Bear Stearns: Take the $ and Run


by Antenna Wilde

That 30 billion dollar bailout we taxpayers just gave to Bear Stearns? Bye-bye.

Ah yes, the Savings and Loan scandal is ringing in my ears, though the coming storm should put it to shame. 30 billion is just a spoonful of Nyquil, and the blame falls directly on the banking industry. This is no surprise, as the only way banks can make money is by either: a) collecting interest on loans. And/or b) making loans to people who default, and then taking the collateral—in this case the real estate, plus any already made payments.

Now the banks would like us to believe that, they too have suffered some loss from this subprime crisis. In reality, they created it by pushing legislation in the eighties, like the Alternative Mortgage Transactions Parity Act of 1982. (with help from the Democrats, I should add) It’s nothing new, and sadly, this article may remain relevant 20 years hence. The real winner here is JP Morgan, but I can assure you that Citigroup and BOA are quite excited about the upcoming foreclosures.

When banks report “profit losses” they are talking about interest they aren’t getting from people who went broke. Don’t worry, they have the real estate now, which is the only thing of value anyway. And it’s true that, normally, this might strain their coffers, but the the central bank is filling them back up. Free money! That’s right, the banks make lousy loans, foreclose on the homes, then cry to the Fed, “We’ve been duped!” Then Big Brother skips to the rescue—with money from the real bank; our bank… the only one that has any “real” money.

So that’s one way the bankers get richer, because they’re certainly not interested in the “money” they loan out: it doesn’t exist. If you find this too long a video, skip to the last 20 minutes:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279

Sherry Cooper—a chief economist at BMO Capital Markets, said, “What is different this time is that the dominoes are falling in so many different sectors, markets, industries and countries … all at the same time and there is yet no end in sight.”

Great, thanks Bush Senior for deregulation, and Clinton for signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Dubya’s helping too! Just like the days of Daddy Bush and the S&L scandal, bankers create a moral hazard by manipulating the system to sell people on bullshit like Option ARM (adjustable rate mortgages) and make huge foreclosure profits at ZERO risk. Yeah, the boys at the top are making a killing—hooray for assholes!

And if you were dumb enough to believe that the subprime rate wasn’t set to double after they hooked you… sorry Charlie, no bailout for you. SOMEBODY has to pay the price. Although the Federal Reserve is partially owned by the banks in question (that’s right, private) it was not created to steal from the poor and give to the rich, but that’s essentially what’s happening—and hang on to your soon-to-be-liquidated seats—cause it will happen again.

Solution: 1) Education. 2) Election Reform. 3) Monetary Reform. That’s it. But in the meantime, if we could just pass ONE bill that says, if we DO bail out the CEOs, Trustees and Lendors for intentional predatory lending, they have to go to a federal, pound-me-in-the-ass prison for 20 years without parole. Any takers?

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Obama: REAL Change?


As the race for the White House heats up, I write another cliche opener.

As these jaded fingers tap away at my weary keyboard, I wonder if Obama’s really got a chance at this thing. Look at what’s at stake; a mighty chunk of control over the most powerful corporation in the world—the U.S. government. And now that he’s a real threat, Billary has joined forces with the GOP to knife this guy into oblivion. Obama offers hope and change, or, a hope FOR change. Because that’s what we’re really doing, hoping things will change.

Now you may say, “But people are out there in the streets, fighting the good fight… fighting for change and not just hoping.” This is true, but look at Ron Paul. By all accounts, he had what it took to be a leading candidate (Yes, he’s a bit goofy, but barring that…) he raised the most $ of any Republican candidate; had a grass roots following based on populist views like nationalism, ending the war and cutting government into bite-sized morsels, and he supported the Constitution. Shocking. The media ignored him—of course—because it was in Daddy Warbuck’s best interest.

But then why does Obama get the coverage? He’s a well spoken figure of change with an interesting life story? Sure, there’s a story, but would he have been given the CHANCE to be a story if he wasn’t willing to play ball in the first place? What I like about him IS his inexperience. Because he’s that less likely to have turned to the Dark Side already. I know we all want something to believe in, but I don’t think Pfizer, Johnson& Johnson or General Electric are too worried. Or are they?

There’s two possibilities I see here, 1: Obama is full of it, nothing of real significance will change. 2: He’s serious about change, which means a) Diebold, Skull and Bones and the powers that be will “fix” election day and put McCain in there (if he’s still walking by then). b) he’ll be assassinated before he has a chance. c) he’ll be assassinated after he gets into office. d) Big Brother is monitoring this blog.

Let’s be honest, we can’t REALLY have change, that would be revolution… real revolution with mayhem in the streets: a full-blown police state (not just the regular wiretapping and email monitoring for insider profits). No friends, I mean “release the hounds” kind of police state, because if you think the military industrial complex is going to forget about 630 billion dollars a year, or that Disney won’t mind paying a fair tax rate on 31 billion dollars a year, or Goldman Sachs on their 90 billion a year; just take a vacation and don’t come back.

I’m for profit, but when a Washington insider like Goldman Sachs has a net income increase of 84% in a single quarter, (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050921/ai_n15361131) I’m reminded of what my Grandpa used to say, “Don’t piss on my head and tell me it’s raining.” And yeah, Goldman Sachs gives $ to Obama, Clinton and McCain. Somebody tell me it’s different… please?

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook