Lipstick on the pig [[economy)

[Sstashmoo]

Geithner embellishes, shucks, jibes, squirms and accidentally tells the truth a few times on Meet the press regarding the economy.

Quotes from the article: "Asked repeatedly on NBC's "Meet the Press" whether this means taxes will rise, Geithner avoided giving specifics. He did say President Barack Obama is committed to dealing with deficit in a way that will not add to the tax burden of people making less than $250,000 a year."

Raise taxes? Now?

Quote: ""Right now we're focused on getting growth back on track," he said. "And we're not at the point yet where we have to decide exactly what it's going to take.""

Some truth, They are not at the point yet? What is the point where they determine action would be pertinent? They have no idea how to get out of this.

Quote: "A bright spot in the recovery identified by Geithner is the banking system, which he said is "dramatically more stable" because of the government bailout."

What a stupid thing to say. We handed them a huge wad of taxpayer cash and they are ok now. It proves nothing, it is no indicator of recovery.

Quote: "
"Unemployment is worse than almost everybody expected. But growth is back a little more quickly, a little stronger than people thought," he said.
Unemployment hit a 26-year high of 9.8 percent in September, and the October report due in the coming week could show it topping 10 percent."


Growth is back a little more quickly, unemployment is increasing? How can the economy be growing when more businesses are closing and more people are out of work? Lies.


Quote: " "You're not going to see real recovery until it's led by the private sector, by businesses," he said."


Businesses that are going under due to the asinine trade policies which this jerk never mentioned once in that article.

It seems their whole thrust and direction, and answer is to get everyone in debt again. Why is solvency such a bad thing? Or do they just not understand the concept? Or is it just not appealing to the bankers and their lobbyists any other way, you know, the folks running the show apparently? As any good investigator will tell you: "Follow the money"

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...L6q_wD9BMOE480

[Lorax]

Not only is this lipstick on the pig, but the pig is rabid and on it's way to slaughter.

There is no way private enterprise is going to "dig" us out of this economic mess. Wall Street is back to business as usual, those left standing are bigger and more uncontrollable than ever. Now we have monopolies that will thrive, largely investing offshore, and dozens of zombie banks sloughing along on TARP funding, never learning their lessons.

Small business, and by that I mean mom & pop businesses, [[not SBA definitions of small business, which is really big business), don't stand a chance at getting lending restarted, and forget the individual who wants to either start a business or buy a home.

Until these "too big to fail" businesses are broken up, banks nationalized, and forced lending implemented, we will stay paralyzed as a society.

The only other option, as I have said many times, is to bring down the cost of goods and services to 1950's levels, which would shake out the big players, and force the breakup of these behemoths.

[EastSider]

Not only is this lipstick on the pig, but the pig is rabid and on it's way to slaughter.

There is no way private enterprise is going to "dig" us out of this economic mess. Wall Street is back to business as usual, those left standing are bigger and more uncontrollable than ever. Now we have monopolies that will thrive, largely investing offshore, and dozens of zombie banks sloughing along on TARP funding, never learning their lessons.

Small business, and by that I mean mom & pop businesses, [[not SBA definitions of small business, which is really big business), don't stand a chance at getting lending restarted, and forget the individual who wants to either start a business or buy a home.

Until these "too big to fail" businesses are broken up, banks nationalized, and forced lending implemented, we will stay paralyzed as a society.

The only other option, as I have said many times, is to bring down the cost of goods and services to 1950's levels, which would shake out the big players, and force the breakup of these behemoths.

And how do you propose to bring back the 50's?

The banks haven't "learned their lessons" because they weren't allowed to. Their "toxic assets" need to be given back to them so they can declare bankruptcy, and a true market value can be assigned to their assets. Only once we allow the market to set the prices can we build again.

We don't need "nationalization" any more than we already have, because it is the setting of interest rates outside of the free market process that creates the boom-bust cycle.

The damage we're suffering from didn't start when the housing prices fell; it was done in the years before the bust, when Washington, through the Federal Reserve, created the artificial boom.

[Gannon]

...at the SAME time they set the trap by altering the age-old bankruptcy laws.


