I would love to hear the revamped anti-trust laws, and broke these to big to fail banks. but i doubt it can your guess talk about this as well.

Thanks,

“broke” should be break, and “guess” should be guests.

sorry for the typos.

I am losing faith in President Obama.

The man with the silver tongue that I voted for has yet to show that he has the backbone to force the greedy Wall Street rats to pay for what they’ve done to the working class of America.

Meanwhile, these overpaid sleazbags want to extract more bonuses, they continue to bribe congress via their campaign contributions, and they fight every effort for regulatory reform.

COME ON PRESIDENT OBAMA! STAND UP TO THE FINANCIAL TERRORISTS! MAKE THEM PAY FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO AMERICA!!

Mandatory Sentencing for Stealing from American People and their Savings!!!

lou, agreed. I too am not happy with Obama, but then I knew he was a pragmatic centrist and not the progressive so many people thought he was. It comes as no surprise to me that between his administration and the two houses of congress we will be back to business as usual. The banks own the government. The thing that is embarrassing to me is how in Iran right now the people are on the streets risking their lives while we Americans just sit back and take it on the chin.

This is from Robert Reich’s blog, if these three things are not implemented then we are doomed to repeat this mess again.

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/

1. Stop bankers from making huge, risky bets with other peoples’ money

2. Prevent any bank from becoming too big to fail.

3. Root out three major conflicts of interest.

Treasury, FED, SEC, OTS

Appoint proven uncorruptable citizens as the Boss, and have the Wall Street Insiders (ie. Geithner, Summers, Mary Shapiro et. al.) “report to them”, but not the other way around.

Enough is enough. Aren’t there smart people in Seattle, Arizona, Missisippi who can add numbers honestly.

Why the entire financial system of this country is controlled by crooks in NYC (Born in Brooklyn), NJ and Lower CT.

Lilya you sound like Madame Defarge.

How about the people who knowingly took out mortgages on houses they could not afford? Should we jail them as well?

Putney,

When are you going to retire? I know of a remote island in the pacific with no internet connection.

You buy a drug from CVS (not regulated), you swallow the pill, and you die. Nobody forced you to buy the darn stuff from CVS. You did it voluntarily.

The crooks were “deceptively” selling garbage to people who were seeing the “garbage” mortgage contracts the “first” time in their lives. The goal if the crafted garbage contracts was that nobody could see that it was garbage.

Shelby from Alabama, sponsored/lobbied for “Reform Act” of financial laws that allowed NY firms to screw us.

a) Poor farmers from Alabama demanded Shelby to do that.
b) Crook/Thief CEO’s of Financial Firms bribed Shelby to deregulate to steal.

Take your pick. Why are you always on the wrong side of the issues. Just because you are loaded?

Give Obama a break, please. He only got handed the biggest financial crisis in NINETY YEARS. These things do not get fixed overnight, and he was quite right when he said that you can’t govern from anger.

He’ll get it done.. hell he -is- getting it done, but it’s not going to happen overnight, and burning down Wall St. will only lead to a pyrrhic victory.

Its very simple. If I make a bet w my bookie, I better be able to pay up. AIG, Merrill and all of them made bets that they could not pay ( when their horse came up lame ) – we can’t break their legs-we could throw them in jail–but forward its very simple–any bet you make-requires the capital reserves to cover the bet. If you lay the bet off on an insurance company they must have the reserves=to some ratio of the bet….stop the financial crossword puzzle word game. The market is a bet…and you gotta have the cash to back your bet. Vegas knows it. The local bookie knows it. The problem is, the guys who are doing the betting don’t have to pay–then again, maybe if we hanged a few deadbeats, we might solve the problem.

To many – no, MOST – of us, the issue is still about the victims of the ‘bubble’ not the perpetrators. Why can’t my daughter – young, vulnerable, needy college student – just dissolve her debt to these banks and credit cards just like the rest of the financial world had their debt resolved? Why should hurting citizens get sued, have their credit bashed (oh, and good credit is REQUIRED to get a job or apartment these days) and have low wages garnished to pay creditors that seduced her into debt? What are her options!?!? None – bad credit, falling self-esteem, a wage so low she can’t afford to live. It’s no wonder she plans never to bring children into this world. We all lose.

