it worked very well when Roosevelt did it and it will work very well
again .

On Jan 14, 11:02 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mike,
>
> You are, of course, free to think and do whatever you please but I do
> suggest that a little more than blind faith be applied. Just because
> you have this hate/love relationship with Bush/Obama, respectively,
> doesn't mean that doing the same thing will result in vastly different
> outcomes just because it's Obama's administration. I've questioned
> twice now how government funded jobs will be sustained and all you've
> been able to do is say you believe it will work. That and a $1.50 at a
> Starbucks might get you a small, regular coffee, but not much else. In
> the short term, if it puts people to work, that is great. But from my
> untrained perspective it has the very real chance of simply making
> things worse, not better. I keep hearing catch phrases such as "kick
> start the economy" but the economy is not a motorcycle. I wish someone
> could put into layman's terms exactly how spending hundreds of
> billions of dollars on unsustainable government jobs will help the
> situation we are in.
>
> On Jan 14, 3:35 am, "florida mike  !" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > from what i understand the money isn't going to be used the way bush
> > used the first half .
>
> > On Jan 14, 1:43 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Obama, Bush team up behind another $350 billion for the banks
> > > 14 January 2009
>
> > > First things first. Even before President Bush makes his farewell
> > > address on Thursday and Barack Obama is sworn in as the 44th president
> > > next Tuesday, the outgoing and incoming administrations are engaged in
> > > a concerted drive to release the second $350 billion installment of
> > > taxpayer funds to bail out the banks.
>
> > > Obama telephoned Bush Monday morning and asked that he formally
> > > request the second half of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief
> > > Program (TARP) windfall for Wall Street approved by Congress on
> > > October 3. Bush complied almost immediately, starting the clock on a
> > > 15-day period during which Congress can block the Treasury Department
> > > from transferring additional billions to financial institutions only
> > > if both houses reject the president's request. Even in that highly
> > > unlikely event, the president can vacate the congressional action by
> > > issuing a veto, which would require a two-thirds majority in both the
> > > House of Representatives and the Senate to override—virtually a
> > > political impossibility given overwhelming Democratic support for the
> > > bailout and Democratic control of both congressional chambers.
>
> > > Such is the priority given to the bailout money for the banks that
> > > Obama and his top economic aides are devoting themselves nearly full-
> > > time to meeting with leading Democrats and Republicans and lobbying
> > > Congress for support. Obama's $800 billion economic stimulus package,
> > > itself tailored to the demands of big business, can wait until mid-
> > > February, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has pledged to hold a
> > > vote on the TARP money by this Friday at the latest.
>
> > > The joint Bush-Obama push for the second half of the TARP money has
> > > occasioned a flurry of complaints from both sides of the congressional
> > > aisle over the refusal of the banks to use the billions they received
> > > in the first installment to increase their lending and protests from
> > > Democrats over the failure to provide relief for homeowners facing
> > > foreclosure—the ostensible purposes of the program. There is also much
> > > bluster over the lack of any restrictions on how the banks used the
> > > money, the absence of serious limits on executive pay and the fact
> > > that the banks were not even required to inform Congress or the public
> > > what they did with the government funds they received.
>
> > > Of the $350 billion already distributed, $250 billion went to banks
> > > and financial institutions, including $125 billion to the nine biggest
> > > banks. Another $40 billion was added to the $100 billion previously
> > > paid out to rescue the insurance giant American International Group,
> > > $19 billion went for emergency loans to General Motors and Chrysler,
> > > $20 billion went to other firms, and $25 billion was injected into
> > > Citigroup as part of a bailout involving over $300 billion in
> > > government loans and guarantees.
>
> > > It is well established that the banks used the money to shore up their
> > > reserves and, in the case of some of the biggest firms, to buy up
> > > smaller institutions with the aid of a tax break unilaterally enacted
> > > by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, formerly the CEO of Goldman
> > > Sachs, to facilitate a further concentration of financial power on
> > > Wall Street.
>
> > > Obama himself on Monday noted "the absence of clarity, the lack of
> > > transparency, the failure to track how the money's been spent and the
> > > failure to take bold action with respect to areas like housing,"
> > > saying he was "disappointed." He promised to "fundamentally change
> > > some of the practices in using this next phase of the program."