Anyone in debt is a slave to the system. Simple as that. They don't WANT solvency, they cannot control anyone free from their net.

I had to describe this all to the fellow at MicroCenter when I paid cash yesterday...he wanted to get my info for their database...and I told him I was specifically paying cash so my purchases DIDN'T get tracked electronically!


Stay FREE...stay out of their system, as much as possible.

[ccbatson]

I hate to scare you Gannon, but you are aware of the electronic medical record big brother proposal Obama is in favor of, aren't you?

[Lorax]

And how do you propose to bring back the 50's?

The banks haven't "learned their lessons" because they weren't allowed to. Their "toxic assets" need to be given back to them so they can declare bankruptcy, and a true market value can be assigned to their assets. Only once we allow the market to set the prices can we build again.

We don't need "nationalization" any more than we already have, because it is the setting of interest rates outside of the free market process that creates the boom-bust cycle.

The damage we're suffering from didn't start when the housing prices fell; it was done in the years before the bust, when Washington, through the Federal Reserve, created the artificial boom.

No one is proposing "bringing back the 50's" as you suggest- I mentioned pricing needed to return to 50's levels to make sense of today's incomes as they relate to the cost of living. I realize this isn't going to happen, but short of re-regulating Wall Street, restoring Glass-Steagall, and enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, there will be no reforms, and it will be business as usual. Point is, the choices are few.

Interesting how you didn't realize I was being satirical in mentioning the "50's".

Harping on the Federal Reserve, as is done frequently by Republicans isn't finally the issue.

We existed with a Reserve that worked when other regulations were in place, and Wall Street wasn't allowed to venture into Casino Capitalism.

The Federal Reserve can only be reactive when checks and balances are in place. Since regulations were removed over the last thirty years of Rethuglican economics, the Reserve has played a greater role, and can be proactive [[not in a good way) in shaping economic policy.

Return to sane regulation, anti-monopolization policies and the system will return to working well. Blowing up the entire thing isn't the answer.

Nationalizing the strongest of the banks, breaking up the rest to sink or swim on their own, will allow the government to conduct better oversight, and force lending to get the machine going again.

[Lorax]

Just over the wires-

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33576310...ss-us_business

CIT Financial group just declared bankruptcy, as I predicted some months ago on this forum.

This is the beginning of the "commercial shoe" dropping, which should be interesting to watch, which, as the article says, may disrupt retailers ability to order new merchandise, potentially effecting 300,000 retailers.

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "I mentioned pricing needed to return to 50's levels to make sense of today's incomes as they relate to the cost of living."

Well, people didn't live like we've been living for the last 30 or so years. A telephone was considered a luxury, same with cars etc. Us returning to a 50's style economy is exactly what the powers that be are hoping for.

Quote: "CIT Financial group just declared bankruptcy,"

That's because the economy is getting stronger, just ask Geithner.

[oladub]

Harping on the Federal Reserve, as is done frequently by Republicans isn't finally the issue.

We existed with a Reserve that worked when other regulations were in place, and Wall Street wasn't allowed to venture into Casino Capitalism.

The Federal Reserve can only be reactive when checks and balances are in place. Since regulations were removed over the last thirty years of Rethuglican economics, the Reserve has played a greater role, and can be proactive [[not in a good way) in shaping economic policy.

Lorax, The Federal Reserve's money policies contributed to the mini-depression of 1921, the Hoover/Roosevelt depression of 29-39, the Nasdaq bubble, the housing bubble, with the promise of inflation should our economy manage to recover. HR1207, an attempt to just audit the Fed, is in trouble because Congressman Mel Watt, the chair of a sub-committee has stripped the bill even though it has 308 co-sponsors. Mel Watt happens to represent Charlotte, NC the home of the Bank of America. His four largest contributors include the Bank of America, Wachovia, and the Bankers Association. Rep. Watt is a Democrat. However, such Democrats as Alan Grayson and Dennis Kucinich are among the largest proponents of this bill. Bernie Sanders is the main sponsor of this bill in the Senate. I was surprised that you are as supportive as you are for the Federal Reserve considering some of your favorite Democrats are trying to bring it to bay.

