Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Campaign Updates and Media Headlines 9/23/08

Caro's picture
Tags: 

Conflict Of Interest? Report Says Goldman Sachs ‘Among Biggest Beneficiaries’ Of Paulson’s Bailout (Think Progress)

In making his push to administer the largest federal bailout of Wall Street in history, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is seeking unfettered authority. McClatchy poses the question today, “can you trust a Wall Street veteran with a Wall Street bailout?,” referring to Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs: “But the conflicts are also visible. Paulson has surrounded himself with former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like collapse of several parts of the global financial market. And others have gone off to lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.”

Daddy doesn’t know best (by Paul Krugman)
I’ve had more time to read the Dodd proposal — and it is a big improvement over the Paulson plan. The key feature, I believe, is the equity participation: if Treasury buys assets, it gets warrants that can be converted into equity if the price of the purchased assets falls. This both guarantees against a pure bailout of the financial firms, and opens the door to a real infusion of capital, if that becomes necessary — and I think it will. Can this be done? Can the Paulson juggernaut be stopped? I’m starting to think yes. Paulson displayed a lot of arrogance here — he basically marched in and said Daddy knows best, don’t worry your pretty little heads about the details. He offered no, zero, zilch explanation of how the plan was supposed to work — just “it’s a crisis and we need to act now.” And he overreached, especially with that demand for immunity from any review.

Now we’ve had a lot of pushback from economists and financial analysts, and the realization has sunk in that this particular daddy has shown very little sign of knowing best. So there’s a real chance to do something quite different.

The Way Forward (by Stirling Newberry, writing at Daily Kos)
The correct response is to expand the FDIC, begin taking over institutions as a whole, providing immediate debt relief through an HOLC, and declare a national emergency to enforce austerity and prevent any short term attempts to profit from the financial chaos. A windfall profits tax on oil companies isn't a bad idea either, since it would bring in tens of billions of dollars right when they are needed the most. This solution, or some version of it, is in line with proposals from economists and political figures such as Robert Reich, Paul Davidson, Nouriel Roubini and others. It also leads to the correct solution to the larger fiscal crisis, which is removing the oil bottleneck to the growth of wealth, and therefore the growth of wages to pay financial instruments, and the cramming down of instruments which claimed the profits of a new economy, while at the same time tried to prevent it.

In that future come a great drive to reduce consumption, increase savings, increase exports, globalize opportunity for all and not just for some, and create a very different system of work. But that is another day. Today's purpose is to say no to dictatorship, and to craft a counter which is yes to insurance and accountability.
Click through to read the whole post. It’s very informative, and not so wonky that a person like me, who hated studying economics, can’t get the gist of it.—Caro

Newsweek: America is a center-right country (County Fair, Media Matters for America)
And that for "40 years, Democrats have been mostly out of stop with the nation."… So for all those years in the last four decades when Democrats controlled Congress (and often the White House) they were out of step with the country? And when Democrats threw out the Republican majority in recent years, they were out of step?

Also note that Newsweek's Jonathan Darman, in making his case, does not point to a single poll or survey result to back up his claim that America is a center-right claim. We're not surprised. Because as a Media Matters study indicated, the relevant polling data suggests just the opposite; that across the board Americans side with a Democratic, or liberal agenda, in terms of big government, gun control laws, gay rights, abortion rights, tax cuts and foreign policy.
I’m going to pound this and pound this and pound this until somebody finds me dead with my head on my keyboard or until somebody listens.

DEMOCRATS DON’T BUILD THEIR BRAND OVER THE LONG TERM.

Not only that, even many in the Democratic leadership seem to have fallen for much of the right-wing propaganda that right wingers HAVE been propagating over the last 40 plus years. America is a center-left country, but the left isn’t informing Americans that’s what it is, so in the absence of a contrary message, many folks, highly paid Newsweek commentators included, just accept what they DO hear—from the right.—Caro

Click here for more political and media news headlines.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

0
No votes yet

Comments

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

-by Clinton guy Galston at Democratic Strategist (maybe this was posted before? it's more great advice that will be ignored)

"...Fourth: your stump speech is too long and discursive. It shouldn’t last more than fifteen minutes, it should focus on your agenda, not today’s news story, it should feature short, declarative sentences, and it should leave no doubt about what you care about the most. Right now, regrettably, few Americans believe that you feel real passion about their economic plight and are willing to wage a tough fight on their behalf. It’s your job to convince them otherwise, and you don’t have much time to do it.