Lilya your such a child and your comments are source of comedy. How am I on the wrong side of the issues here?
Oh I know because I dare to criticize you and your warped immature uninformed view points on everything. If anyone disagrees with you you attack them, insult them.
Now your telling me to commit suicide. Do you realize you sound like a 9 year child. By the way I’m not rich, so you see your making snap judgments based on your own point of view. Spoken like a true despot.

Here’s two words I think you should learn.

Debate

1. 1debate (noun)
2. 2debate (verb)

Main Entry:
1de·bate Listen to the pronunciation of 1debate
Pronunciation:
\di-ˈbāt, dē-\
Function:
noun
Date:
13th century

: a contention by words or arguments: as a: the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b: a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

Nuance:
nu·ance Listen to the pronunciation of nuance
Pronunciation:
\ˈnü-ˌän(t)s, ˈnyü-, -ˌäⁿs; nü-ˈ, nyü-ˈ\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
French, from Middle French, shade of color, from nuer to make shades of color, from nue cloud, from Latin nubes; perhaps akin to Welsh nudd mist
Date: 1781

1 : a subtle distinction or variation 2 : a subtle quality : nicety 3 : sensibility to, awareness of, or ability to express delicate shadings (as of meaning, feeling, or value)
— nu·anced \-ˌän(t)st, -ˈän(t)st\ adjective

For me the question is whether the new bill/regulatory scheme, etc., will prevent the debacle we are experiencing from happening again. Seems to me that one of the things we need is to have bankers holding mortgages they write and to end securitization of risk. When you separate the lender from the holder of the mortgage, especially when you allow for the slicing and dicing of mortgages so no owner can tell who holds the mortgage, and the only benefit the lender receives for making the loan comes in the form of fees for writing the loan/mortgage, you’ve given lenders the incentive to write as many loans and mortgages as they can, regardless of whether the instruments suit the borrower.

If we don’t stop that, we’ll see another bubble doomed to spill its guts on everyone again.

I would have patience with Obama if it seemed as if he were really “doing battle” with the big banks. But rather, it seems that he is accomodating them.

There has been no responsibility accepted by congressional oversite committees for their lack of monitoring or regulation of the markets prior to their collapse, nor has there been adequate accounting of the SEC. What it the point of new regulation when the existing regulation had not been implemented?

This crisis should come as know surprise if you wake-up and realize that the wolf has been guarding the chicken coop! Regulation, masked as “free-market” policy, is what allowed this economic mess to occur. Get rid of the Federal Reserve and its manipulation of our economy (e.g. interest rates), or else we will never have a truly free-market.

Get to the core issue: the Fed is the root cause of these boom/bust cycles since 1913!

Sir,

Short selling did not cause the market collapse. It helped and continues to tease out troubled companies. It is necessary service.

Vincent Nyakairu

Monique I am sorry but I don’t see why your daughter or mine for that matter should have her debt wiped clean.
She bought stuff with credit cards, well she should pay for them. If I build up debt through my own fault then I should be responsible.

Now if one wants to discuss the issue of the shrinking earnings of the majority the middle class and the predatory nature of the credit card industry then that’s a different issue. Some people are using credit cards to just get by. In short I think one needs to separate getting into debt for buying stuff you don’t need to being in need, such as eating.

College is a separate issue which should be free or low in cost. Better yet every student who gets into a school should have combination of grants and low interest student loans that from the government. Student loans should not be given by for profit institutions.

Says Simon Johnson in the Baseline Scenario re Geithner’s and Summer’s five point plan for dealing with the underlying problems of the financial system:

“…the complete omissions from this document are breathtaking. No mention of executive compensation or the structure of compensation within the financial sector. Not even a hint that the complete breakdown of corporate governance at major banks contributed to execessive risk taking. And no notion of regulatory capture-by-crazy-ideas of any kind.

Overall, there are no surprises here. Brick by brick, we are building the foundation for the next financial crisis; by all indications, it will be more disruptive and a great deal more damaging than the crisis of 2008-09. But presumably by then the authors will be out of office.”

