presidency because people were wearing short sleeves in the Oval Office. We're wearing short sleeves because we have to roll up our sleeves and clean up the mess that we inherited."

Reading Tannehaus's Essay "Conservatism is Dead" in the New Republic he makes the case what the Obama, Democratic Congress and the entire US Society is up against:

Yet, even as the right begins to regroup, it is not clear that its leaders have absorbed the full implications of their [party's] defeat. They readily concede that the Democrats are in charge and, in Obama, have a leader of rare political skills. Many on the right also admit that the specific failures of the outgoing administration were legion. But what of the verdict issued on movement conservatism itself?

The story of postwar American conservatism is best understood as a continual replay of a single long-standing debate. On one side are those who have upheld the Burkean ideal of replenishing civil society by adjusting to changing conditions [political pragmatism]. On the other are those committed to a revanchist counterrevolution, the restoration of America's pre-welfare state ancien regime. And, time and again, the counterrevolutionaries have won. The result is that modern American conservatism has dedicated itself not to fortifying and replenishing civil society but rather to weakening it through a politics of civil warfare. [AKA the Cultural War]

They, the now Republicans, now the completely taken over by the right are now cornered like a wounded animal where they occupy the proverbial political place of irrelevance, as authored by the former Senator Hagel, who happened to be one of the last 'Burkian' Republicans who expressed the concepts of replenishing civil society by adjusting to changing conditions. 

But what of the time honored tradition that the previous Administration who were able to silence their criticisms following recent transitions. Today that is gone for the right revolution is on life-support politically.  The right knows they are facing obsolesce, both as the numbers in elected seats attest and a few conscious ones know they failed to perform the essential component to sustain any political power---ultimately every government, every ideology, every political movement is eventually measured by its ability to use it powers to make better its own society, otherwise it turns into a reactionary goon squad. Is that not what the Bush Administration emerged to be?  Tannehaus continues:

One reason is that the most intellectually sophisticated founders of postwar conservatism were in many instances ex-Marxists, who moved from left to right [the original neo-con's] but remained persuaded that they were living in revolutionary times and so retained their absolutist fervor. In place of the Marxist dialectic they formulated a Manichaean politics of good and evil, still with us today, and their strategy was to build a movement based on organizing cultural antagonisms. [social conservatives, evangelical conservatives, paleo-conservatives, neo-conservatives]. Many have observed that movement politics most clearly defines itself not by what it yearns to conserve but by what it longs to destroy--"statist" social programs; "socialized medicine"; "big labor"; "activist" Supreme Court justices, the "media elite"; "tenured radicals" on university faculties; "experts" in and out of government.  But, if it's clear what the right is against, what exactly has it been for? This question has haunted the movement from its inception in the 1950s, when its principal objective was to undo the New Deal and reinstate the laissez-faire Republicanism of the 1920s.

Ahh the reason we locked into this solidarity of opposition by the Congressional Republicans who are now dominated by the right's ideologues, is it . They are fixated against the New Deal, its new social contract of relevancy, of actually solving intolerable problems of the industrial-capitalist society expressed by things like "socialized medicine" while 50M Americans are uninsured. They are opposed to fiscal regulation while we know speculation becomes rampant when commercial banks are merged with investment banks. They opposed modern governance and why they hold Reagan as a pseudo deity in his ideology that "government is the enemy" where in reality that statement held the the entire objective to undo the New Deal.

That is really what Rove's ideal of a permanent Republican majority that fell apart the day a hurricane came to Louisiana's shores. At each juncture the right's ideology failed to solve basic governance competency and yet they scream and holler about shirt sleeves, torture and fiscal responsibility. What they are screaming about is not shirt sleeve style, they are hollering that once this generation sees an actual effort and results of making government work their basic mantra is dead, except for their own echo chambers. Tannehaus says conservatism is dead, I say then lets bury too, dressed in their suits and ties and along with Limbaugh and O'Reilly's megaphones.