Do you really think that after all this shakes out that people are going to end up with what they deserve? And what do they deserve?

Certainly people who only live for money and the things it can by are very pathetic people. But do you think that in the end that such people are going to be deprived of their money? I think that on the contrary, it is those people, the talented among them anyway, who are likely to end up with more money than anyone. After all, that is their priority, and if they go for that before anything else then why would they not be more likely to get it? That does not mean that they are likely to be happy.

Some will lose out, and will lose out big time. But a lot of them will end up just fine, by the measure of money.

And is there a certain point where someone would have too much money? What would that point be? Would that be my neighbors who live in huge houses across the street? Would that be me and those like me who cannot afford more than our nice little townhouses in our good neighborhood in Fairfax County? Would that be my middle class inlaws in Colombia, who have TVs and cars, and some have computers, but who don't have clothes dryers and dishwashers? Or would that be those who live in the slums of South Bogota, who still have more than most of the rural poor of Colombia?

What is the point where people have too much, and why would we expect the economy, in all of its wisdom, to eventually send people to that point?

I don't know, Arneoker ....

I hadn't thought of it, actually ....

And you try and define this "thing" as if it could be simply defined ....

HAS THERE EVER BEEN A MOMENT IN HISTORY WHERE THINGS SHAKE OUT AND PEOPLE END UP WITH WHAT THEY DESERVE?

How about Sodom and Gomorrah?

Or Jerico?

Or Babylon?

Or the French Revolution when the tumbrills were rolling?

Did Robes-Pierre get what he deserved?

How about Marie-Antoinette?

And so ....

I haven't a clue, Arneoker ....

I'm not their judge ....

And so ....

Would there?

What is "too much", Arneoker?

And who gets to be the arbiter of that?

Did Midas have too much money?

Or Croesus?

What about Crassus, the Consul of Rome who was a part of the FIRST TRIUMVERATE?

He was said to be the richest man in Rome back then ....

Did you know that?

Did he have too much money?

Or not enough?

Do you know how he died, Arneoker?

The Parthians surrounded him and his army and they annihilated them, after mocking Crassus ....

I guess they really didn't give much of a damn about all of Crassus' money .....

And a fat lot of good it did him in the end ....

And so ....

On Fri, 12/19/08, Don Stacey wrote: Wall Street Coup-D'etat
Posted at indexcalls.com:

http://news.goldseek.com/TrendInvestor/12293596...

The Bailouts now stand at $8.5 trillion Dollars and the vast majority
of this money has been stolen by the Wall Street insiders,
as I will now demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt.

The Bailout money will be financed in three ways

1. More taxation.

2. Sale of new debt, to be added to the existing $10.6 trillion Dollars of debt.

3. The money will simply be printed therefore devaluing
the purchasing power of all your existing Dollars.

So you will be taxed more,
and you will have to suffer poorer government services.
As far more of the government’s income via taxation is used
to pay the interest on all the existing and new debt,
and finally your Dollars will buy a lot less.

That is the future, and it is the future because the vast majority
of the $8.5 trillion Dollars of bailout money has simply been stolen.

We were originally told that the whole problem was
a sub prime mortgage problem. Unfortunately this is a LIE.

The amount of ALL Sub-Prime Mortgages

in America is $1.3 trillion Dollars.

But the bailouts are already $8.5 trillion Dollars and growing daily.
Why do you need $8.5 trillion to fix a $1.3 trillion problem?

And that’s assuming that everybody with a sub prime mortgage
goes into foreclosure and that the foreclosure sale proceeds
are precisely zero, not exactly a likely outcome.

So lets look at it another way the total value of all residential mortgages
in the USA prime, ALT A , and Subprime as of August 2008
according to the Federal Reserve is $10.6 trillion Dollars
THAT IS EVERY MORTGAGE IN AMERICA.

According to the Mortgage Bankers Association at this same time
9.2% of all mortgages were either delinquent or in foreclosure.
So let’s assume that 100% of all these mortgages eventually
go into foreclosure and that at auction the total proceeds
for the foreclosure sales are zero.
I am sure you will agree this is once again a highly unlikely outcome!

$10.6 trillion X 9.2% = $975 Billion Dollars

So a total of $975 Billlion Dollars would be required as an absolute
maximum to bail out every single foreclosed mortgage in America.

So why do we have an $8.5 trillion Dollar solution

to solve a $975 Billion Dollar problem?

If you buy a futures contract you can either buy it
LONG or SHORT.
If you are LONG you believe that the price
of the underlying asset will rise,
if you are SHORT you feel that it will fall.

It is a zero sum game somebody wins and somebody loses.
If the winner wins $1000 then he takes this $1000 from the loser.
The amount of contracts outstanding or open interest is always in balance.
All transactions and trades take place within a regulated and transparent exchange.

OTC derivative contracts are basically the same as regulated futures contracts.
They are also zero sum, BUT they do not take place within an exchange.
So they are not regulated and they are not transparent.

What has happened is that a band of insiders have taken such huge
OTC derivative bets that they have been able to push the markets,
so that many of these OTC derivative contracts have triggered.

Because the amount of leverage used or the notional value
of these contracts is so high it takes very little movement
for the outsiders to become insolvent, it is leverage gone mad.

The Insiders knew that this would happen,
but they also knew that the Government
would not allow this corrupt system to fail.

Hence the $8.5 trillion Dollars of bailouts, this money is simply
being transferred or funnelled from the taxpayers to a select band
of Wall Street insiders. Remember it is a zero sum game
the outsiders Bear Stearns, Wachovia, Citigroup LOST
but somebody gained an equivalent amount.
As Gordon Gecko stated in the film Wall Street.

“Money is not lost

that’s the illusion,

it is simply transferred”

The Politicians and media go on, and on, about how
this is necessary to save the system, too big to fail, etc, etc.

It is all rubbish they are nothing more than paid salesman for the bankers,
it is a Government of the few and only for the few.
The banks had huge unregulated bets amongst themselves
and all kept in secret, the outsiders inevitably lost,
and your money is now being funnelled directly to the bet winners.

It is theft pure and simple.

If you take a bet with somebody and you win
BUT the loser cannot pay
then that bet is worthless,
and it dies.

Why should American taxpayers pay for these failed bets? Surely
the insiders had completed their “due diligence” on the counterparty risk?
The reality was that they had not because they knew they would win,
and they also knew that the government would pay the winnings
via the taxpayer.

What people cannot accept is that America is in no way, shape,
or form a democracy, and neither is any other western country.

The politicians are bought and paid for, as are the media.
With the Mcain Vs Obama election you had a simple choice
you were voting for the bankers man
or the bankers other man,
the outcome will be the same it always will be in a bank oligarchy. .

You think I maybe wrong?
Then I leave you with a very sobering thought.

$8.5 Trillion Dollars would buy exactly 80% of all the mortgages
outstanding in America. So imagine for the same money
that your government or is it the bankers government?
have already given to the bankers they could have instead
sent you a cheque for 80% of your outstanding mortgage,
that would be some Christmas present.

Instead they decided to send
all of this money, YOUR MONEY
to a select band of Wall Street insiders.

If your mortgage was now 80% paid off, would it not provide
quite a “stimulus” for the real economy? And it would not cost
$1 more than what they have already committed to the bankers.

It is an $8.5 Trillion Dollar and growing daily,
solution to a $975 Billion Dollar problem.
The surplus has simply been “transferred”.

It begs the question,
why is the Government paying off

the gambling bets of Wall Street?

These bets had no purpose, they added no value, and provided
no jobs they were simply symptomatic of the unregulated
and opaque casino that wall street has unfortunately become.

This again is a matter of deliberate policy
otherwise the thieves will be identified.
Let them fail, if 80% of all the outstanding mortgages were paid,
we would not need much of a credit or finance industry.
New start banks and foreign banks could easily provide this facility.

So I leave you with one thought this Christmas.
The bailouts if redirected could pay
80% of every mortgage in America INCLUDING YOURS.

Ironic that a few bankers
have engineered
the biggest robbery in history

Oh Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy! Kissinger and his croonies are going to save us!! I know you are all sooooooooooo surprised to hear that 'they' have a solution to the financial crisis they invented!

I can relax and have a Merry Christmas, now :-)

***************************************************

Kissinger Calls For New International System Out Of World Crises
Steve Watson

(snip)
Bilderberg luminary Henry Kissinger has repeated his routine call for a new international political order, stating that global crises should be seen as an opportunity to move toward a borderless world where national interests are outweighed by global necessities.

