Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Legislation to Strip FED of Powers by Sen. Bunning
reuters.com — "The only difference between what the Fed did and what Hugo Chavez is doing in Venezuela is Chavez doesn't put taxpayer dollars at risk when he takes over companies - he just takes them."
BeaReady- 1034 diggs
- digg it
- kemp34, on 09/18/2008, -8/+117This is a no-brainer. Down with the Fed!
- OpenRevolt, on 09/18/2008, -1/+12First we strip them, then we hang them!
- sulthernao, on 09/19/2008, -16/+13I don't like the FED buyout either, but what the FED is doing is entirely to keep the economy stable. I don't think you realize what sort of domino effect the loss of these banks and financial companies (whatever boneheaded, greedy investments they made) would have on the national economy.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -4/+16If they didn't have the government enabling them to make boneheaded greedy investments they wouldn't be in such a huge danger of collapsing.
Still... I'm digging you up to counter act the knee jerk reaction of people joining this new bandwagon without knowing what's really going on here. You're right... it's too late to decide not to bail these institutions out... but we should still look to avoid creating the same situation agian in another century or so. Do some research and you'll find this is far from the first time the fed running aground of issues like these... nor would this be the first time it had been abolished. - ngmcs8203, on 09/19/2008, -4/+10@Wolferz... you mean that the last 28yrs or so of deregulation hasn't worked out best for us? /s
Regulation was put in place to avoid another "great" depression, and look at what deregulation has done. Way to go Gov't. - ruddy, on 09/19/2008, -2/+11Keeping the economy stable requires the fed out of the equation! We're just seeing the blowback of a failed policy - one that is unconstitutional and illegal. The central bank needs to go.
- FTLJohnson, on 09/19/2008, -1/+6"another century or so"
Someone sounds a little optimistic... Ok... A LOT optimistic. I give it a term or two. (Choose your own adventure: Which incumbent party candidate will ruin the country further?) - positron, on 09/19/2008, -0/+15They aren't fixing anything. They're just delaying the inevitable.
- Dumbledorito, on 09/19/2008, -2/+5"Keeping the economy stable requires the fed out of the equation! We're just seeing the blowback of a failed policy..."
No, we're seeing politicians relaxing legislation and ignoring it altogether for their friends in corporate America. I think a lot of people are missing the point, here; There wasn't too much regulation, there wasn't any enforcement of even existing regulation. - LiberalKid, on 09/19/2008, -6/+2I agree, I don't see how you can say that the FED should be out of the equation, when the whole reason these banks are failing is because we deregulated the subprime mortgage industry.
- ostracize, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5So the Fed knocks the economic balance way too far in one direction so they have to force the market to avoid restabilizing?
It's like pushing a glass of water right over the edge and then trying to force the falling water back in the falling glass to make up for the mistake.
What a joke. Ban the Fed! - wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5@ngmcs8203 & LiberalKid
Deregulation? Pass the pipe man... your turn is way past over. Overarching regulations might be a thing of the past but micro-management style regulations are on the rise big time and, due to a left hand/right hand lack of communication, are causing more serious problems than policies like new deal and early anti-trust laws ever did.
Also regulation never solved the problems. It dealt with the symptoms... but it has always ignored the disease. The United State' economy had grown steadily for 2 centuries before Black Tuesday. The 20's were the most decadent decade in US history. Then Black Tuesday happened. If all the regulations put in place to solve the problems of the great depression have worked why has the quality of life (IE the quality of our schools, health care, science, and industry) been on a steady decline since the end WWII while most nations who suffered from the effects of Black Tuesday (and even worse effects from WWII) have recovered? And don't say we need more regulation. If strong regulation was needed to have a stable economy we would have needed it before the great depression. So would countries like China and India which are currently booming economically and have practically no regulation on their business and industrial markets.
@FTLJohnson
The more i think about it the more i think a century *is* very optimistic. I'm not sure 8 years is very realistic ether but 20 years from now really wouldn't surprise me.
@positron
They are fixing a short term problem (banks our economy depends on being in jeopardy) with a short term solution (bail them out). That said, while the situation with the banks is a problem in and of itself, it is also a symptom of a larger problem that can't be fixed with short term solutions. That problem is embodied in the Federal Reserve.
Should we fix the long term problem? Yes. However, we cant ignore this short term problem ether. It is too severe and wont wait for use to fix the bigger issue. Also, as it is a problem in and of itself it likely wouldn't be fixed when the larger issues is fixed. It has to be dealt with separately and and it has to be dealt with now.
@Dumbledorito
If the solution to a problem requires unrealistic expectations to be met then the solution is inherently flawed. Politicians always have and always will break the rules. That it one of the guiding principles behind our government's design as laid out by the founding fathers. We can keep them from getting too far out of control by staying informed and interested in their actions and the reasons behind it and, more importantly, by never trusting them no matter how many babies they've kissed. However, in the end they are still human beings given power and money and will do with that power and money what all human beings would do given power and money.
We can't make them obey the rules all the time... but if we put the fear of God into them when they step out of line too far we can make them get sweaty palms next time consider buying a BMW M5 on tax payer's money. We just have to stay informed and interested long enough to make sure they don't take the +5 War Maul of God Fearing away from us before it comes time to use it next. - wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -2/+4Oh and since I forgot to mention it but it's still so important:
@LiberalKid
"the whole reason these banks are failing is because we deregulated the subprime mortgage industry."
You don't know that. Yes it might have been a contributing factor but as convoluted as our regulations have become you can't honestly say that is the *whole* reason... especially as esoteric as an economy based on opinion and perception (as opposed to tangible commodities) can be. The "subprime mortgage industry" does not exist in a vacuum from all the other regulations out there on other industries and institutions. For all you know it was one of those other regulations that actually caused the current problems... and the removed regulations were negating or lessening their effects. Given the ever increasing strength of certain unregulated economies it seems much more likely that something other than a supposed absence of regulations is causing the issus.
