About Me

Name: James Burns
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Paulson, An Inside Job?

Henry Paulson the Treasury Secretary of the United States was also CEO at one time of Goldman Sachs. So why an inside job? Well lets see:

  • Paulson let Leamann Bros. go bankrupt with no help from the government. Leamann Bros. was Goldman Sach's competition.
  • Paulson loans AIG 85 billion dollars. Current Goldman Sachs CEO was the only private sector person in that meeting. Waving Goldman Sachs 20 billion dollar risk exposure in AIG.
  • Once questions arise about Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley's future based on AIG and Leamann Bros situations. Paulson jumps and all of a sudden cries fire and wants 700 billion to bail the mess out.
  • Paulson under the failed bill had the right to buy assets at higher prices than what the market says they are worth, and at his discression. I am sure under that plan Goldman Sachs assets would be paid top dollar for.
  • Paulson already has a 1 trillion dollar fund to help back these failed mortgage securities. Why ask for more? His counterpart at SEC has the power suspend mark to market rule. Basically revaluating the market to its true value.
So why doesn't Paulson and the administration use the tools it has already, which needs no congressional input to solve this problem. I will repeat what I have stated in another post I have made, economist have come out and stated by suspending mark to market could jump value of all these assets to 500 billion infusing liquidity almost instantly. Well here we have made most of the 700 billion by the stroke of the pen. 200 billion could be in loans for those who still are in trouble if needed.

My feeling, Paulson has a lot to gain with the current bailout plan that has failed. His old buddies have a lot to lose if they have to pay loans instead of free money. Plus like stated before Paulson's discression at the price paid for assets would benefit those parties. So was this bailout for the personal gain of some government officals? Research and see, make your own opinions. But sounds to me like a Good Ole Boys network.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Is There Really a Market Crisis?

As I dwell on the "financial crisis" that is being blasted all over the news. I wonder is there really a crisis?

Look I am forty years old. I remember when credit cards were luxuries. Most people only had mortgages and car payment. Even car financing was hard to get at that time. Credit was something you earned. Know a days its thrown at you and as long as you don't screw up you can keep it. Look you can walk in to a car dealership and walk out with a car, no cash changes hand just sign here. Many people bought houses with no money down just pay closing costs, strictly credit. If you go to McDonalds you can finance a Big Mac if you use a credit card.

Now everything runs on credit. That is a problem. Because this means everyone runs in debt. From your employer who pulls short term loans to pay your paycheck to the person who buys your product. We really are in a credit free for all, and have gotten so used to functioning with it, we have forgotten how to function without it. I have a mortgage, a car payment, both cars are used one payed for with cash, and a credit card with less than a two hundred dollar balance. If I want a p.c or a 72" LCD HDTV I need to pay cash for it, if I don't have the cash I don't buy it. This free for all credit has fueled this "Keeping up with the Jones" attitude to an all new high. I will admit I have had credit cards multiple car payments etc. Got myself into trouble, got out of it and believe me will never allow myself to get into the mess again. Unfortunately not enough people have gone through that, but know are. Because everything is financed not owned outright. The temptation is just to great.

In my opinion, as economist say, markets go through corrections. Readjusting to over valuing because of heavy investing. I think now were in the same kind of correction. Just it is the credit market realizing that it over extended credit ,playing the big paper shuffles to fix the books, and not recouping the funds lent out. It is now tightening the reigns because of all the over extension of credit and everyone is screaming because people do not know how to function without it.  I think when its all over businesses and people will have relearned how to function with what cash they have and a little credit rather than all credit. Not saying it will be an easy lesson to learn, but a much needed one.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Barack Obama And The First Amendment

Seems to me that Barack Obama is an anti constitutional, left wing, I can't take the negative socialist.

Reports keep coming in about his "Truth Squads." Now I am not afraid of "Truth Squads," both sides have them to repudiate lies told by the other side. My problem is Obama's squads contain, from what news reporters have said, state prosecutors, police officers.  Again nothing wrong with that. But what is wrong, is threats of prosecution by some of these people who are on these squads for speaking against Obama. Please this country is not a police state. We have the right to speak out against an individual, McCain or Obama or anyone running for public office as long it is done in a peaceful way. But to threaten liable and slander charges is unconstitutional and wrong. Obama is a free speech advocate only if it is in his favor I assume.