[Gannon]

No worries, Cc, I'll be one of the estimated six percent who will not be included in this, or any, plan.

Cheers!

[EastSider]

No one is proposing "bringing back the 50's" as you suggest- I mentioned pricing needed to return to 50's levels to make sense of today's incomes as they relate to the cost of living. I realize this isn't going to happen, but short of re-regulating Wall Street, restoring Glass-Steagall, and enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, there will be no reforms, and it will be business as usual. Point is, the choices are few.

Interesting how you didn't realize I was being satirical in mentioning the "50's".

Harping on the Federal Reserve, as is done frequently by Republicans isn't finally the issue.

We existed with a Reserve that worked when other regulations were in place, and Wall Street wasn't allowed to venture into Casino Capitalism.

The Federal Reserve can only be reactive when checks and balances are in place. Since regulations were removed over the last thirty years of Rethuglican economics, the Reserve has played a greater role, and can be proactive [[not in a good way) in shaping economic policy.

Return to sane regulation, anti-monopolization policies and the system will return to working well. Blowing up the entire thing isn't the answer.

Nationalizing the strongest of the banks, breaking up the rest to sink or swim on their own, will allow the government to conduct better oversight, and force lending to get the machine going again.

Dumb ass, I realize you didn't mean we would timewarp back into the 50's; it was easier to type that than type "bring back the price levels of the 50's."

As for your defense of the FR, it makes no sense. None of our current problems would be possible without their manipulations of the interest rates, monetary base and money supply, regardless of what 'regulations' you allege were lifted.

You don't have to be Kreskin to have predicted the bankruptcy of any specific lender; just read Celente's Trends Research Journal or any Austrian economic theory publications. Gerald Celente was writing about the Greater Recession back in 2004, and uncannily said it would unfold in 2007.

[Lorax]

Dumb ass, I realize you didn't mean we would timewarp back into the 50's; it was easier to type that than type "bring back the price levels of the 50's."

As for your defense of the FR, it makes no sense. None of our current problems would be possible without their manipulations of the interest rates, monetary base and money supply, regardless of what 'regulations' you allege were lifted.

You don't have to be Kreskin to have predicted the bankruptcy of any specific lender; just read Celente's Trends Research Journal or any Austrian economic theory publications. Gerald Celente was writing about the Greater Recession back in 2004, and uncannily said it would unfold in 2007.

You need to watch your lip, Sparky. Name calling is forbidden here.

Yeah, and I predicted it as well, since I follow the bouncing ball too.

[Lorax]

Lorax, The Federal Reserve's money policies contributed to the mini-depression of 1921, the Hoover/Roosevelt depression of 29-39, the Nasdaq bubble, the housing bubble, with the promise of inflation should our economy manage to recover. HR1207, an attempt to just audit the Fed, is in trouble because Congressman Mel Watt, the chair of a sub-committee has stripped the bill even though it has 308 co-sponsors. Mel Watt happens to represent Charlotte, NC the home of the Bank of America. His four largest contributors include the Bank of America, Wachovia, and the Bankers Association. Rep. Watt is a Democrat. However, such Democrats as Alan Grayson and Dennis Kucinich are among the largest proponents of this bill. Bernie Sanders is the main sponsor of this bill in the Senate. I was surprised that you are as supportive as you are for the Federal Reserve considering some of your favorite Democrats are trying to bring it to bay.

I believe Sanders supports this due to the fact we can, and have, worked in tandem with the Fed when regulations were the order of the day. Restoring them in effect can restore the working relationship. Baby steps.

[ccbatson]

The Fed was ill conceived and still is. Now it is going from ill conceived too tyrannical.

[mjs]

Wow! I didn't think I could agree with both Lorax and batson on the same topic.

short of . . . restoring Glass-Steagall, and enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, there will be no reforms, and it will be business as usual. Point is, the choices are few.

. . .

Return to sane regulation, anti-monopolization policies and the system will return to working well. Blowing up the entire thing isn't the answer.

The Fed was ill conceived and still is. Now it is going from ill conceived to tyrannical.

[ccbatson]

How can anyone be in favor of antitrust regulations that guarantee a governmental coercive monopoly?

