REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
DEAR AMERICAN:
I NEED TO ASK YOU TO SUPPORT AN URGENT SECRET BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH A TRANSFER OF FUNDS OF GREAT MAGNITUDE.
I AM MINISTRY OF THE TREASURY OF THE REPUBLIC OF AMERICA. MY COUNTRY HAS HAD CRISIS THAT HAS CAUSED THE NEED FOR LARGE TRANSFER OF FUNDS OF 800 BILLION DOLLARS US. IF YOU WOULD ASSIST ME IN THIS TRANSFER, IT WOULD BE MOST PROFITABLE TO YOU.
. . . . . . . . . . .
THIS IS A MATTER OF GREAT URGENCY . . . . WE NEED THE FUNDS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. WE CANNOT DIRECTLY TRANSFER THESE FUNDS IN THE NAMES OF OUR CLOSE FRIENDS BECAUSE WE ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER SURVEILLANCE. MY FAMILY LAWYER ADVISED ME THAT I SHOULD LOOK FOR A RELIABLE AND TRUSTWORTHY PERSON WHO WILL ACT AS A NEXT OF KIN SO THE FUNDS CAN BE TRANSFERRED.
PLEASE REPLY WITH ALL OF YOUR BANK ACCOUNT, IRA AND COLLEGE FUND ACCOUNT NUMBERS AND THOSE OF YOUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN TO WALLSTREETBAILOUT@TREASURY.GOV SO THAT WE MAY TRANSFER YOUR COMMISSION FOR THIS TRANSACTION. AFTER I RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION, I WILL RESPOND WITH DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT SAFEGUARDS THAT WILL BE USED TO PROTECT THE FUNDS.
The question . . . really isnÂ’t about reforming Wall Street, but instead reforming Washington. This crisis started because of government interference in lending markets, and it will repeat until government learns to stop dictating lending policy and avoid guaranteeing lenders.
Which campaign truly gets the problem? We probably wonÂ’t guess it from the spots they produce over the next few days, so McCain and Sarah Palin will have to make sure they make it part of their stump speeches. McCain got it right in his two . . . essays, and he needs to keep explaining it on the campaign trail.
Fannie and Freddie are the poster children for a lack of transparency and accountability. Fannie Mae employees deliberately manipulated financial reports to trigger bonuses for senior executives. Freddie Mac manipulated its earnings by $5-billion. They've misled us about their accounting, and now they are endangering financial markets. More than two years ago, I said: "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose." Fannie and Freddie's lobbyists succeeded; Congress failed to act. They've stayed in business, grown, and profited mightily by showering money on lobbyists and favors on the Washington establishment. Now the bill has come due.
What should be done? We are stuck with the reality that they have grown so large that we must support Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac through the current rough spell. But if a dime of taxpayer money ends up being directly invested, the management and the board should immediately be replaced, multimillion dollar salaries should be cut, and bonuses and other compensation should be eliminated. They should cease all lobbying activities and drop all payments to outside lobbyists. And taxpayers should be first in line for any repayments.
Even with those terms, sticking Main Street Americans with Wall Street's bill is a shame on Washington. If elected, I'll continue my crusade for the right reform of the institutions: making them go away.
1
I like the idea of salary caps on executives!
And for the large institutions on whom millions depend, and whose failure affects the very lives of all Americans, greater government supervision and control for the benefit of taxpayers and society....
Now, if we can just apply the same principles to health care, we'll really have something!
;-)
Posted by: rin at September 16, 2008 03:53 PM (RcTyt)
Monday, Bloody Monday.
I'm not an economist; I got nothin'.
Except to get the government out of the way.
And maybe do some drillin'.*
There is the McCann-centric plan for fixing the economy, of course: hire yourselves a quality cartoon writer, or a terrific copyeditor/proofreader/fact-checker!
* And all the rest: flex-fuel cars, biofuels, clean coal, natural gas, some wind, a little solar. Some French-style nuclear power. But also . . . lots of drillin'.
1
Well, Rin--I think these public-private partnerships have to be done correctly, rather than by subsidizing the taking of untenable risks.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were encouraging the writing of unwise loans.
How can you take a badly managed public-private partnership in which capitalism wasn't permitted to work correctly, and then use it as an indictment of unchecked capitalism?
Posted by: Attila Girl at September 16, 2008 10:01 AM (TpmQk)
2
So the Democrats wanted "a million Mogadishus" in the War on Terrorism, and the MSM's co-operation to paint that picture. Just as they wanted the same on the war on the US economy that started in January 2008 with 24/7 with doom-and-gloom stories. "We don't just report it, we make it happen." (Fluffy wants you to go to newsbusters and find the link)
OK, Azmat, I will stipulate that the Dems want the worst for the US in their quest for the acquisition of power. You don't have to convince me. They started the "talk down the economy" campaign in Dec. 2001 when the rest of America was dealing with 9/11, and just when the economy was settling down and experiencing some growth. They wanted to make some hay for the coming midterms. They even had a secret meeting where the MSM bigshots were there as participants(Aspen). Wonder if they cleaned out their stock portfolios beforehand because they knew what was coming? We'll never know. The MSM didn't bother to check. The rest of us average Americans took a bath on our retirement nest eggs. Who knew that kicking us in the balls was how the Democrats plan to look out for the common man?
Posted by: Darrell at September 16, 2008 01:25 PM (3fov+)
3
Here's the thing, Azmat. Companies are out to make a buck. Yes, they will look after their employees' welfare to some degree. Yes, they will maintain financial reserves to tide them over. Yes, they are out o safeguard the interests of their stakeholders. Yes, they aim to become better corporate citizens - but the underlying drive for all private enterprise is to survive and thrive. Same as with all of us organic people.
The world still runs on a barter economy, do you realise that? The only thing is, we have abstracted it over by agreeing (mostly) to a shared, common means of exchange - money. Strangely enough, this makes money a commodity and a trade item. We are buying and selling money, all of us. I buy money by selling my skills and services. I sell money by buying goods and services.
How, then, do financial institutions make money? Primarily, they make money by buying the use of our money with a promise to keep it safe and maybe add a little bit to it when we want it, and then turning around and selling it for even more money. This sale is time-bound; I'm selling the use of $300,000 now in exchange for $600,000 over the next 30 years. We normally call these mortgages or loans.
Here's the thing. When I sell something for an immediate consideration, my risks are fairly low, because I get the exchange done there and then. But in the case of a loan, I don't. And in order to make money, I have make sure that whoever buys the use of that 300k can actually pay for it over that period of time. This is called credit risk management - both risk assessment, and risk control.
Companies are out to make money. In a totally free market, this usually results in the rich being offered even more money (because the companies are fairly confident they can afford to buy the 300k), and the poor are not (because the companies are not confident). Hence, no meltdown is likely to occur. You will have those who are willing to cater to the needs of the less rich - but in order to take on the higher risks, higher rewards are anticipated. We call them loan sharks. Or credit card companies, same thing.
What you had happen in the US was the simultaneous pressure of Congress requiring financial institutions disregard standard risk procedures in order to lend money to people who could never afford to service the loans, and the perceived removal of the underlying risks through implied government underwriting.* This created a moral hazard of incredible proportions, and now you are reaping the whirlwind.
But make no mistake; this is not caused by hedge fund managers, or speculators, or whatever. This was caused by Big Government, the kind put in place by Democrats, and sadly, seemingly supported by many RINOs.
*An example; when I was undergoing a camp, one of the things I had to do was demonstrate trust in my team by falling straight off a table into their outstretched hands. Perfect example of being required to disregard risk assessment guidelines, but with an implicit guarantee and removal of risk.
Of course the bitch who was supposed to catch my head failed to do so, causing me to see stars for a bit. I may even have lost a couple of seconds. I didn't even get to fuck her up nicely (or any other way). I don't think the big players are cracking their heads open on concrete yet, but surely it's gotta be hurting.
/yeah, I had to do it again. Did it perfectly this time round.
//You wanna trust the govt not to ass-rape you again, Azmat? I'm not so trusting the THIRD time round.
Posted by: Gregory at September 19, 2008 10:33 AM (6EETi)