And before I forget... The "subprime mortgage industry" could be described more clearly (less euphemistically) as "an industry dedicated to providing mortgages to clients who are likely enough to be unable to pay off such mortgages that there is no assurance of breaking even in the long run." Odd how when a business does something like this it's called "subprime"... but when an individual does it it's called gambling.
How would you like it if your money was being taken (by force no less) by the casino you are staying at with the promise that it would (eventually... most likely sometime before you check out) improve the conditions of your stay... but instead you keep getting bumped down to lower accommodations as the casino claims to not have enough money to go around while at the same time the money you gave the casino in return for (eventual) better accommodations was instead promised to the gambling addicted casino regulars (without your approval) so if they went in the hole the casino would use the money that was supposed to get you a penthouse (eventually) to bail them out so they could come back and do it again next week.
There is a flaw in my analogy... in that in a case like this you would probably go to a casino that didn't take your money by force and offer only vague promises in return. But it's hard to make a solid analogy regarding governments and taxes that also involves gambling. For the sake of argument imagine that all casinos, hotels, motels, and rentals operated this way (just as all countries operate that way)... and that there are no homes, apartments, or lofts left for purchase (ie no land left to colonize that isn't claimed by an existing sovereign state).
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -4/+16If they didn't have the government enabling them to make boneheaded greedy investments they wouldn't be in such a huge danger of collapsing.
- david76, on 09/19/2008, -0/+6Here's another big difference, the Fed isn't part of the US Federal Government.
- kuys, on 09/18/2008, -2/+25I hate Bunning. Being from his state and all but what he said is very true.
- condorhauck, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5Fellow Kentuckian, I couldn't agree more. I pretty much hate both of our senators, but today my opinion of Bunning just rose above that of McConnell for the first time. I typically try to be abreast of these types of things, but I was oblivious to the fact that the fed had that kind of power.
- BeaReady, on 09/18/2008, -2/+24Can't stand either rep in my state either, Ohio. BUT this is excellent chance for the people to let them all know to do the right thing for once!
- BeaReady, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2sorry about the stammer :-P
- turpenine, on 09/19/2008, -1/+7kucinich is from ohio and he is great. he is in the house though.
- InspectorGadget, on 09/19/2008, -6/+2Yeah, though I suspect his proposed bill to issue bonds to the Martians to help us through the recession won't pass.
- libertygal76, on 09/18/2008, -9/+86FINALLY someone is saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! Time to tell the FED to quit bailing these companies out!!
Ron Paul was right all along by the way!!- veesofnaught, on 09/19/2008, -15/+8May I remind you what would happen if the Fed HADN'T bailed these companies out. I'll take a bailout over a collapse but I still don't like either of them.
- ruddy, on 09/19/2008, -1/+13Well if we followed the constitution we wouldn't have this problem. The fed got us into this ***** hole, and now *we're* gonna get us "out" by bailing them out with printed money (which defaces my hard earned money..).
- cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2May I remiond you that the fed did not cure the problem, they delayed the collapse. What makes you think the bailout will work?
Got proof?
- dsmx, on 09/19/2008, -2/+12It would of been painful in the short term but the benefits in the long term would of been huge.
- whimmel, on 09/19/2008, -3/+6would HAVE. "would've" is a contraction of "would have". "would of" makes no sense. When you say it out loud you are saying "would've"
- Bith8654, on 09/19/2008, -6/+3How would it have been better in the long term? There would be massive damage to ecomonies all over the world and as a result, maybe some sort of regulations are put in place so this doesn't happen again. Ok that's good, but things like that are already being proposed, and by bailing them out they avoided the damage.
Look, I'm pissed they had to bail the company out, but by doing that they prevented massive chaos that many citizens from every tax bracket would have had that go through. Don't be pissed about the buyout, be pissed that they allowed themselves to get into this mess despite numerous warnings. - dsmx, on 09/19/2008, -0/+9The long term benefits are it shows the government is not willing to bail out companies that take insane risks knowing that they'll get bailed out if anything goes wrong. With the loss of a big insurance company hundreds of smaller ones would of popped up increasing competition in the marketplace lowering costs for everyone.
Our current system seems to be if your a big company it doesn't matter if you ***** up we will save you from going bankrupt. This means they can do anything they want and get away with it. - WalkerTXclocker, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2@Bith8654
I think I'll just be pissed about both - Bith8654, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2@dsmx: I agree that the bailout doesn't send a good message, but we can show we won't bailout anymore through legislation instead of example. You're basically saying we should have ***** over a lot of innocent people just to teach big corporations of a lesson.
- dsmx, on 09/19/2008, -0/+4What choice do you have? You bail the company out you devalue the dollar even more and cause even more inflation which will hit the people even harder then losing their money, in the long term.
- Bith8654, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2Well you're assuming that we will continue to bailout companies and inflation will continue to rise. If that were to happen, I would agree with you that in the long term it would hit more people harder. If we instead just stop the bailouts now, we might experience some inflation, but it won't cause the financial ruin that just letting the company die would have. MORE people might get hit due to the bailout, since it will affect all taxpayers instead of just those with a connection to the specific company, but they will be hit considerably weaker.
- FTLJohnson, on 09/19/2008, -1/+12Eventually the bailout fund is going to run out. That will come in the form of more taxes, but more sneakily, it will come in the form of the government printing more money, thus stealing from you by making your savings and investments worth less by devaluing the dollar, which also raises the prices of commodities like, for example, food and gas.
As more companies fail, and more bailouts occur, the price of everything is going to skyrocket. Rather than ripping off the bandaid, this is going to be a tedious and drawn out demise. No one in government is actually doing what really needs to happen, which is to ease restrictions and regulations on businesses, cut taxes to stimulate growth, AND get rid of laws and regulations that make criminals of peaceful consenting adults, costing huge amounts of resources in wasteful unnecessary enforcement.