Cut Obama a break? Not when I hear this exact sentiment being echoed by the likes of Paul Krugman and Joseph Steiglitz, among others who are howling into the wind. Read and be very afraid. We are being sold down the river, no doubt about it. But listening to Obama makes it feel like a smooth elixir as we swallow it down. I am a supporter, but am more wary every day.

http://baselinescenario.com/2009/06/15/todays-foundation-tomorrows-crisis-the-geithner-summers-proposals/

john, you make too much sense! NOT gambling with money you can not afford to lose? PUUUUULEEEAAASSSEE!

short-selling: BORROWING stock to sell today with a promise to buy it back later (presumably cheaper) and give it back to the lender. HOW stupid a financial system can we get? If you don’t own it, you should not be able to sell it. If short-selling is not made illegal, all profits should be taxed at 95% and losses should not be deductible. You want to speculate, go to Vegas and play the tables.

Stocks are supposed to be purchased for the purpose of owning part of a company you believe in, either in their mission or their financial/business future. Unless you buy a new issuance of stock, the ONLY thing you are buying is someone else’s stake in the company, the company gets no benefit. It is time to get back to that model. Credit default swaps, derivatives and all the other ‘financial instruments’ are nothing more than gambling with someone else’s money. If a loan is ’shaky’, DON’T BUY IT! Instead the big banks carved ton of loans into little (presumably nearly impossible to reconstruct) pieces and sold them as “investments”.

OOPS, too many bad ones in there and the entire world economy is in the toilet. Yes, those in charge of creating such things should have their golden parachutes shredded, their assets seized, and be forced to live in a homeless shelter with all the people they defrauded while getting rich. Work it all the way down to those mortgage lenders that took a kickback from the lender if they could get some poor clueless person to take a WORSE rate and the accountants who filed false ‘credit worthiness’ reports for people who could not afford a loan. You ALL knew what you were doing was immoral, whether legal or not. Now you should pay for it. Back to a system whereby If you can’t come up with a down payment, you CAN’T afford the loan.

ARM’s and ‘interest only’ loans that rely on presumed appreciation and future refinancing of the property before the rate becomes unaffordable should be illegal. A person’s home should not be an ‘investment’ it should be their home. If someone wants to buy property hoping they can flip it for a quick profit, they must be able to afford being wrong and they better have 50% down.

Putney, my daughter DIDN’T just buy crap. She lived on what she had available. Paid for school with the promise that the cards could be merged with her school loan debt – a lie. I know people bought more than they should have. But we’re talking about bailing out rich rapers and destroying a young woman’s life. It’s not the same as just buying beyond means and making her pay for her debt. It’s about prolonging financial punishment on the raped.

Todd, you do realize that prior to the creation of the Fed the US economy was, if anything, considreably more volatile than it is today? The late 19th century was characterized by several extreme depressions (not recessions)that occured at least partly due to not having a central monetary authority. The Fed may not be perfect, and we should certainly continue pushing it twoards perfection, but the alternative of not having it is certainly a less appealing alternative.

Regulate credit default swaps, derivatives and other fantasy financial instruments out of existence or kick them to the esoteric sidelines of finance where they can’t kill the economy again. Repeal Gramm-Leach-Blyly and reinstitute Glass-Steagall. If the Europeans want to continue to flirt with disaster under the bancassurance concept, let them. End the fiction that the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 caused the subprime mess. Sixty percent of the financial institutions that made subprime loans WERE NOT subject to the CRA. Finally, “too big to fail” should morph into “to big to exist.” Any institution that becomes influential enough to present a systemic threat to the lives, families, homes and jobs of millions of Americans, and indeed the global economy, is too great a responsibility to leave in the hands of a relative few whose eyes are firmly fixed on their next bonus checks. It was insanity that led us to this point. It would be a refreshing change if some semblance of sanity was restored, even if it means that the financial services industry will forever be restrained from reaching the high boil it once operated at.

Monique I hate to say this but your daughter was given very bad advice. My daughter is in college now, and she is not allowed to have a credit card. When I was in college we had these obligatory sessions with the finance staff of the college and we were given a long lecture on not using a credit card to pay for school.

Granted the student loan structure is now very messed up and this is one area that needs serious reform. I hear a lot of anger in your posting, what do rappers have to do with this?

I would get angry at the legislators who made the new bankruptcy laws which make it impossible to wipe the student loan debt when filing. You can blame the current VP Joe Bidden for that one as he was one of the bills authors.

