Remember the case of Kelo vs. New London? Briefly, it was a case in which homeowners including Susette Kelo sued their municipality to stop it from taking their homes using the power of eminent domain. The city wanted to raze the homes and redevelop the area, making it shiny and new to complement the anticipated Pfizer pharmaceutical research facility. After all, one musn’t allow the shabby dwellings of the peasantry to mar the image of success and corporate uniformity that one is trying to project:
So, the politicians picked a 24-acre lot and sold it Pfizer for $10, adding on special tax breaks. Also, state and local governments promised $26 million to clean up contamination on the lot and a nearby junkyard.
But Pfizer executive David Burnett thought New London needed to do some more cleaning. “Pfizer wants a nice place to operate,” the Hartford Courant quoted Burnett in 2001. “We don’t want to be surrounded by tenements.” The old Victorian houses in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood next door did not match Pfizer’s vision - a high-rise hotel or luxury condominiums would be more fitting.
1. The financial sector harms the real economy. Even when not in crisis, the financial sector harms the real economy. First, it is vastly too large.
2. The financial sector produces recurrent, intensifying economic crises here and abroad.
3. The financial sector’s predation is so extraordinary that it now drives the upper one percent of our nation’s income distribution and has driven much of the increase in our grotesque income inequality.
4. The financial sector’s predation and its leading role in committing and aiding and abetting accounting control fraud combine to: A) Corrupt financial elites and professionals, and B) Spur a rise in Social Darwinism in an attempt to justify the elites’ power and wealth.
5. The CEOs of the largest financial firms are so powerful that they pose a critical risk to the financial sector, the real economy, and our democracy.
The Solution: Fix the real economy, if you can find it. “The real economy came off the rails at least three decades ago for the great majority of Americans.”
I was highly impressed with William Black after seeing him interviewed by Bill Moyers. And now, after reading this detailed by accessible analysis, I’m even more impressed. We can’t begin to fix the economy unless we begin to implement basic principles we can actually understand. Fixing the real economy and making sure that finance is merely the servant of the real economy are clearly steps one and two, for each of the reasons listed by Black.
Listen to the scolding being delivered by Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri with regard to what appears to be a fraud committed by a major Department of Defense contractor and subsequent incompetence by the GAO. How many other millions and billions of tax dollars are being wasted by the pentagon and its contractors? Where are the tea-parties protesting pentagon fraud?
Over the past few weeks, videotapes have been trickling out that purport to show ACORN employees offered tax advice to those seeking to engage in child prostitution or other salacious activities. Having viewed the tapes, it’s obvious that they have been edited extensively, and that alone should make one wonder what the original tapes may show. Further, Media Matters has a lengthy critique of the credibility of the conservative activists and the manufactured news story that they have created, including failing to report that in at least one instance police were called and the filmmakers were removed from the premises after inquiring about underage prostitution. But really, whether ACORN employees did or did not do everything they are accused of is a side issue.
The Huffington Post yesterday pointed out that the legislative zeal to cut off funding for ACORN may have created an even bigger problem: it may eliminate the entire military-industrial complex. You see, the legislation prohibits federal funding or promotion of organizations that, among other things, “has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency”. The Project on Government Oversight (POGO) maintains a database of companies holding federal contracts that also have “histories of misconduct such as fraud” that would ostensibly bar them from receiving any further governmental funding under the “Defund ACORN Act”. Top violators include Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grummond, Raytheon, KBR (former Halliburton subsidiary)…. and a staggering number of other large corporations doing business with the federal government. House Republican leader John Boehner released a statement congratulating house Republicans for all they “have done to hold ACORN accountable for its abuse of taxpayer dollars and the public trust.” One wonders whether he will hold these other corporations to the same standard that they require of ACORN? After all, the scale of the violations by the weapons industry dwarfs anything ACORN is accused of. For fiscal year 2007, Lockheed Martin had federal contracts valued at $34.2 billion (with a b) dollars, and the cost of their misconduct since 1995 is valued at $577.2 million. ACORN has only received $53 million in federal funds since 1994, and none of the allegations show any actual harm was done to the government. In other words, Lockeed Martin has committed fraud to the tune of over 10 times the total amount of federal funding ACORN has received.
Elizabeth Warren, the TARP Oversight Chair was on the Rachel Maddow’s show discussing the aggressive anti-consumer practices of credit card companies, and warning that the credit card industry is about to try to kill federal efforts to regulate the industry. She reminds us that in 1980 a credit card agreement was only about a page long. Now credit card agreements are 30 pages long, full of “tricks and traps.”
MADDOW: Are you worried that the [credit card] industry’s going to be about to kill [credit card reform legislation] in the crib? Reporting is that it’s their top priority to get rid of it.