Until that happens, we are on a slow path to serious economic hardships... The problem with relying on Government for everything comes from forgetting the fact that Government doesn't actually PRODUCE anything.- mike17032, on 09/19/2008, -3/+3Its relaxed regulations that got us into this mess in the first place.
- FTLJohnson, on 09/20/2008, -0/+5WOW, that is stunningly ignorant. What is happening is the socialization of losses, and the privatization of profits. If you think that small businesses operate without regulations, you're delusional. If you think that mega corporations operate without so many regulations it would take a lifetime of a single person to read them all, you are delusional.
The biggest delusion you seem to suffer from though, is thinking that some government committee can run a business better than greed can. If we had a system that worked to expect greed, but actually held businesses RESPONSIBLE for their actions - we wouldn't be bailing failures out. Again, we socialize losses, and privatize profits - because of ignorance. It's ignorance that causes us to try and run everything by a committee and socialize it, but when these companies get successful enough, they find they ways around the nonsense of fools, and the socialist system doesn't work with responsibility and concrete results, but instead works for the idea of NEEDS. Needs are not concrete. If we don't hold people responsible - this is going to continue to get worse. Regulations don't hold people responsible - they provide a set of rules to be circumvented in search of profit. Greed will win in the face of regulations. Regulations are the devices of the lazy and ignorant.
- mike17032, on 09/19/2008, -5/+3Yes, total economic crash is much better than a recession. Ask any rontard, he will tell you!
- Grok22, on 09/19/2008, -0/+7The fed got us into this in the first place, and now all they have done is delay the inevitable.
- cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3mike- what makes you think we will not see a crash? Did stealing half of your money stop the crash or did it delay the inevitable?
Ron Paul has far more economic expertise and experience than you do. When you can telk to me about Von Mises and Hayek without looking them up, get back to me.
You don't have to be a fool to hate Ron Paul but it seem as if it is a common thing.
- ZenFountain, on 09/19/2008, -3/+2These are not "bailouts" in the sense that the federal reserve just throws a bunch of money at a failing financial institution. The whole point of a central bank is to have a lender of last resort, and that's exactly the function that is being performed here. The feds loan money to failing financial institutions, essentially at loan shark rates, so they can put their house in order without a fire sale and then repay the loan. The alternative of anarchy in the market when a bank fails is far, far, worse.
- avengingturnip, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2No. The whole purpose of the Fed is to socialize the banking industry and monetize the national debt.
- cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Where did the fed get the money to loan?
- veesofnaught, on 09/19/2008, -15/+8May I remind you what would happen if the Fed HADN'T bailed these companies out. I'll take a bailout over a collapse but I still don't like either of them.
- Ebacherville, on 09/18/2008, -6/+59END THE FED!!!! This crap has to stop!
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -11/+5And then what? The fed has been abolished before and each time it resulted in a disaster that took decades to clean up. I'm not saying that abolishing the fed caused that. Rather I'm saying the failure on the part of presidents and congressmen to REPLACE the fed with something else has caused economic ruin for America more than once.
- synapz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+10Er... what kind of history book are you reading? The Fed has been around nonstop since its founding in 1913.
- Moonkeeper, on 09/19/2008, -0/+6He's referring to the fed that existed until 1832. We had central banks off and on for the first 43 years after our Constitution. Andrew Jackson put an end to it.
- synapz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+7Ah, touche'. Well, if that's the case, we need more Andrew Jacksons.
- Moonkeeper, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5I'll agree with that. Jackson was the man.
- avengingturnip, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3"You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out and by the Eternal God I will rout you out." - Andrew Jackson
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -11/+5And then what? The fed has been abolished before and each time it resulted in a disaster that took decades to clean up. I'm not saying that abolishing the fed caused that. Rather I'm saying the failure on the part of presidents and congressmen to REPLACE the fed with something else has caused economic ruin for America more than once.
- ryenski, on 09/18/2008, -4/+47House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank: "No one in a democracy, unelected, should have $800 billion to dispense with as he sees fit..."
- ThinkOutTheBox, on 09/19/2008, -16/+9Unless that person has 800 billion that he earned by hard work and being a business genius.
- jhnsnp, on 09/19/2008, -3/+16Since there are so many people walking around that have earned more than $800 billion in their life...
- gaqua, on 09/19/2008, -1/+14The richest man in the world isn't worth 1/10th that amount, what the hell are you talking about?
- ruddy, on 09/19/2008, -1/+6if only they had $800 billion. They have as much money as they want just FYI. They can print as they see fit, and not even have to tell us. Don't you love democracy!
- neurobox, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2As it's always been, the question is do they even have $800 billion, or just an impossible-to-cash-claim-on-gold-that-there-isn't-enough-of-thats-supposedly-worth-800-billion?
When this all shakes out, the really wealthy folks are going to be the ones with all the well-backed funds..
hey, why don't we start a bank, borrow a ton of money, lend out 10 times that much to various front companies, pay their planted execs all of it in dividends, and have them buy us gold! Then we'll bankrupt the companies and our bank. All been done before..
- ThinkOutTheBox, on 09/19/2008, -16/+9Unless that person has 800 billion that he earned by hard work and being a business genius.
- crazyhorse1972, on 09/18/2008, -5/+48Something has to be done, as they keep expanding our money supply. If you have money in the bank, in your pocket, under your mattress, it matters not because they stole about half of it in the last 2 years by doubling the amount of money, making what you have worth half what it was. So we start with a 33 percent tax on our income leaving us with 66% then we get the 50% money expansion tax, leaves us with 33%. Heck even if you live week to week, your paycheck has halved in real value to you in the last couple years. For those smart enough to have their money tied up in gold, they luckily avoided some of this tax burden. Yet when they cash that in they will have to pay income tax on it even though gold has not gone up in value, just the dollar has gone down relative to it. No matter what you do you are losing money by saving it. Yeh we should all be pissed off!