What is needed is reform in how we pay for higher education, right now it is a complete rip off.

All this talk about more regulation. OK, I know we need to not let the foxes guard the hen-house. Not only do we need to revamp this risky system, but we need to enforce the regulations in place. I have a very close friend who audited bank loans all through the 90’s. She traveled all through Missouri and Kansas for spot checks on all types of loans made by the banks. When red flags were raised, nothing was done. The problem was that she was not a government employee. She worked as an independent contractor, making well over 50k per year doing this. The money was good but she had no standing or authority except to bring the irregularities up to her supervisor. Also she was not protected by whistle-blower laws. She could be fired if the boss didn’t like the way she parted her hair. Until attitudes change with the rank and file employees in the financial business, the CEO’s and top management will continue to take bonuses(bribes) to keep their mouths shut and our system will continue to push the envelope with OUR money (both deposits and taxpayer bail-out dollars) until the house of cards falls again. This is just one example of why this push to out-source government business is a bad idea.

I have been listening to tonight’s broadcast (6/18/2009)and I feel compelled to ask why the media, including Tom Ashbrook, NEVER include the members of Congress when assigning blame for the recent financial problems. While it is true that certain financial institutions, by no means all or nearly all, overreached, its is also true that members of Congress, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd come to mind, encouraged many of the activities which contributed to the problem. In fact, legislation was passed over the years which made some of the problems inevitable. If we do not discuss all causes for the problems then any regulation or legislation which is passed will further contribute to failures in the future.

Putney, Putney, Putney

You are losing it. You are always on the wrong side of issues.

Consumers are screwed left and right, and you are defending those sleezebags who call a meeting at 10:00 am with wonderful ideas about how to cheat on monthly statements and enjoy their self-generated bonuses.

And you are defending those criminals who made a careers out of cheating and stealing our money.

From Independent.co.uk

Britain/Blair has sent 4200 troops to play along with the US.

>>>Brown forced to open Iraq inquiry to public scrutiny
Senior military officers and peers welcome decision to hear evidence in public<<<

On an unrelated story, United States of America, which started the whole occupation, has sent total of 380,000 soldiers to Iraq during the last seven years.

And Americans have no interest in asking questions about the occupation and the reasons why we really occupied Iraq.

Hello,

I am one of those who always said we should let the bad betters lose. Let the incompetent financial institutions fail. This is simple capitalism. Supposedly we could not do that – let’s compare the #s: (please feel free to improve these – this is my back-of-the-napkin swags)

Cost of keeping the status quo: between 3 and 12 trillion dollars, depending how much of the bad betters exposure we taxpayers cover.

Cost of keeping the individuals going until new profitable companies arise to employ them:

1) 20% unemployment – say 20 million people.
2) say we taxpayers pay each unemployed person $50,000 per year for two years.
2×10^7 x 5×10^4 x 2 = 20×10^11 = 2 trillion dollars

In other words, it looks to me like we could let the incompetent/greedy/”bad” institutions fail and keep the individuals going, for less money than it would cost us to cover all the bad bets – that *we* didn’t even make! Yes, people who invested or participated in these bad institutions lose their money. FDIC deposits would be covered, but that’s all.

-Lisa

“I have been listening to tonight’s broadcast (6/18/2009)and I feel compelled to ask why the media, including Tom Ashbrook, NEVER include the members of Congress when assigning blame for the recent financial problems.”

Terri, for a very simple reason – it would make the Democrats look bad, as some regulations that were responsible for the meltdown were signed by Clinton and some were pushed by Dodd and Frank. (Which is not to absolve the Republicans of their share of blame.) And most people are unable to look at issues without taking off their partisan glasses (look at how easily people blame Bush-Cheney for everything because that means these people can safely ignore the faults of Democrats), so it follows that the Republicans have to be the bad guys here, and the Democrats have to come out untarnished. That’s the script, and NPR is faithfully following it.

If Democrats were held accountable based on facts, be it non-impeachment of Cheney/Bush, their role in saying yes to the Iraq war, or the economic meltdown, then there would be less of a difference between these two parties (as it is in reality) both of which are corrupt, and we just can’t have that on NPR/mainstream left.

It’s called identity politics.