Where is the ACLU on this one. Of course Obama's campaign down plays this but Google the Truth Squads and you can see for yourself. Funny thing is government officials are allowing this to go on at Obama rallies. Here is link to prove it, http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/09/29/obama-campaign-stifles-free-speech-university-rally .

People be very afraid. If he is elected he could become the first American dictator. He is squashing our constitutional rights.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Destroyed Wall street

Another culprit in this great economic crisis that we are in is called the Sarbanes-Oxley act. This legislation was passed in 2002 and acts like a two edged sword as far as accounting goes. This is the legislation that put into effect the mark to market rule on mortgage backed securities.

What this act does is when an institution wants to sell off mortgages the whole institutions inventory is valued by their last sale. So what does this mean? Well when the economy was booming mortgages were repackaged and sold in groups as mortgage bonds. Investment banks bought these bonds and turned a profit by collecting the interest. Well when valuing these instruments an institution would have to take, under federal law, and value everything in inventory based on its last sale. So this is good when values are high. But as we are finding out that it also works in reverse. When banks start selling these mortgages off when values are low; again they take the lowest price and revalue their inventory again. So even loans  that are good their value drops because of the mark to market rule. So this in turn lowers an institutions net value, which inhibits it from making and receiving loans. It basically devalues a banks assets based on instant market fluctuations.

So an easy fix for this, the SEC Chairman has the power to suspend this practice and go back to conventional accounting rules. This would automatically raise the value of all these assets these institutions have and then increase their capitol by giving the assets some liquidity. I have heard reports that 500 billion of the 700 billion needed for a bailout could come from this, and the rest from an FDIC type insurance company run by the feds, paid for by Wall Street. This is what house republicans want to do. So why won't the SEC do this?

Well I think it has to do with Hank Paulson. Mr. Paulson is the Secretary of the Treasury and former CEO of Goldman Sachs. One of the firms involved with this bailout.  In the bailout Paulson has discretion on what assets the government buys and at what price. So if the market value is low on an asset, he can pay a higher price knowing the true value of that asset. But if its the right asset, meaning an old Goldman Sachs asset, he can make money because I am sure he owns options in Goldman-Sachs or some of the assets. So I think something is fishy here. But I cannot be sure of it, justs sounds odd to me. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Wall Street Exceutives Make Me Sick

As I hear more and more I get closer to vomiting.

With today's failure of the Bailout To No Where, I have been watching closely the response, from Main Street and Wall Street. Main Street spoke loud and clear we don't want to pay for Wall Street. Ok we can't get loans so what, the majority of American's credit is shot now or will be soon. But as usual the Working Class will trudge through and get buy and will survive. Always have and always will.

The real problem is Wall Street. These maxi morons could not fight their way out of a wet paper bag. I mean when the going is good and your screwing with everyones money and turn a huge profit that fine and good. Cruise in the Mercedes, eat caviar etc. But when the crap hits the fan because you have taken all the money given and entrusted to you and lost it. You all of a sudden cry help. The market can't crash, we can't lose are cushy jobs. We did nothing wrong. We need to have the federal government take away our mistakes so we can go on business as usual.

Hey congress, president of the united states were is the urgency to help me the Working Class. Give me a break. The market has crashed and come back many times before. Maybe if it does crash it will be a birth of something new. Not so corrupt and more stable. If a market is this fragile then maybe we need a new one. AIG , Leaman all the others, maybe we shouldn't have all the eggs in one basket.

But Wall Street executives, suck it up, roll up the sleeves and fix your own damn mess.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Weather Update! Blizzard in Hell

Today after the failed vote for the Bailout To No Where, I was flipping through the news channels.
I happened to land on MSNBC and Chris Matthews was on. This was actually when I realized Hell had frozen over. Chris Matthews stated how John McCain said he was a Teddy Roosevelt republican. So I thought "oh well more McCain bashing." But to my surprise Matthews  said McCain has been warning for 7 or 8 years now that Washington is broken. He also stated that he made a risky move of going to Washington to rally the troops. While Obama played the safe bet and watched from the sidelines. But in spite of McCains efforts the bill failed. Not only because the republicans didn't vote for it but also because democrats didn't vote for it either. He went on to say that the ones who voted for it voted disregarding the American people's outcry to not pass this bill.

Now by no means am I a fan of MSNBC or Chris Matthews, but for once he got it right.