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -2/+1They're only doing that to steal other countries' money. They devalue the dollar and force countries to dump the dollar to hedge against value loss. They buy back all the available US dollars, and then burn the inflated pile. It makes the US rich and makes less savvy investors poor.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+2if it really works that way why is the us the only one doing it and/or why aren't sanctions being brought against the US by, I dunno... the world trade organization and/or united nations? I mean I can think of one reason in particular that the United Nations might not do squat... but the world trade organization should have erupted into something resembling a bar room brawl by now.
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2The fact is that the Federal Reserve has enormous power because it controls the printing of the world's reserve currency, the US Dollar, against which all other floating currencies of the world, either directly or indirectly, are measured. In 2006, the Fed stopped publishing the full data set on its money supply (the M3), arguing that M1 and M2 data are enough. It means, that economists cannot exactly be sure how much total US currency is in supply, which means, its only everybody's guess how inflated the US dollar has become, leaving the world's financial institutions speculating on what exactly the USD exchange rate is. The date on money supply being published only gives details on cash assets that can be quickly converted to cash (immediately in circulation). This allows the US government to hide US dollars in other assets or release it into circulation whenever the hell it wants to. There is no absolute value of the US dollar anymore. Only its speculated value, and that can affect/manipulate every other economy in the world because the world does its transactions in US Dollars.
Other countries do know about this, but there isn't anything they can do about it.
The WTO is run by the US and its economic allies. If you want in, you have to play by their rules. - wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+2reserve currency. Completely didn't think about that and I will make no exuse as to why.
Thank you for the other info as well. I'll be double checking it via other sources... but I'm sure you understand the reasons why.
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -2/+1They're only doing that to steal other countries' money. They devalue the dollar and force countries to dump the dollar to hedge against value loss. They buy back all the available US dollars, and then burn the inflated pile. It makes the US rich and makes less savvy investors poor.
- BeaReady, on 09/18/2008, -3/+35Here is contact info for Sen. Bunning. Please write to encourage him and assure that you'll urge own reps to support his proposal. He also has updated news on this site.
http://bunning.senate.gov/public/ - gatparker, on 09/18/2008, -4/+31A private bank controlling the worlds currency. "All hail the king!"
- robotsworld, on 09/18/2008, -10/+69McCain and Obama WOULD and WILL never address the Federal Reserve. Even now they had the opportunity to Point the finder at the Federal Reserver BUT NOOOOOOO! Like to little punks in the schoolyard they point fingers at each other. BLAH!!
BUT PEOPLE WAKE THE HECK UP!!! There are 3rd Party candidates who are READY to point the fingers at the Federal Reserve (McKinney, Nader, Baldwin, and Barr) Here's what they AGREE to regard Federal Reserve:
"The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.
You want "STRAIGHT-TALK" You want "CHANGE".
Vote 3rd Party. Cause you ain't gonna get it from McBama!!!!- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+6Good to see others spreading the word. Preach on brother!
(and for once I really have nothing to add...) - ruddy, on 09/19/2008, -0/+6why would I care about this "federal reserve" you speak of when there's pressing issues like lipstick on pitbulls and hope!.
- Pssdoff, on 09/19/2008, -0/+13They all have different positions on the Fed
McKinney wants to ‘Nationalize’ the Federal Reserve and put the process of currency back into the hands of the United States of America.
Barr wants to begin a debate over more far-reaching policy changes.
Nader wants to give control over the Federal Reserve to Congress
Ron Paul's and Chuck Baldwin's positions on the Fed are essential identical: Abolish it!!!
Chuck Baldwin would expunge the Federal Reserve and to restore the American economy to sound money.
"The Fed's economic policies, in addition to the irresponsible spending of politicians in Washington have lead directly to the collapse of the dollar. No system of "debt money" should ever again be imposed on the people of the United States. We will work to restore a debt free, interest free money system that works for the people of this country & not for the benefit of the international banking cartel." - Chuck Baldwin
Thanks to Ron Paul, all four candidates have agreed to investigate the Fed.
Baldwin '08!- Pssdoff, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2*essential(ly)
Damn, too late to edit. - wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -4/+3"McKinney wants to ‘Nationalize’ the Federal Reserve and put the process of currency back into the hands of the United States of America."
I honestly have no idea if that would help anything or not. Sounds like an interesting idea at least. Will need to do some research on that one.
"Ron Paul's and Chuck Baldwin's positions on the Fed are essential identical: Abolish it!!!"
And then? Or did it really take two people to come up with half of a plan?
This was Andrew Jackson's plan regarding the Second Bank of the United States (predecessor to the the Federal Reserve). Unfortunately that was his entire plan. Eventually free banking took over but nether he nor the congress of the time made any plans to help smooth out that transition. The result was rather unpleasant.
"Barr wants to begin a debate over more far-reaching policy changes.
Nader wants to give control over the Federal Reserve to Congress"
I never thought I'd say this but Nader's lost his damned mind. Something else I thought I'd never say... Barr's idea is the best one I've seen. Forcing some serious debate instead of letting every one toss around preconceptions and getting pissy (eventually becoming completely entrenched with their parties viewpoint) is the kind of wise plan I expect to hear from blind men smoking opium in a tent on top of a mountain in the middle a desert... not presidential nominees. And no... I'm not being sarcastic.
- Pssdoff, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2*essential(ly)
- Konrad9, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2I agree, but there is absolutely positively no chance of them getting elected in November.
It'd be nice, but it isn't going to happen. - lukedamonkey, on 09/19/2008, -3/+2third parties won't win. Just don't vote at all if you're going to vote third party...
same result.- jaymzdean, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2McCain and Obama are both from the same party.
The McBama Party.
A vote for the McBama Party is a wasted vote. - cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Which explains Governor Ventura, right?
It is people like you who are the problem. You refuse to own the responsibility by pretending it won't make a difference. - neurobox, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Popular misconception.. and that's the only problem.
Many people don't vote for either party 'cause they know it's pointless... they're starting to see the light this year. There's a strong force for independents that's been hampered only by the media, and even that is bursting at the seams.
- jaymzdean, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2McCain and Obama are both from the same party.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+6Good to see others spreading the word. Preach on brother!
