About Me

Name: ML Smith
Email: smthmort@gmail.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Blog Roll

 

Stimulus or Socialism

Posted by ML Smith on Saturday, February 14, 2009 4:17:42 PM
There is only so much reading between the lines that one can do before coming to the conclusion that America is taking socialism for a test drive. For all practical purposes, the government is now the new owner of 359 banking institutions across the country, and more will be added to the list as other institutions fail and request stimulus support. By taking control of the bonus and salary structure of the 359 banks slated to receive stimulus money, the government is the de facto owner - calling the shots previously the domain of CEO's and corporate boards of trustees. Salary caps and bonuses are now the province of the federal government, and if it makes it easier for you to swallow, call it federalization...the end result is still the same.

Is this a good thing? It depends on your perspective. Some argue that the stimulus program is simply a federalized act of philanthropy designed to boost the economy back into orbit and prevent the domino effect that is sure to follow as smaller institutions beg the royal court for help.
Others, argue that every word in the stimulus bill smacks of socialism, simply by virtue of the transfer of power to the government.

The bill approved by Congress is comprehensive and quite clear on this transfer of power; federally monitored salary and bonus caps send a mighty strong message and it goes something like this: "If we give you assistance, you are beholden to us for all of your financial decision making." If you don't think that means total control, think again because financial decisions are at the core of operations for the banking industry.

While the stimulus plan is socialistic in concept and implementation, the question left un-answered is "How will this affect stockholders who hold shares in federally controlled enterprises?" The possibilities are disturbing at best and catastrophic at worst. Perhaps we need an Economic Sedative Package as well.

I do not believe that socialism is a real issue here - unbridled greed is the issue we must deal with and unfortunately, the stimulus package fails to address the enormity of white collar crime that has gotten us into this mess to begin with. The plan avoids the facts, thereby making it possible for greedy investors to capitalize on the misfortune of others. Remember, this plan was figuratively formulated overnight and as such it has loopholes...some of them big enough to accommodate a fleet of Brinks and Wells Fargo trucks.

The real test is yet to come when greed surfaces as it always does - where the money is. When the people's money supply is vulnerable to tampering, something far worse than federalized control of banking is at stake and it can be identified now because it is already happening...people are losing trust in the banking industry as a whole and nearly half the country distrusts this plan and the man behind it. If the people lose all trust and panic, the entire system (which is only a house of cards anyway) crashes, and all the King's men won't be able to put that back together again.

Socialism? Does it matter, really? We are now witnessing Humpty Dumpty economic policy. Weren't we told long ago to stay off that wall?
 
***ML Smith is a freelance columnist in Poughkeepsie, N.Y. His work, which includes political commentary/satire is widely published on the web***at http://ml-Smith.blogspot.com and http://inhumanityandinhumanity.blogspot.com  as well as......................
             http://smithworld.blogtownhall.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Drugs?

Posted by ML Smith on Monday, February 09, 2009 4:52:42 PM
People don't forget things saved as Euphoric Recall. Alex Rodriguez gets my vote for Stupidity of the Month; his attempt to camouflage Inbox memory as Spam is ludicrous. He says he doesn't know what drugs he takes, which means one or both of two things:
 
[1] He is using something mighty potent. You don't go into a complete stupor on Vicodin, and if he can't remember what he takes somebody out there is going to remember it for him. I will say this - there have been times when I have noticed his eyes were pinned. I'm not going to speculate, but maybe 72 hours without will be revealing - withdrawal is pretty obvious.
 
If you read between the lines you are likely to conclude that he's setting the stage for the skeleton pounding on his closet door. Something is coming out, that's for sure. Alex is a lousy liar - if he had any sense at all he would have spoken with Bill Clinton before dredging up a blank dating back to 2003. I have always admired Bill for his ability to tell a bold faced lie and skate...with a smile, no less. Alex has his tail between his legs already and the guilty "doggie" expression on his face doesn't help. It won't be long before someone sniffs it out and I'm willing to bet that the odor comes from the funky department. You know, don't you? It's two aisles down from "Don't forget to tuck your shirt in, Elliot."
 
[2] If it's not number one, get ready for the stench. Alex isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I didn't figure him for a complete moron. Now, I suppose it's time to re-evaluate - what price is Alex willing to pay for admission? Ambiguity costs nothing but the truth...well...did I ever tell you about my buddie, a full blooded Sioux named Jerry Horses-Hit? Of course his name is hyphenated. Semantically speaking, Alec's-Rod-Reeks isn't too far off the mark. He is, after all, quite prolific...even in baseball.
 
So - is it number one or number two? Both, you say? I'm down with that; it usually comes out that way, but we do need to keep it in  perspective. Where else can we put it? Okay, I'll admit I'm being a bit malicious with my little word-play game, but he started it! The real deal is this - I don't give a damn. I wouldn't give a nickel. How much money does he make? Enough that he doesn't give a damn either? That must be it...I can't think of any rational reason for this circus trapeze act.
 
Alex, take some aspirin and call us in the morning. What? What's that you say? You might not remember? We'll give you a hint. Think about what you forgot and you'll remember.
 
ML Smith at http://blogtownhall.com      
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Stimulate This, Obama

Posted by ML Smith on Tuesday, February 03, 2009 5:48:24 PM

Ellen Brown, economic theorist and author of Web of Debt is not optimistic about the approach being taken to right our failing economy. While her theories contrast sharply with conventional thinking on the issue of money in general, her opinions bear noting. Web of Debt is a legitimate and logical debunking of myths about money. According to Brown, "Our money system is not what we have been led to believe. The creation of money has been privatized; taken over by a private money cartel. Except for coins, all of our money is now created as loans advanced by private banking institutions - including the 'private' Federal Reserve. Banks create the principal but not the interest to service their loans. To find the interest, new loans must continually be taken out, expanding the money supply, inflating prices - and robbing people of the value of their money."

 

Brown theorizes that "virtually all of the money supply is created privately by a mere handful of large banking institutions that have introduced a massive investment scheme known as "derivatives," which now tallies in at hundreds of trillions of dollars." The system has been manipulated so that the big banks are "always bailed out by the taxpayers when their high risk ventures fail." However, the derivatives market is reaching its mathematical limits. There isn't enough money in the entire global economy to bail out the banks from a massive derivatives default. When investors realize that the "insurance" against catastrophe that they have purchased in the form of derivatives may become worthless, they are likely to bail out en masse, "bringing the whole shaky edifice crashing down."

Brown's take on the Economic Stimulus Plan is not optimistic. "I don't think it will work. We'll be underwriting a quadrillion dollars in toxic derivatives debt."

Web of Debt was published in 2007. While Ellen Brown's theories are not embraced by Federal Reserve or Treasury officials, her predicted scenario for collapse is now reality. Whether or not there will be eventual reform of our monetary system and the derivatives market is a question that will hang in the balance for the time being, as Americans and global investors hope for the best in what is currently a frightening situation.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »