Home

About

Contents

Guidelines

Glossary

Contacts

Discussion

Recent Discussion

Create New Topic

Membership

Join Now

Login

Who's doing what to whom

Emotionally charged words about the current financial problem are being used in the hopes you will be stampeded to vote in the upcoming election out of fear. Before you vote, sort through this carefully.

"Bailout" is not what is happening. The U.S. Treasury is injecting $700 billion to temporarily establish credit so that you can continue to borrow money from banks for houses, credit purchases, and businesses. The injection is needed because mortgage-backed securities (MBS) are not worthless, but they have been packaged so that their value is opaque. If they are not easily valued, they can't be traded. Liquidity is the problem, not solvency. No bank or investor wants to gamble on any single MBS bundle. The government called a time out that gives the economy time to digest the pieces.

The MBS packages, taken together, probably have enough value to get close to $700 billion back and perhaps even turn a profit for Treasury. What is more, the Treasury will see that the investors and the investment houses that brought about this crisis are going to take a financial beating.

But wait. This is at odds with the loud political posturing of Democratic politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, who posture with words like "bailout", "poor homeowner", failure of de-regulation", "big business", and "taxpayer". The phrases are used even when they don't apply. Their tactics ought to embarrass them but do not. They would play this dangerous game only if they thought they would not get caught. They'd play only if the prize were worth it. Only if they wanted power so badly would they risk screwing up society to win.

This smells more like an "October Surprise" to stampede voters towards a particular vote on Election Day.

Congress did nothing to head off the problem. President George W. Bush warned them to solve the problem in 2001. To clean up the risk, Senator John McCain sponsored legislation two years ago that Democrats scuttled. Why? To understand the problem, think ACORN, Democratic congress, Fannie Mae, greedy banks, and a lust for power.

Follow the money to find who has consistently opposed tightening Fannie Mae guidelines. Since the middle 1990s, Democrats have been using Fannie Mae and friendly outside groups to build a political base. ACORN is the "sounds-good-at-first" community organization, operating all over the country, whose subsidiaries repeatedly get hauled into court for bogus voter registrations. Evidence suggests ACORN subsidiaries shake down corporations for funding. ACORN received grants from friendly Fannie Mae executives and from the $50 million Chicago Annenberg Challenge back when Barak Obama was its CEO. Democratic congressional bigwigs have slipped your tax money to ACORN subsidiaries through earmarks.

Barak Obama, received Fannie Mae money and likely benefited from votes ACORN voter registrations generated. Obama represented ACORN to sue Fannie Mae to reduce the requirements for getting mortgages. Lowering those mortgage requirements set the stage for waves of big bank scams that lined the pockets of the banks, bank officials, Fannie Mae executives, and -- surprise -- Democratic politicians.

So the stage is set with ACORN, Fannie Mae, Congressional Democrats, greedy banks, and Obama Σ just in time for a presidential election. Breathless words reverberate over today's news to whip up the masses. Don't swallow the bait.

When Chuck Schumer wants to take more tax money out of your pocket to prop up mortgages that never should have happened in the first place, laugh at his audacity. Reckless deregulation didn't cause this problem, Congressional meddling did.

Remember, Wall Street is only a small corner of a broad economy. Furthermore, the underlying economy is sound. If it weren't, unemployment would be at 25 percent instead of 5-6 percent. Don't let political theater stampede you to the wrong decision on Election Day.

These people want power. They would undermine the institutions that make this country work to make you dependent on them.

Discuss

[Macro error: Can't find a sub-table named "commentIt".]