- mcchilimeat, on 09/18/2008, -5/+15F the F'in FED!!!!
- inboxnews, on 09/18/2008, -2/+28fta: Republican Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky said he was introducing legislation to strip the Fed of the authority to use taxpayer dollars on bailouts. "Once again the Fed has put the taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars to bail out an institution that put greed ahead of responsibility and used their good name to take risky bets that did not pay off," he said. "The only difference between what the Fed did and what Hugo Chavez is doing in Venezuela is Chavez doesn't put taxpayer dollars at risk when he takes over companies - he just takes them."
- 0nslaught, on 09/18/2008, -1/+12Karl Denninger on what's coming next if this isn't stopped:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqtAzRNhTTY- xrmb, on 09/19/2008, -1/+2interesting video, but to spread it he should make it less boring and shorter... not everyone has as much time as I have
- Journeywithinn, on 09/18/2008, -2/+20This is all a ploy to get votes. They have ALL sat there, year after year, whilst Ron Paul tried over and over to put in economic bills, to tell them this was going to happen, and NONE of his stuff was listened to. Yet today, he could fix all this mess, and still people wonder what to do. PLEASE make your vote count and vote for ANY third party. To continue with these idiots is ridiculous. Obama wants to take from the rich and give to the poor so NO one ill want to be a success in this country..and give universal healthcare so it will not even pay people to be doctors anymore. PLEASE wake up to this constant raping. Vote third party!
- adam1mc, on 09/18/2008, -5/+11Fuk da FED
- Thinbev, on 09/18/2008, -3/+23Finally Americans are waking up to the fact that our country has been hijacked by a bunch of bankers with the ability to create money out of thin air. We must demand that congress abolish the Federal Reserve and that we allow competing currencies to be circulated in the marketplace. We need commodity backed currencies, so our government has restrictions on how much money they spend and borrow.
Our future is in the hands of private bankers... The Federal Reserve hasn't even ever been audited for God's sake.- Cherubim, on 09/19/2008, -0/+1They don't even pay taxes. Not surprising as all since tax revenue is INTEREST payments made directly to the Fed. This evil monstrosity needs to be eradicated very soon.
- Cherubim, on 09/19/2008, -0/+1They don't even pay taxes. Not surprising as all since tax revenue is INTEREST payments made directly to the Fed. This evil monstrosity needs to be eradicated very soon.
- like2, on 09/18/2008, -6/+20FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!! This is beautiful!! One day there will be peace and prosperity- get rid of the fed and corruption within the ranks!! yeah!! vote third party- make your vote count be american. the lesser of two evils is still evil. vote 3rd party!! im votin for chuck!!
- Scheitbag, on 09/18/2008, -0/+5needs more "!"
- ruddy, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5FINALLY"!""!""!""!""!""!""!""!""!""!""!"
- lukedamonkey, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2might as well not vote at all.
Same result, and if the greater of the two evils win...
you share the blame! Congratulations!
- Scheitbag, on 09/18/2008, -0/+5needs more "!"
- BeaReady, on 09/18/2008, -5/+29If the American people ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency... the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
- Thomas Jefferson
FORGIVE US OUR DEBT
VOTE THIRD PARTY- krebcycle, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2Hamilton and Adams both directly disagreed with him on this stance; they were Federalists, Jefferson was a Republican. Hamilton was a huge proponent of a central bank, which Jefferson disagreed with, which is where this quote comes from.
Regardless of what you agree with you should know that this was not unilaterally believed by the founding fathers, Adams was a great man and he disagreed.- Moonkeeper, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5Adams was great? He messed up Ben Franklin's diplomacy during the revolution. He signed the Sedition Acts of 1797 (illegal to speak against the gov.). On his way out, when Jefferson beat him, he passed a bunch of last minute legislation to take away the power of the incoming republican admin. to fix what he messed up, part of which was an attempt to decrease the number of supreme court justices after the next one retired so that Jefferson couldn't appoint a new one.
- Ultomato, on 09/19/2008, -6/+4voting third party will probably just be worse, just vote obama jesus christ
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5...? I suppose it's possible, if a third party or independent president some how got elected, that they might be worse than Obama... though that's hard to imagine... until you consider McCain... then it's just soul crushing. However, even it they were, the existence of a third dominant party in American politics would have certain inherent benefits... many of them shoring up of even solving outright the most significant flaws in our existing political system.
and honestly... if you think "just because" is a valid argument for voting Obama then I suggest you don't vote and let people who actually care about the consequences of their vote take care of things. - Ultomato, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2i meant to say that voting third party will just help mccain. theres no way ron paul is getting elected at this point so stop telling people to vote third party.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5...? I suppose it's possible, if a third party or independent president some how got elected, that they might be worse than Obama... though that's hard to imagine... until you consider McCain... then it's just soul crushing. However, even it they were, the existence of a third dominant party in American politics would have certain inherent benefits... many of them shoring up of even solving outright the most significant flaws in our existing political system.
- krebcycle, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2Hamilton and Adams both directly disagreed with him on this stance; they were Federalists, Jefferson was a Republican. Hamilton was a huge proponent of a central bank, which Jefferson disagreed with, which is where this quote comes from.
- tomjeff08, on 09/18/2008, -5/+23We should shut down the Fed, boot the criminals out of this country and wipe the slate clean. Go back to the Constitutional coinage of money and deal with the initial aftermath.
Nobody likes a root canal but it beats the hell out of a never ending toothache. Root these ***** out and end the ache they have caused since they usurped the Constitution.- doom777, on 09/19/2008, -2/+3there is no need to go to gold based currency, but I don't like a private bank in control of world's top currency.
- southeastbeast, on 09/18/2008, -7/+5Vote third party people! Break out of the Cripps and Bloods gang of the democraps and neo-cons.... Since Ron Paul has stepped down.... we all know who is left.... Nader08! *incoming bury*
- Pssdoff, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5When has Nader ever said he would abolish the Fed?
When has Bob Barr?
Never as far as I know. There are only two candidates who talk about abolishing the Fed and moving to a new stable and Constitutional honest money system, Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin.- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -6/+2Abolishing the fed is, by itself, just a political stunt. It's not in the best interests of the nation or the people. That's not to say keeping the fed around is. We need to look at alternatives to the Fed. Regulations are needed but they need to guide the economy... not control it. Just abolishing it and hoping the economy doesn't fall apart before it can find it's footing again isn't what I would call a plan.
- Pssdoff, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5When has Nader ever said he would abolish the Fed?
- itsmesunny, on 09/19/2008, -8/+19thanks to jim bunning. the fed HAS to go.
don't ever forget that DR. RON PAUL has been speaking of this for years and years. he has been fighting the fight.
he is a magnificent man and a statesman!
and absolutely - VOTE THIRD PARTY!
from a proud ron paul delegate! - kerston, on 09/19/2008, -4/+8Love what I'm seeing here! See you all at the 3rd party voting booth with my down with the fed Tshirt on.~peace
- Mitchellkohl, on 09/19/2008, -11/+10Hannah Montana is a bitch.
- snotrokit, on 09/19/2008, -6/+2***** RIAA...... I mean ***** the Fed
FTF FTW!!!! - mshtml, on 09/19/2008, -7/+6Moving to Venezuela looks more attractive every day.
- GumGuts, on 09/19/2008, -2/+8Oh man, to bad we don't have any other economic crisis in American History that we can turn to for advice in this troubling period. Times where large unregulated companies crashed all in one day because no one was watching out.
Ah nuts, it'd be really helpful about now.- sulthernao, on 09/19/2008, -5/+3Yeah these people who say down with the FED clearly have no idea what the hazards of wild banks can have on the economy. Especially when you get these behemoth corporations that fail.
- kidid, on 09/19/2008, -0/+8Are you saying this is a culmination of no regulation? Yes, you are correct, the congress has not exercised it's oversite on the Federal Reserve and has failed to regulate the most viscious monopoly ever in existance... As far as private business goes in our so called "free market", regulation works for the biggest corporations in power plays to grab more of the market.... Too big to fail? Exactly how do these corp's become 'too big to fail'? Regulating smaller competing companies out of business! It's not just government nor just corporations but the collusion of the two profiting while the american public feeds on the government's and corporations' "blame game". Kill our central bamk the Federal Reserve, just as Jefferson and Jackson did to our previous 2 central banks....3 strikes and you're out!!!! ;-)
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -0/+8if your referring to Black Tuesday... I'd like to point that in the end the governments response was to bail out (what was left of) the major corporations... albeit 8 years later and at the dawn of a World War. New Deal was unpopular then... and it is still debatable whether it solved anything. One thing isn't debatable however. New Deal started the tradition of corporate and personal welfare that has left this country with a continually declining economy and quality of living. And yes I know the economy has see-sawed back and forth many times... but the net trend is for it to become less stable over time resulting in our dependence on an ever increasing pile of debt and need for such measures as bailouts from the fed. The whole system is ***** from top to bottom at this point. There are so many problems at the point it's hard to tell which ones are causes and which ones are effects.
But you're right... we can learn from Black Tuesday. We can learn what not to do.
- smartass007, on 09/19/2008, -1/+14once people come to terms with the fact that we live in an oligarchy disguised as a 'democracy' then it all will begin to make sense.
- Ramenhood, on 09/19/2008, -6/+2BERNANKE WHAT A STUPID NAME
- PeanutCheeseBar, on 09/19/2008, -5/+11Ron Paul, "told you so", etc.
- EwMo, on 09/19/2008, -10/+6LOUD NOISES!!
- k3rfuffl3, on 09/19/2008, -10/+5There's s reason the Federal Reserve exists. If you do some research you'll realize that it solved a lot of problems. The problem is not the existence of a Federal Reserve, but making sure that it's run competently.
- chupavacas, on 09/19/2008, -2/+5All cartels exist for a reason, to benefit the members. Everything else is lip service to keep the collateral for the loan (taxpayers) from discovering the truth about the Fed's true interest.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5Just because the symptoms went away doesn't mean the problem was solved. It might... but correlation does not equal causation.
- cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Oh -please, help me out, list a problem that the federal reserve solved.
- hillbillyboy07, on 09/19/2008, -0/+4Did you know Bunning pitched a no hitter and a perfect game in MLB.
- kidid, on 09/19/2008, -3/+17Americans were warned by our past presidents, but unfortunately most American's are historically challenged. :-(
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance." --James Madison
"The bold effort the present (central) bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it." --Andrew Jackson
Paper is poverty,... it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself." -- Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1788.
"Scenes are now to take place as will open the eyes of credulity and of insanity itself, to the dangers of a paper medium abandoned to the discretion of avarice and of swindlers." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, 1814.
"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves.' " --Andrew Jackson
"You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out." --Andrew Jackson- lmf49, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2relevant.
- chupavacas, on 09/19/2008, -0/+7Good Luck Senator, you'll need it. My guess is if this gets media attention there's going to be some back room deals to get the Senator to hush up.
- elishock, on 09/19/2008, -1/+19Yeah, there's a reason the federal reserve exists. To put control of the United States of America into the hands of a privately held central banking cartel. President Woodrow Wilson realized how he let his country down when he allowed the Creature from Jekyll Island to be born. His words:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world -- no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -1/+4The Fed actually makes the US government quite powerful. Remember oil is traded in USD, and as of 2002 they don't publicize how much money is in circulation anymore. If the whole world has to guess at the value of the USD because the Fed can just print money or retract it, the US can basically manipulate the world economy. It's not just US citizens who are slaves.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -0/+6You realize how many nations are suffering because it's traded in USD right now? Any country using the Euro for starters. How long before The UAE (think Dubai), Iran, and other oil rich countries decide to rip the rug out from under their "foreign oppressors" by trading it in Euros?