1 to 2 feet of accumilation of snow in Hell expected.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bailout To No Where Fails to Pass In House

The House of Representatives has failed to pass the Bailout To No Where plan. In a vote of 228 nay and 205 yea, the house knocked it down. The Dow drops 500 points as vote is announced. Finally Washington does it right. House Republicans not bowing to the pressure of democrats killed the bailout bill.

Rep. Barney Frank(D, Ma) has already said it is the republicans fault, but in reality close to 100 democrats voted no as well. So even with a democratic majority it could not pass. Basically no one party can take blame for not passing a bad bill. If anything with a majority of Americans having passed their disapproval for this bill to their congressmen and women, our voices have been heard and did the will of the people.  Let's see what happens next.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Funding For ACORN Removed From Bailout To No Where

Fox news just reported that one of the big sticking points in the bailout bill was money going into a federal slush fund that would help fund ACORN and other special interest organizations. I am glad to say that Fox reported that that provision has been removed from the final bill.

Thank God for John McCain and the House Republicans who would not let that issue go. If John McCain did not go to Washington and help the House Republicans, minority leader John Boehner (R, Oh) said " If John McCain did not back me up they would have run over me like a freight train." This remark in reference to the meeting at the White House on Friday. How shameful that the senate and House Democrats for not including these elected officials. Just shows how Washington really works, if your in, your good. If your not in, then you don't exist.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Better Bailout Plan

I received this from a friend in an email. I like it a lot better:

Finally, a bail-out plan I can agree with...

In a message dated 9/25/2008 3:08:55 P.M. Pacific
Daylight Time
, a very smart person wrote:   I don't
know where this came from, my brother forwarded it to
me, but it sounds like a fantastic plan...
I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.

Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to
America in a "We Deserve It" Dividend.

To make the math simple, let's assume there are
200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.

Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every
man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair
stab at adults 18 and up. So divide 200 million adults
18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.

My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a
"We Deserve It" Dividend.

Of course, it would NOT be tax free.

So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.

Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.


That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.

But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in
their pocket. A husband and wife have $595,000.00.

What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in
your family?

Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.

Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads

Put away money for college - it'll be there safe in a
bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.

Buy a new car - create jobs.

Invest in the market - capital drives growth.

Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care
improves.

Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else.

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+
including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman
Brothers
and every other company that is cutting back.


And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.

If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do
it.

If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's
bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!

As for AIG - liquidate it. Sell off its parts. Let
American General go back to being American General.
Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector
bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.

Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.
Sure it's a crazy idea that can "never work." But can
you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!

How do you spell Economic Boom? I trust my fellow
adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion We
Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG
or in Washington DC.

And remember, this plan only really costs $59.5
Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in
taxes to Uncle Sam.

Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my
chest.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bailout To No Where Proposal Links

The draft of the bailout is here got to:
financialservices.house.gov or www.foxnews.com and click the draft proposal link. I would use the Fox news link because I can't get onto the house site. the file is a pdf to download.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Letter To Democrats

Dear All Democrats,

While I watch the news about the bailout, and how you all are going to take credit for it I have some points to make. So you then can truly take credit for the bailout. In 1977 democratic president Jimmy Carter signed the Community Reinvestment Act. This gave Fannie and Freddie their power. Fannie the lender and Freddie the repackager. In the 1980's ACORN is born using this act to give loans to people who probably should have not gotten them and using Fannie and Freddie to do it. Then in 1999 with this act just collecting dust democratic president Bill Clinton decided to resurrect it and enforce it using Fannie and Freddie. Things are going great, so good Bush extends it.

That brings us to today September 28, 2008. Democratically controlled congress says bailout proposal is agreed on. Will vote on it tommorrow. Funny thing that all the parties on some of these committees refused to do something when the democrats were not in control.

So yes not, only can you democrats take credit for your Bailout to No Where, that you all tried to fill with earmarks, go figure. But you can start taking credit for the whole mess to begin with.

What makes me sick is you can never blame yourselves it is always a republicans fault. History speaks for itself. Just too many stupid democrats won't look up history. Too caught up in Obama's hoopla.

Thanks for using my tax money to fix your problem,

The Working Class
American Taxpayers

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obam Trying To Take Credit For Bailout

Here we go. Obama is saying that John McCain cannot take credit for helping in the bailout, but he can. Obama has stated he has been on the phone with Treasury Secretary Paulson and Senators everyday since this crisis began. He also states that he has been pushing what he wanted for provisions since the begining.

Here is how I have seen it on the news.
  • The week of the AIG colloapse and bailout, stocks rose again befor breaking even that weekend. But with the violatitlity of the market that week the fed's thought something must be done, Paulson pitched his plan.
  • McCain make his fundamentals of the economy comment
  • McCain then gives his proposal on how he would wnat this bailout to be
  • Obama makes speech regarding what he wants to do. Gives no specifics saying he doesn't want to interfere in the process and muddle it up.
  • Obama then comes out with a proposal that sounds similarlly like McCains. But no one seems to notice. How convenient.
  • McCain heads for Washington on his own accord, followed by Obama at President Bush's request. Remember Obama stated call me if you need me.
  • Obama runs his mouth while in White House meeting. McCain says very little exept to say no one has included House Republicans and they need to be heard.
  • Debate goes on Friday night.
  • McCain returns to Washington immediatley after debate. Obama back on the trail.
  • While campaigining Obama continues to say he is in constant touch with all concerned parties. McCain only canidate in Washington continuing to work on bailout, even though he is behind the scenes, he was still helping House Republicans.
  • Congress comes out today with a statement that a proposal has been agreed on.
  • Obama says he did it. Not John McCain.
So my question is if Obama has spent the last two days campaigning and not in Washington, how can you take credit forthe bailouit? Second how can principles that were laid out before yours Obama, be yours. If you have done what you say you've had publish you phone records to sohw all these calls. Have your democrat buddies come out and say so. Actions speak louder than words McCain took action, Obama, you spewed words.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bailout To No Where Draft Propasal

Here is the congressional draft proposal that has been worked out by congress and posted online on Fox News.com. Can't wait to see the final bill. I hope their are no special interest groups, such as ACORN, benefiting from this.

REINVEST, REIMBURSE, REFORM

IMPROVING THE FINANCIAL RESCUE LEGISLATION

Significant bipartisan work has built consensus around dramatic improvements to the original Bush-Paulson plan to stabilize American financial markets — including cutting in half the Administration’s initial request for $700 billion and requiring Congressional review for any future commitment of taxpayers’ funds. If the government loses money, the financial industry will pay back the taxpayers.

3 Phases of a Financial Rescue with Strong Taxpayer Protections.

Reinvest in the troubled financial markets … to stabilize our economy and insulate Main Street from Wall Street

Reimburse the taxpayer … through ownership of shares and appreciation in the value of purchased assets

Reform business-as-usual on Wall Street … strong Congressional oversight and no golden parachutes

CRITICAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RESCUE PLAN.
Democrats have insisted from day one on substantial changes to make the Bush-Paulson plan acceptable — protecting American taxpayers and Main Street — and these elements will be included in the legislation

Protection for taxpayers, ensuring THEY share IN ANY profits

• Cuts the payment of $700 billion in half and conditions future payments on Congressional review

• Gives taxpayers an ownership stake and profit-making opportunities with participating companies

• Puts taxpayers first in line to recover assets if participating company fails

• Guarantees taxpayers are repaid in full — if other protections have not actually produced a profit

• Allows the government to purchase troubled assets from pension plans, local governments, and small banks that serve low- and middle-income families

Limits on excessive compensation for CEOs and executives

New restrictions on CEO and executive compensation for participating companies:

• No multi-million dollar golden parachutes

• Limits CEO compensation that encourages unnecessary risk-taking

• Recovers bonuses paid based on promised gains that later turn out to be false or inaccurate

Strong independent oversight and transparency

Four separate independent oversight entities or processes to protect the taxpayer

• A strong oversight board appointed by bipartisan leaders of Congress

• A GAO presence at Treasury to oversee the program and conduct audits to ensure strong internal controls, and to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse

• An independent Inspector General to monitor the Treasury Secretary’s decisions

• Transparency — requiring posting of transactions online — to help jumpstart private sector demand

Meaningful judicial review of the Treasury Secretary’s actions

Help to prevent home foreclosures crippling the American economy

• The government can use its power as the owner of mortgages and mortgage backed securities to facilitate loan modifications (such as, reduced principal or interest rate, lengthened time to pay back the mortgage) to help reduce the 2 million projected foreclosures in the next year

• Extends provision (passed earlier in this Congress) to stop tax liability on mortgage foreclosures

• Helps save small businesses that need credit by aiding small community banks hurt by the mortgage crisis — allowing these banks to deduct losses from investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stocks

Office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi – September 28, 2008



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Kathleen Parker On Sarah Palin

I am saddened by what Kathleen Parker has written about Sarah Palin. Yes I agree Palin has made some stupid statements, or has sounded unintelligent with some of the answers during her interviews. But here is my problem.

