Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

If Dennis Kucinich were the Dem. candidate, the contrast between him and millionaire McCain would give Americans a real choice between someone who wants our political system to work for the vast majority and one who wants more and more wealth concentrated in the hands of the very few, the only sharing to be done when the rich start losing their ass on Wall Street. How ironic that the Republican base, which finds homosexuality so repulsive, are so drawn to leaders who shove it up their rectum in the economic sphere.

Reply
Report this post

Good article, David. It's clear that McCain is befuddled and Obama is not up to speed, today especially we need to hear from Paul and Nader. I find it remarkable how very little the MSM and the candidates are debating issues and the choices Americans must make.

Reply
Report this post

So it sounds like the financial situation is that banks are at risk of going out of business and will liquidate their assets. The proposed $250-$700Billion bailout is claimed to be needed before these banks go out of business and the government is asked to act now to prevent this from happening. For one, I don't think all banks will instantly close their doors. I was still able to deposit and withdraw money from the ATM as well as from a bank teller, my work check still went through and I was still able to pay for items at the store. For GWB to suggest that something is needed now and to turn over large sums of money to Paulson smells bad. I hear them suggesting turning money over to the few elites, but I don't hear of any suggestions of turning money over to the people directly. If $700Billion was divided up to each forclosed home, there would be a little over $1mill for each home. My friend just bought out a $3000 forclosed home in Ohio so that tells me if the elite gets a hold of this bailout, there could be as much as $997,000 left over for some homes for the elite to play with. I'm betting this money would be at a historically low rate which the elite know how to do "leveraged investments" where you get a low rate loan and use it in a low risk- higher rate of return investment. For example, If I could get a loan from the US government at 2% but turn around to buy the New Zeland bonds at 8%, I would get a gaurenteed 6% RoR. No wonder why Paulison was saying I want a no-questions asked bailout. If there is $997,000 left over for a bunch of homes, where would you put that money? Give it back to the tax payer... probably not, certainly not when there is no oversite during the tail end of the presidential and congressional cycle. I would believe the government is acting honestly if they said something like "...the US will offer US tax payers directly with the highest credit scores up to $1Mill towards buying up forclosed properties. The money will be a partial grant to cover some down payment to those who do not have the money and the loan will be extremely compeditive (e.g. 3% fixed for 15yrs). The main requirement would be of credit scores and location to the forclosed property. No businesses allowed to participate...." Something also sounds funny that the media is telling us that "this morgage stuff is just too complicated for polititians to understand..." suggesting that either we don't understand it either and we need to trust the elite or we are electing idiots that yield to special interests and during this election cycle, now is not the time for a populist movement. Ironically, I think it is the perfect time for the US tax payer to tell the government, trust in your people over your special interest groups.... Give us an honest chance by leveling the playing field and to make a change of action and we'll fix this economy ourselves.