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -1/+1The US does not care about the economic suffering of other nations as long as their suffering doesn't affect the long term stability of US economic interests. Because we're facing a serious loss of confidence in the US economy, now we're seeing a massive government bailout being assembled. The bonus for the Federal Government is that it has given itself a lot of power by nationalizing a large share of previously private owned businesses. That's the power of the Fed Reserve - to print money and keep the true value of US currency a secret. They're not interested in making sure the US remains a viable democracy or that American values are upheld and represented. Their primary motivation is profit and making sure they keep a monopoly on profitable schemes througout the world.
Call it NWO, or just call it plain old greed and powerlust - it's the same old story of human nature. It's happened before, it happens now, and it'll happen again.
- MadMushroom, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5Over 95 years the Fed has stolen 95% of the value of our money supply through inflation, and we are paying interest on it!
Since the 1960s, we have been incurring trade deficits of $100+ billion per year ($800 billion for 2007, IIRC). At first these were because of foreign oil, but lately we import *practically everything*. The Fed has been financing these deficits by inflating the money supply.
If the Fed had not been involved, tight money would have highlighted our oil addiction years ago, and the problem would have been solved by now. We as a nation would have been much stronger for it.
Instead, we have just borrowed, and borrowed, and borrowed. Our dollar hegemony (forcing everyone to pay for oil in dollars) has made our credit line practically limitless. The United States is the equivalent of the rich blowhard who moves onto your street and dazzles everyone with his apparently immense wealth, only to suddenly go bankrupt because all his money was borrowed. The appearance of prosperity is an illusion. Because we live on credit, our wages are other costs are no longer competitive in the world and we are no produce necessities of life for ourselves, except for food. This will cause great pain when our economy crashes, but we will recover eventually.
Speaking about our dollar hegemony, don't ***** yourself about why we go to war. Iraq and Iran have long expressed their intention to sell oil for currencies other than dollars, and in fact Iran started up an oil bourse this year to that end. This is what put these nations on our 'terrorist' list. Putin of Russia has made noise in the past about selling oil for euros, and now we are rattling our sabers at Russia in contrived fashion.
We *can* stabilize the dollar if we dismantle our trillion dollar per year military empire and return our federal government to its Constitutional roots.
--Turn off your treasonous TV set.
--Vote third party this year (it really doesn't matter which one) to put the two-party duopoly on notice and to give third parties ballot access for 2010/2012.
--Get involved in Ron's nonpartisan Campaign for Liberty and in electing honest people to state and local offices.
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -1/+4The Fed actually makes the US government quite powerful. Remember oil is traded in USD, and as of 2002 they don't publicize how much money is in circulation anymore. If the whole world has to guess at the value of the USD because the Fed can just print money or retract it, the US can basically manipulate the world economy. It's not just US citizens who are slaves.
- upstream1, on 09/19/2008, -2/+1just go here, it's what you all are saying, I'm to tired to do it again.
http://againstthepoliticalcurrents.blogspot.com/
there's pictures and stuff, make fun if you all want.- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3I stopped reading after the 3th sentence. 3 incorrect statements and 2 occasions of twisting peoples words in 3 sentences is just too much for my brain to handle.
- upstream1, on 09/20/2008, -1/+1ya, na its true. The whole economy shifted away from that which was founded in the 30's. It started with the then head of the FEDs Paul Volckers monetary policies which shifted away from a Keynesian form of economics with employment at it's heart which created what is called the Volcker Shock. This resulted in huge levels of unemployment and a recession but "freed" the market. Get past the third sentence, I can explain in greater depth if needed.
- evil-doer, on 09/19/2008, -1/+10what ive never understood is the fed creates money out of nowhere, then sells it to the US with interest... shouldnt they have trillions and trillions of dollars by now? where is this money?
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -1/+1Figuratively, when it cycles back through they burn it.
- thegrantman, on 09/19/2008, -2/+8 Why are we the people always at odds with our own government?
- BlacklabelSAR, on 09/19/2008, -1/+8Now we are asking the right questions. You are now a threat to national security. Welcome to the majority!
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -3/+4Welcome to the minority... not the majority. Get your terms straight.
If we were the majority there would be no question of whether Obama would win over McCain. *waits for the sheep to finish their bleated agreements* It would be a certainty nether would win. *waits for the sheep to finish their bleated disagreements*
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -3/+4Welcome to the minority... not the majority. Get your terms straight.
- OuijaCat, on 09/19/2008, -0/+10Because when the individual States first united, they created the Federal Government on the condition that it would never become a giant monster that could start telling the States how to conduct their affairs... We all know how that turned out.
- wolferz, on 09/19/2008, -1/+7Because if we weren't we would end up like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.
Our founding fathers understood that and that's why they tried their hardest to protect the ability of Americans to openly criticize their government... and why any one attempting to undermine that in any way is highly suspicious.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 09/19/2008, -1/+8Now we are asking the right questions. You are now a threat to national security. Welcome to the majority!
- BlacklabelSAR, on 09/19/2008, -0/+12If I had ***** a large group of people for a ton of money......I'd expect that people would shoot me dead.
Eh? - IMTruckingUSA, on 09/19/2008, -2/+10The reason the Federal Reserve Bank exist is because Woodrow Wilson (League of Nations creator) installed it. It is not Constitutional. We need to dump the Fed and mint our own money once again. We also need to stop the politicians from selling our country out from under us.
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3amen brother!
- xrmb, on 09/19/2008, -2/+5Like always my question is, in who's hands did all the money end up in? Not mine, probably not anyone else here... I would like to see an animation of all the money flow from when this crap started. Links anyone?
- BeaReady, on 09/19/2008, -1/+3Here's a good one to start with. Don't let the title make you think boring, it's not.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540 ...- xrmb, on 09/21/2008, -0/+210 years old... but a good starting point. thanks
- BeaReady, on 09/19/2008, -1/+3Here's a good one to start with. Don't let the title make you think boring, it's not.