We all say stupid things.  Also sometimes we don't answer questions in a intelligent way, but in no means does this mean that Palin would not make a good vice-president. Look at Joe Biden, this man can clears his throat with is toes at least once a day. He has a horrible record of also not standing on the side of the American people. But I hear no one calling for him to be drop from the Dem's ticket. So why should anyone call for Palin to drop of the Rep. ticket. She has a record of being on the side of the taxpayer. She enjoys an over 80% approval record in her home state.  So basically yes she has had a case of hoof and mouth disease as of late, but her actions speak louder than those words. She will learn about issues she has not dealt with as governor. She will gaind experience with issues, but at least as vice-president, not like Obama learning as he goes while being president. This opinion by Ms. Parker does't sound like a republican stand but more of a democratic " make a mistake and we drop you like a bad habit", eliltest attitude.

I think that during this weeks coming VP debate she will sound more intelligent than Biden. Also I think that we need to worry about Biden being a heart beat away from president rather than Palin.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bailout To No Where or Conspiracy?

So let me ask and the reader judge. Is the Bailout to Nowhere a real bailout to help the American economy or is it a tool to get Obama elected?

From as far back as 2005 and maybe farther many in congress, including John McCain, stated that Fannie and Freddie needed to be reigned in. A bill, co sponsored by John McCain,  was brought forth to senate in 2005 in front of the banking committee to change Fannie and Freddie. At the time the republicans were in control of congress. So that bill went no where, with democrats saying it was not needed. Now that same committee is in charge of this bailout. The difference is the democrats are in control of both houses of congress. Funny thing about the banking committee is a lot of the faces are the same as in 2005. See my post "More Of The Blame Game."

Over the next three years, the economy as slowly gone down hill. Real estate sales declining, job loss climbing, foreclosures sky rocketing. So what does are government say both the administration and congress? There is no recession, the economy is strong, and its just a market correction. So after much pressure from the American public, congress and the administration come up with the economic stimulus plain. Basically throw 50 billion at the 800 lb gorilla in the room and it will go away. What did this do, it pissed off the 800 lb gorilla.

First comes Bear/Stearns, the government bails them out. Next over this past summer the feds decide to bail out Fannie and Freddie, to try and fix the economy. Next we have Leamann Bros. feds say no. Then finally AIG, this is what stops the feds in their tracks. Oh my gosh what is happening. After the first bailouts they thought problem solved things will go back to normal. But instead the 800 lb gorilla is still there. The real problem of the Working Class struggling to make mortgage payments and many failing to, cause all this bad debt on Wall Street. So here we are today with congress working overtime to throw more money at the 800 lb gorilla.

So now what? You see on the news that senators and congressional leaders keep coming out to say "we have a deal", "we're close to a deal" every hour or so. But here is the catch. Congress being democratically controlled can pass anything they want without republican input. But in an election year, when they, the democrats want the White House, wouldn't look so good. So "in a feeling of bi-partisanship" they want a plan that all parties can agree to. This so called bi-partisanship is a bunch of hoopla. See if the dems pushed something through and the public went crazy to what was in it, no win for Obama, and there would be linchings in Washington. The face of congress would change next congressional election year really quick. But if all parties agree, dems and republicans, then the dems can say we are the party of change, and Obama get elected, and ACORN ends up with over 100 million dollars of our, the taxpayer's, profit from the bailout compliments of Sen Chris Dodd, and Barack Obama.

Then ACORN can go and register non existent, dead, teenage or convicted felon voters for the dems. Also they could continue in their sub prime mortgage lending to low income, unqualified by any standard loan standard people,  and sell those bad loans back to Fannie and Freddie, Then we can get back to were we started. Great just what I want. Hence the name Bailout To No Where.

So you see the dem's have a master plan with this Bailout To No Where. Get Obama elected at all costs. No matter what it costs us the Working Class taxpayer.

Just a side note Rausmussen polls show that over 50% of the American pblic is against the bailout.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123Next »