>
> > > This, and similar statements from leading Democrats in Congress, are
> > > little more than window dressing designed to placate public anger over
> > > the handover of federal funds to shore up the balance sheets of the
> > > very institutions whose pursuit of super-profits and financial Ponzi
> > > schemes precipitated the deepest economic crisis since the Great
> > > Depression. Some political cover is needed to continue placing the
> > > assets of the American people at the disposal of this discredited
> > > financial elite.
>
> > > But such demagogy and associated political maneuvering cannot disguise
> > > the total subordination of the government and both parties to the most
> > > powerful sections of the ruling class. The indecent haste with which
> > > both the outgoing and incoming administrations are rushing to satisfy
> > > the demands of Wall Street for a new infusion of cash provides an
> > > object lesson on the class relations that underlie American
> > > "democracy."
>
> > > One day before Obama requested $350 billion more for the banks, he
> > > explicitly affirmed that his administration would seek to impose major
> > > funding cuts and structural "reforms" on the bedrock social programs—
> > > Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid—upon which tens of millions of
> > > workers and retirees depend. In an interview on the ABC News "This
> > > Week" program, Obama was asked whether he would carry out "entitlement
> > > reform, including Social Security and Medicare, where everybody in the
> > > country is going to have to sacrifice."
>
> > > "Yes," Obama replied, adding that "what you describe is exactly what
> > > we're going to have to do... Everybody is going to have to give."
>
> > > Everybody, that is, except for the multi-millionaires and billionaires
> > > who comprise the financial aristocracy.
>
> > > There is not even an attempt to explain why it is the critical social
> > > programs on which the working class relies that must be cut to offset
> > > the explosive growth of budget deficits resulting from cash infusions
> > > to the banks and corporations. Indeed, as with the initial passage of
> > > the TARP program, there is to be no public discussion or serious
> > > congressional debate—no assessment of the failure of the first
> > > installment to prevent the economic catastrophe it was supposedly
> > > implemented to avert, or explanation of how the second installment
> > > will work, whom it will benefit and how it will address the economic
> > > crisis any better than the first half of the Wall Street slush fund.
>
> > > Once again, a proverbial gun is being held to the head of the American
> > > people. In a letter to congressional leaders, Obama's top economic
> > > adviser, Lawrence Summers, wrote that "President-elect Obama believes
> > > the need is imminent and urgent. We cannot afford to wait."
>
> > > In his letter to Congress, Summers wrote that companies receiving
> > > "exceptional assistance" would be subject to "tough but sensible"
> > > limits on executive pay and other restrictions. One can judge how much
> > > such assurances are worth from the resumés of Summers and Obama's
> > > designee as treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, who will head up the
> > > TARP program.
>
> > > As treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, Summers promoted
> > > the dismantling of bank regulations and the cheap credit policies that
> > > fueled the housing and credit bubbles which imploded 18 months ago.
> > > Geithner, as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, played
> > > a central role along with Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke in
> > > engineering the government loans, cash infusions and guarantees to the
> > > banks and financial markets that now total some $8 trillion.
>
> > > Bernanke weighed in on Monday to push for the additional TARP money.
> > > In a speech at the London School of Economics, he endorsed Obama's
> > > stimulus plan but added that further taxpayer infusions into the
> > > banking system were essential. Bernanke suggested that the second
> > > installment should be used to buy up bad mortgage-related bonds and
> > > other "toxic" assets weighing down the balance sheets of the banks.
> > > This was the plan originally marketed by Bernanke and Paulson, only to
> > > be dropped within days of congressional passage in favor of direct
> > > cash infusions into the banks.
>
> > > Whatever form the next transfusion of cash takes, it will not solve
> > > the deepening economic crisis. It will not, and cannot, address the
> > > fundamental contradictions and deep-seated structural problems of
> > > American and world capitalism. No amount of handouts to the banks can
> > > resolve the crisis of profitability in basic production and the
> > > conflict between globalization and the nation-state system that
> > > underlies the crisis, or reverse the massive decay of manufacturing in
> > > the
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to