- bxblox, on 09/19/2008, -1/+3Too big to fail: the recipe for riches.
- nullvalu, on 09/19/2008, -0/+13The bill number is S.3510, please tell your senator to co-sponsor and support this bill!
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110 ...- BeaReady, on 09/19/2008, -0/+4Thank you! If you haven't already, everyone write/call your reps demanding they support this bill!
- TheSprunk, on 09/19/2008, -3/+5What is with these retards? Bailing out debt-wrought companies with ... debt? Basing our economy on a lie, the so called "great experiment", which is essentially, one big-ass pool of debt.
Am I the only one thinking that we should actually start trying to up our balances with positive valued assets and currency? This seems like one big ***** of people getting greedy, being stupid, pointing fingers, and ignoring the obvious. The "Pro's" are sweating so hard their balls are shriveling like grapes, and in a time when they should be trying to think "ok, how do we fix this", they're instead saying, "Ok, how do i shove the blame onto someone else".
OIL is not the answer.
LOANS are not the answer
CREDIT is not the answer
REPUBLICANS are not the answer
DEMOCRATS are not the answer
and BUSH? ***** him. With a bullet.
Let's break our dependencies on oil and invest in new energy sources. It wont be cheap, it wont be fast, and it wont be easy. But it's smart, and in the long run, much less painful than the alternative (essentially, dying of thirst, for oil). Let's break our dependencies on credit and debt and end this great experiment. I think we're starting to see, quite clearly, what the answer to a debt based currency is. Let's break our dependence on the Mainstream Media, on being forcefed information, on taking things for face value... Let's start thinking for ourselves, and electing officials based on their beliefs, and their records, and their policies, not on their affiliation, or the latest buzz.
God damnit America, I know you've grown deaf to the words of logic but maybe if I beat you in the face with it someone will understand.- RogueGenius, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3Forget it Sprunk. Republicans are so brainwashed they can't think and democrats are so weak they can't act. Either way, they don't have the balls to stare into the full light of truth. The truth will always get you dugg down.
Also, it's a little too late for that now. I don't even want to make a better America at this point. I just want it not to collapse. Right at the time we needed a great president, we elected the worst. Now you just got to pick the team least likely to stop us from sliding into the sea. Maybe in twenty years, if we never elect another Republican and keep our eyes on every move the democrats make, we might be back at the point where we can start to elevate ourselves above mediocrity again. But that won't be for a long time. Too much damage has been done. I hate writing this, but it's the truth.
- RogueGenius, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3Forget it Sprunk. Republicans are so brainwashed they can't think and democrats are so weak they can't act. Either way, they don't have the balls to stare into the full light of truth. The truth will always get you dugg down.
- Neuro421, on 09/19/2008, -6/+1If Americans somehow did get rid of the Fed, there would be martial law followed by civil war. There is no mechanism in the political process for such a thing to ever happen within the scheme of US democracy. So which of you brave patriotic down-home americans is gonna be the sacrificial goat and raise the flag of revolution? .... /sounds of crickets chirping
I THOUGHT SO BECAUSE YOU'RE ALL TOO BUSY CHASING AFTER THE SCRAPS THE GOVERNMENT FEEDS YOU TO KEEP YOUR BELLIES FULL AND YOUR MOUTHS SILENT.
The day you guys finally accept that your beloved "American Dream" is only a vision of a fools paradise is the day that revolution will bring the Fed down.- BeaReady, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3Not the least bit dramatic are we? Of course nobody is talking about immediate end to FED. This is a step in the right direction if Congress would do their job and chain this out of control, unconstitutional monster. Do a bit of research before making assumptions. You know the old saying about 'assume.'
- nymphetamine, on 09/19/2008, -9/+3Uh oh, here come the Paultards...
Nostradamus '08! He saw this coming ages ago!- cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4I have noticed that people who use the term paultards have barely graduated high school, never run a business, and have never taken an economics class in their lives. They hate Ron Paul because he makes them uncomfortable by telling the truth.
You don't have to be a complete fool to hate Ron Paul and the patriotic Americans who support him but it helps.
- cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4I have noticed that people who use the term paultards have barely graduated high school, never run a business, and have never taken an economics class in their lives. They hate Ron Paul because he makes them uncomfortable by telling the truth.
- gnocchi1442, on 09/19/2008, -8/+2Jim Bunning shouldn't be allowed to write a shopping list. Even for a Repug, he's seriously stupid.
- ruarctb, on 09/19/2008, -5/+2Not bailing out AIG would screw a lot of people over. People would lose insurance policies and money they've invested into them. For a lot of poor people, losing their life insurance would be a bigger blow than it sounds.
The fed had to do something. Congress isn't so far. You can only sit on your hands so long before a chain reaction starts and get out of control.- BeaReady, on 09/19/2008, -0/+4Maybe this will help in understanding the impact of this.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=554 - hurdboy, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3"For a lot of poor people, losing their life insurance would be a bigger blow than it sounds."
Then they become claimants during the Ch. 7 process. There's laws that cover that sort of stuff, too. No financial vehicle is 100% secure. Alternatively, let the federal government deal with the issue *after* it's all said and done if these "poor people" are still out money. Likely, it will be cheaper than bailing out these Wall Street dimwits. - cashman57, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Exactly how many poor people invest in AIG?
3?
- BeaReady, on 09/19/2008, -0/+4Maybe this will help in understanding the impact of this.
- wshwe, on 09/19/2008, -2/+6Bush/Cheney have been hypocrites lecturing other nations about free markets.
- steakneggs, on 09/19/2008, -4/+8Technically, no tax payer money was used.
The money was actually printed out of thin air. Congress appropriates government spending, and thus deals with tax revenues.
The Fed conducts monetary policy. All this bailout will do is increase the money supply and thus push inflation upward. So no, you don't have a right as a taxpayer to say "NO" to this - because this isn't your money at stake (the future value of your money, sure, but not your direct tax dollars) -
Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is