WARREN: My gosh! I have to tell you, it’s like they’re stampeding in the halls already in Washington. the Gucci loafers. These guys have built up a huge war chest, they’ve been interviewing public relations firms to see who can come up with the next Harry And Louise ad to explain to the American people why they’re better off with credit cards that nobody can read, hundreds of pages of mortgage documents that nobody can read…the idea is you’re better off with how things are…forget all that stuff the happened over the last few years. And we promise to keep things up just like we did before. I just can’t believe they’re trying to sell that to the American people.
You can read much more on this topic at Jason Linkins’ post at Huffpo’s new Lobby Blog.
The Pope arrived as a pilgrim, news reports said. The Polish people saw more, perhaps a glimpse of freedom in the offing where their historic contributions and ties to the world were once again recognized as Polish, not as a Warsaw Pact satellite of the communist USSR.
Something similar is going on now in the Islamic Republic of Iran. After an historic election where the chosen candidate of the ruling elite was challenged, the results were announced mere hours after the paper ballots were cast, and current Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared the winner.
Reports of unrest due to concerns of electoral fraud continue, although foreign media have been barred from Iran
Many of the supporters of the rival candidate for President have taken to the roofs and shouting, “Allahu Akbar!” which I’ve seen translated as “God is the Greatest!” and “God is Great!”
Without a doubt, there is continued opposition to the hard line polices of President Ahmadinejad which many in Iran believe do not reflect the country’s history and traditions.
It has become a staple of the ruling council to denounce protesters as incited by the West, mostly the UK, where two diplomats were thrown out of Iran. The UK responded by giving the heave to two Iranian embassy personnel. But, the Iranian government raised the ante on the UK, yesterday and detained many members of the diplomatic staff assigned to Iran in violation of international law.
It remains an issue is whether there what actions may be taken in solidarity with the aspirations of Iranians by supporters of freedom around the world.
If many take up the rhetoric of the far right in the US calling for swift, strong action against Iran there will be a backlash against the protesters in Iran. Such is already in the offing as the media have been closed down, and the government tries to spin the whole thing as a plot by the West and points to such rhetoric in support of its claims. Those which make such harsh statements and urge imprudent action give aid and comfort to the enemies of freedom in Iran.
So, what then for those worldwide which support the Iranian people’s return to the world community and to again recognize Iran’s past contributions and continuing ability to contribute to the world at large? I offer several ideas.
We could tie a green ribbon ‘round the old oak trees. Green is the color of the party of the opposition in Iran.
We could join in solidarity with the aspirations of the protestors and go onto our rooftops or just go outside and shout or say; “God is Great!” at midnight Tehran time (about 2:30 p.m. CST [+4 GMT]).
And ask that peace be with our Iranian brothers and sisters.
Jon Stewart is at his journalistic best here. This was filmed in March 2009, though I hadn’t seen it until today. Jim Cramer desperately tries to spin himself out of Stewart’s devastating indictment. Truly worth watching:
TMP has presented a terrible, yet not surprising, description of the enforcement arm of the SEC. Based on this detailed description of this dyfunctional enforcement arm, no wonder securities fraud has been running rampant.
The inspector general tasked with overseeing and auditing the Federal Reserve knows pretty much nothing about what the Fed is doing. . . . She did not know where the Fed has invested its $2 trillion on the liability side of the balance sheet. “I do not know. We have not looked at that specific area at this particular point on,” she said.
Could you ever imagine George W. Bush scolding credit card companies for “ripping off” and “abusing” American consumers? Barack Obama is proposing to do away with the fine print and to do away with profits that depend on misleading hard-working families by hiding fees and penalties. He wants to sign a bill reforming the industry by Memorial Day.
In an article titled “The Born Prophecy,” published in the May, 2009 American Bar Association Journal, Richard Schmitt writes about a 1996 conversation between Brooksley E. Born (shortly after she was named to head the Commodity Futures Trading Commission) and Alan Greenspan, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
The influential Greenspan was an ardent proponent of unfettered markets. Born was a powerful Washington, DC lawyer with a track record for activist causes. Over lunch in his private dining room at the stately headquarters of the Fed in Washington, Greenspan probed their differences.
Well, Brooksley, I guess you and I will never agree about fraud,” Born, in a recent interview, remembers Greenspan saying.
“What is there not to agree on?” Born says she replied.
“Well, you probably will always believe that there should be laws against fraud, and I don’t think there is any need for a law against fraud,” she recalls him saying. Greenspan, Born says, believed the market would take care of itself.
Further down in this same article Schmidt notes that, according to Greenspan, Born has mischaracterized the conversation and that the alleged conversation is “wholly at variance with my decades-long-held view.”
Actions speak louder than words, of course, proving that Greenspan is largely responsible for ruining the economy of the United States, and that he is lying to attempt to deny a conversation that is wholly consistent with his lack of interest in regulating financial institutions during his tenure at the Fed.
Eliot Spitzer, recently appearing with Arianna Huffington on CNBC, makes one strong point after another. Stress test the banks now, he asks? Shouldn’t they have been monitoring the banks all along? It’s as if a doctor who, after ten years under your care, and after you’ve suffered a heart attack, finally decides to take a blood test. What the hell has he been doing for ten years, given that he wasn’t doing anything meaningful to monitor your health.
According to Spitzer (see the ten-minute video here), Greenspan’s approach was absolutely destructive to the life savings of middle class tax payers, who are now in the process of subsidizing the big banks “who are burning our money.” He points out that not one CEO of a bank has been removed. To the extent that some of the banks look OK at the moment, it’s only because the federal government recently handed them a trillion dollars; “the Fed is sliding the money to the banks” through a “flim-flam game.” That’s the money they are burning through. He sees more financial crises to come, because we haven’t made any significant changes to the system. “We have leveraged the future of our kids.” He seriously doubts that the bank “stress tests” are real. Rather, he suspects that they are based on fantasy numbers relating to jobs and debt. He further points out that the Fed is run by the CEO’s of the very banks that got us into trouble.
Spitzer refers listeners to an article he recently wrote for Slate. The questions focus on whether we should trust the Fed, especially the New York Fed:
Given the power of the N.Y. Fed, it is time to ask some very hard questions about its recent performance. The first question to ask is: Who is the New York Fed? Who exactly has been running the show? Yes, we all know that Tim Geithner was the president and CEO of the N.Y. Fed from 2003 until his ascension as treasury secretary. But who chose him for that position, and to whom did he report? The N.Y. Fed president reports to, and is chosen by, the Fed board of directors.
Huffington points out that the money we’re dealing with now is taxpayer money and that it makes the Enron problem look minuscule.
Economist Robert Shiller (see the separate video) also suggest that the stress tests are not really about objective data, but they are about “animal spirits.” They are attempts to make the American investors feel confident.
I’ve often had the thought that our massive meltdown could be figured out if we could only recruit some intelligent and well-motivated people to gather and analyze the evidence. But who would those people be? Who could serve as the template the type of character we seek out in such people?
Too bad we don’t have 1,000 people like William K. Black. Black is the former senior regulator who cracked down on financial institutions during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s, pointing fingers at five congressmen including John McCain. Black went about his work with such vigor that he even drew a death threat from Charles Keating.
Have you ever gotten excited listening to anyone talking about the economy? In this breath-taking interview with Bill Moyers, Black offers his own carefully studied analysis regarding the “bailout.” This is not the intentionally abstruse financial jargon that you usually hear when pundits discuss the meltdown. The theme of the Black’s interview is this: “The best way to rob a bank is to own one,” which is also the title to a book he wrote in 2005. Black teaches economics and law at the University of Missouri — Kansas City (UMKC). He was the Executive Director of the Institute for Fraud Prevention from 2005-2007.
This video is required viewing for anyone who is convinced that we are not getting the straight scoop from the corporate media or from our government.
We are in the middle of a huge economic crisis. Should we listen to the experts? Of course we should, because the economy and the financial sector are horrifically complicated.
What happens when the experts disagree, however? To which experts should we listen? I took a stab at that question recently, but I remain unconvinced that any of the economics experts can be trusted. Yes, there are people like George Soros who have made a phenomenal amount of money during the crisis, but this makes me wonder whether he (and all of the other recent success stories) are smart or whether they are lucky.
Today, Nicholas Kristof (in the NYT) reminds us that many experts (at least political experts) have a terrible track record. His opening sentence: “Ever wonder how financial experts could lead the world over the economic cliff?” He warns us of the “Dr. Fox effect,” named for a “pioneering series of psychology experiments in which an actor was paid to give a meaningless presentation to professional educators.” Despite the fact that the lectures consisted of gibberish, they were well received. He mentions a study showing that “clinical psychologists did no better than their secretaries in their diagnoses.” He also mentions a study by Philip Tetlock which determined that “The [82,000] predictions of [284] experts were, on average, only a tiny bit better than random guesses — the equivalent of a chimpanzee throwing darts at a board.” Those experts who were the most impressive to most people “provided strong, coherent points of view, who saw things in blacks and whites.”
I’m reminded of Alan Sokal’s intentionally nonsensical article that he submitted to the postmodern journal, Social Text. See here for more of the details. BTW, if you want to generate your own postmodern bullshit, use this postmodernist bullshit generator (every time you hit the link, more impressive-sounding bullshit will be assembled automatically into an article).
How far astray are we led by “experts”? Consider investment “experts.” There are none worse. Entire industries are built on the thoroughly disproved notion that a stock-picker can consistently beat the market. Dan Smolin has made a career of proving that stock-picker experts are thoroughly and demonstrably terrible at what they claim to be. But many of us still run to these financial “experts” to help us pick the “right” stocks.
Just think of the hundreds of political military experts who were similarly awful at their recommendations and predictions regarding the invasion of Iraq. They appeared hundreds of time on network TV during the few weeks prior to the invasion, all of them confident in their assessments and advice. Consider, also that fewer than 1% of them took anti-war stances. Consider, also, that many of these “experts” were secretly in positions to financially benefit from an invasion of Iraq.
Consider the thousands of religious experts, from coast to coast, who loudly and confidently tell their religious followers that there is a heaven and that they will go there, without the tiniest big of evidence in support. The followers of fundamentalist preachers continue to listen to these guys even when they attack evolutionary biologists, even though these religious leaders have no training in science and no basic understanding of the principles of evolutionary biology.
Everyone loves weather forecasters, right? These guys are wrong so incredibly often that no station dares to post their track records for those five-day forecasts they confidently present night after night.
The list goes on and on. We insist on listening to the experts, medical experts, beauty experts, psychologists, their track records be damned. That’s because they are the best that we’ve got, no matter how wrong they are how often.
The bottom line is that we crave experts because we crave certainty, even where there isn’t any. The confirmation bias causes us to rely heavily on experts hawking our own opinions, even when there is no evidence in support, as long as the expert dishes out those opinions with a loud confident voice. And a fancy business suit doesn’t hurt either.
This whole crisis will just be repeated again because the way W and Obama have stacked the deck.We, the taxpayers are the payors of last resort, and there's no risk, civilly or criminally for the thieves, jackals and vultures who will pick over the last of the bones of the Middle Class at the end of the next crisis when the whole world is thrown ba... »
Erich-It seems that the Chinese are acting as though peak oil were here or something. From the article:This green spending is concurrent with their ongoing efforts to lock up remaining supplies of oil, as I briefly mentioned here. See also this article on Chinese oil buying. »
Jay, I agree. A lot of the house bill, particularly where Medicaid reform is concerned, references specific paragraphs in the Medicaid laws. Understanding the full effect of the changes wil require reading those as well. I've often thought it would be fun to get an amendment to repeal or suspend an obscure law of physics, such as the chandrasekha... »
Ya know, I thought NO ONE actually read those bills. I've always wanted to slip in weird, off the wall statements and regs that make no sense into the middle of such a document to see if anyone is actually reading them. »
Palin quit some appointment to an oil board because of GOP "corruption."Palin says the McCain people didn't let her have her say. The media just did "gotcha" moments on Palin.Palin quits being governor two years early because of conservative allegations of her being "corrupt." Just after Palin pays back Alaska for bilking the state for travel for h... »
Niklaus: I admire your determination. There are probably only a few hundred people in the entire country who have read the first 1,000 pages. When you finish, I'll invite you to read the Senate version too, so that you can do a comparison. »
Well I'm up to page 1000 in the house bill. A lot of the bill addresses specifically the loopholes that have been exploited by large corporations like Wal-mart that have permitted those companies to put most of their employees on public health care or to deny them access to coverage. Some actually includes provisions for making those corporations p... »
Get Over It, It's not about a difference of opinion. Mrs' Palin has repeatedly and proudly her voiced opinions in ways that exhibit a wanton ignorance of current events, world history, and global politics. She has on many occasions voiced opinions that show grounding in the prejudices and stereotyping common to those who prefer to leave the he... »
Hey, Get Over It,What do we do if someone actually happens to BE stupid? I suppose we could say they're rationality challenged.But seriously, I don't for a minute think this woman is stupid. I think she's opportunistic and such a thorough-going politician that she'd use just about anyone, including her family, to win.BTW, American Right To Life (... »
Ya'll need to get over it. Name calling conservatives will never get independents like me. Try to be more balanced and analyze Sarah's actions/remarks to the same degree as your beloved Obama. Also, please stop judging people to be stupid just because they don't agree with you! This elitism in the liberal party is just sickening. »
Aw, bugger! I'm in a "fight?" Who do I punch in the nose? My faith there is a God means I cannot accept that others don't believe as I do? Or that some might believe that I'm delusional and believe in mythical beings?There's some unforseen armageddon between theism and science which will result in the inevitable destruction of theism? Dammit, I gue... »
I've been working hard to not post anything on Sarah Palin, who continues to gather publicity for reasons I can't fathom. I must say, though, that I am aghast at her recent position on the illegal Jewish settlements. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/11/palin-on-israel.html »
These words by Karen Armstrong bear on this discussion. When we insist that there has to be a "winner" to a "debate" instead of a discussion, we might all be losers:http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html »
Ebonmuse: I don't know anything about Mooney's position other than what I heard on this interview with D.J.Grothe. I thought that what he said there sounded reasonable and that's why I posted on it. It now seems, however, that my position is actually somewhat different than that of Mooney. I'd be the last person to tell anyone that they shou... »