[Detroitej72]

The Fed was ill conceived and still is. Now it is going from ill conceived too tyrannical.

So why do conservatives support it en masses, because Rush tells them to?

[rb336]

How can anyone be in favor of antitrust regulations that guarantee a governmental coercive monopoly?

so TR's trust busting led to a government monopoly? you are just, as usual, spewing bullshit without a single bit of evidence to back you up

[Lorax]

I know, it's really breathtaking Batt's complete lack of historical foundation for really every debate he's engaged in.

Personally, I think all utilities should be nationalized as well, since these costs are out of control, and here in Florida we are slaves to Florida Power and Light, which is the privately held monopoly that provides Florida with it's electricity [[or lack thereof) as in yesterday when one of our three phases blew out for about 50 blocks, and took 4 hours to restore. Typical.

[oladub]

I know, it's really breathtaking Batt's complete lack of historical foundation for really every debate he's engaged in.

Personally, I think all utilities should be nationalized as well, since these costs are out of control, and here in Florida we are slaves to Florida Power and Light, which is the privately held monopoly that provides Florida with it's electricity [[or lack thereof) as in yesterday when one of our three phases blew out for about 50 blocks, and took 4 hours to restore. Typical.

Florida has five major investor owned utilities, all sorts of municipal utilities and customer owned coops in rural areas. The are regulated by Florida's public service commission; a government agency. De-regualation didn't work out so well in California. What you have is regulation. You are proposing, instead, to have a government monopoly run by the same people who now regulate your system. FPL, by the way, is one of the largest owners of wind generation facilities across the country.
Primer on Florida electical production -see pages 2-5.

Back on topic-
The US jobless rate has risen to over 10%. One of the administration people had threatened Congress that if they didn't pass Obama's Porkulus bill by that given Friday, unemployment would increase above 8.5%. So they passed Porkulus and unemployment is now over 10%. It has failed to do as promised while running the country down the road of greater debt and an eventual collapsing dollar.
US jobless rate rises to over 10%

[rb336]

The US jobless rate has risen to over 10%. One of the administration people had threatened Congress that if they didn't pass Obama's Porkulus bill by that given Friday, unemployment would increase above 8.5%. So they passed Porkulus and unemployment is now over 10%. It has failed to do as promised while running the country down the road of greater debt and an eventual collapsing dollar.
US jobless rate rises to over 10%

and, lest yee forget, last year at this time, virtually every economist was predicting 12-13% by now if nothing was done

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "every economist was predicting 12-13% by now"

Factor in all those they don't count and it is probably higher.

[oladub]

and, lest yee forget, last year at this time, virtually every economist was predicting 12-13% by now if nothing was done

Those were the Keynesian economists who set us up for this fall in the first place, never saw it coming, claimed that Porkulus would prevent unemployment from exceeding 8.5%, and now want to expand upon the policies that failed. The Austrian economists, on the other hand, accurately predicted this coming many years ago. Austrians would have us allow the economy to run its course as it did in 1921 when Harding did nothing. The unemployment rate went from [[two sets of figures) 11.7 or 8.7% in 1921, to 6.7 or 6.9 % in 1922, to 2.4 or 4.8% in 1923. Hoover and Roosevelt, instead tried to 'fix' the economy,failed to do so and perpetuated it. Bush and Obama are doing their best to repeat the Great Depression.

President Clinton changed the way unemployment is determined. Using pre-Clinton measurements, national unemployment is 15-18% so it has not been going well for Obama. Wait until his proposed cap and trade taxes kick in and medical insurance costs rise. Then there is the detail about paying for the Wall Street bailout and Porkulus. None of these things work. They are lipstick on a pig. Cash for Clunkers increased car sales for one month. Paying $8,000 to home buyers will likewise buoy housing sales ...until the program is over. Then we will be where we started except deeper in debt. We owe our souls to the corporate store.

[rb336]

Those were the Keynesian economists who set us up for this fall in the first place, never saw it coming

Now THAT is revisionist history

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "Personally, I think all utilities should be nationalized as well,"

Karl Marx would have loved you.