A message is a thought not only sent, but also received and understood. If your hearers aren’t getting it, it’s not a message. The essence of political speech is functional, not aesthetic. It is a tree judged by its fruit, and the fruit is persuasion. Right now you’re not persuading the people you need to persuade, and nothing else matters.

Fifth: there’s no coordination between an economic message and the rest of your campaign. ..." -- http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/s...

Submitted by jawbone on

reality? From commenter a different chris (comment #8--the link at #9 is to an eyeopener) at Moon of AL:

[Earlier comment]me thinks this plan has been in existence since 2006 when the derivatives beast first began to show signs of trouble?

My even more pissed-off take is that the many smart (if immoral) people on Wall Street realized almost 10 years ago that the whole thing was a Ponzi scheme, and the only way to keep it going was to find more suckers to fill out the bottom of the pyramid.

Hence the entire bullshit-filled egg about Social Security needing to be privatized was hatched. They didn't believe all the crap they were spouting any more than the people here, you don't need to work through Dean Baker's math to grok that (paraphrasing) "If the economy is OK, SS will be fine, if it isn't, the stock market certainly won't be either".

They just wanted that 15% of payroll to be driven into their pyramid. As soon as possible - why else was there such an "emergency" to fix something that was based on hazy projections of 50 years in the future?

Now in 2006 the SS thing not only failed, it was followed up by a Democratic Party landslide victory. So much for that revenue stream.

Now, without that and the Cheney regime coming to an end, they have thrown a Hail Mary pass - a blatant application of the Shock Doctrine.

Shorter different chris: they fully expected the derivative beast to eventually act up, what they didn't expect was their abject failure in getting their hands in the SS till.

Posted by: a different chris | Sep 23, 2008 12:54:04 PM | 8

Hhhmmmm--When did things start unraveling? Perhaps not getting the SocSec vig was a factor??

Bernhard also lists articles which have predicting this very mess in another post.

There's also a link to a new Bilmon post! At DKos, so fair warning.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Wait until there's a "crisis" before you act so that people don't have time to think or react in any manner but to go along.

Swift Loris's picture
Submitted by Swift Loris on

"For at least a month, Mr. Paulson and Treasury officials had discussed the option of jump-starting markets by having the government absorb the rotten assets -- mainly financial instruments tied to subprime mortgages -- at the heart of the crisis. The concept, dubbed Balance Sheet Relief, was seen at Treasury as a blunt instrument, something to be used in only the direst of circumstances."

http://tinyurl.com/5yfhlm

So it's not really new, and it hasn't exactly been "hidden."

Swift Loris's picture
Submitted by Swift Loris on

sitting on it hasn't been hidden since that WSJ article from September 20. The paragraph I quoted is the third in the piece.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

"... Obama did not say decisively if he will support the current proposal in Congress if it doesn't include the provisions he has laid out.

"The principles I outlined are principles I believe any package needs to contain for me to support it. And there are a number of ways of accomplishing it," he said, arguing that if the plan does not include his principals then he will recommend Paulson to go back to the rework another proposal.

...

Obama –- who is huddling with his advisors in Tampa for three days of debate preparation -- said that he will only come back to Washington to vote for the bill if it’s a close vote. ..." -- http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/...

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Bad optics if McCain shows up. Of course, this is a campaign being waged by two poltical cowards, so they might both skip it.

And what would that say - we get to choose between two guys who can't bother to show up to vote on probably the most important piece of legislation since the AUMF. Leadership, schmeadership.

lambert's picture
Submitted by lambert on

Sheesh. What, he doesn't want to be photographed where the dirty deed is being done?

[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

"... "I'm glad he has people that love him that much, but those are not the people that hold this election," he said. "In other words, he needs to get the votes of the people who voted for Hillary or independents who didn't even vote."
...

"We already got all the people that love us on this side, we got to get some others."

..." -- http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0...

Submitted by gob on

"The purpose of this election is to win; we need to do what gets votes. We already got all the people that love us on this side, we got to get some others. We got to love them, not expect them to love us."

So nobody listens to me (whine) but maybe you'll listen to Bill? Or does he have to do the Palin Palin Palin Palin thing before he has any credibility?

Policy not party!