Speaking with Charlie Rose earlier this week, Kissinger cited the chaos being wrought across the globe by the financial crisis and the spread of terrorism as an opportunity to bolster a new global order.

(snip)
Interviewer Charlie Rose, who has previously listened to Kissinger’s calls for a new world order, recognized the direction the conversation was taking and urged Kissinger to elaborate:

“When you talk about a new structure, I’m not sure, you’ve used the term new world order, what is it? Is it simply a world order that is defined by new interest and new mutuality of interest?” Rose asked.

“That’s certainly how you have to start. I know the view that you start by converting the whole world to our political philosophy. I don’t think that can be done in one or two terms of an administration. That is an historic process that has its own rhythm.” Kissinger replied.

“There are so many elements in this world at the moment that can only be dealt with on a global basis, and that’s unique,” Kissinger continued. “Proliferation, energy, environment, All of these issues necessitate a global approach, so you don’t have to invent an international order. So every country has to mitigate its pure national interests by the global necessities, or define it’s national interests by global necessities But it cannot push its own technically selfish interests only by throwing its own weight around.” he stated.

More of the article and a video, of the interview, can be seen at the link below:


[/font][font="Arial"]KISSINGER

BUT .....

Nonetheless ....

IT IS NOT LOOTING, folks .....

IT IS GOOD AND BENEVOLENT GOVERNMENT IN ACTION ....

And so ....

Arneoker ....

What can I say besides that ....

Arneoker, over and over and over again ....

"Ah, Arneoker ..."

This reminds me of a Fleetwood Mac album cover from back when which had an old man on the cover of it trying to make sense out of something to an ape ....

And I'll let you be the old man, Arneoker, so you don't think that I am disrespecting you in here this morning ...

I'll be the confused ape ....

In the now apparently outmoded and discredited MISSION STATEMENT for this forum, it states as follows:

We all share a spirit of Democracy, love of Liberty, and pride in our patriotic history.

Every American is united in their quest for economic security, their desire for a cleaner environment, good schools for this nation’s children, more affordable healthcare for all – and of course, freedom and justice.

end quotes

BUT IS THAT REALLY TRUE, Arneoker?

Is any of that true?

Do we have ECONOMIC SECURITY here in America?

I would say on behalf of a lot of Americans - HELL NO ....

And that is really a part of what this thread is about, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, anyway ....

And what about OUR HISTORY, Arneoker?

How it was we got to here?

Does Pocock have it wrong here, then?

"The Whig canon and the neo-Harringtonians, John Milton, James Harrington and Sidney, Trenchard, Gordon and Bolingbroke, together with the Greek, Roman, and Renaissance masters of the tradition as far as Montesquieu, formed the authoritative literature of this culture;

and its values and concepts were those with which we have grown familiar:

a civic and patriot ideal in which the personality was founded in property, perfected in citizenship but perpetually threatened by corruption;

government figuring paradoxically as the principal source of corruption and operating through such means as patronage, faction, standing armies (opposed to the ideal of the militia), established churches (opposed to the Puritan and deist modes of American religion) and the promotion of a monied interest

—though the formulation of this last concept was somewhat hindered by the keen desire for readily available paper credit common in colonies of settlement."

end quotes

CORRUPTION = PROMOTION OF A MONIED INTEREST .....

And so ...

But, don't forget the B Team's mission to build a replacement System...As in a Love Relationship,
a little bit of Good wipes out a bunch of Bad...

"Economic Security" is an oxymoron.

Giving away my goodies and even letting them be stolen has tended to be my vocation in doing Operations Research and Organizational Training over the years in the Disability and Independent
Living, State-Federal Programs, as a third party, University-sponsored R & T Center service provider:1978 -Retired 1995. Present employment...House Boy and Stable Boy.

Maybe I got artistic and made it up? I don't remember...it should be included in the Model Building Thread...

Goggle: Love as Verb Facilitates Self-maintenance and Growth I was pleasantly surprized...

Property is slavery, Snuf ....

People better accept that which they think they have done for themselves, rla ....

Am I the only Jungian in here, rla?

I thought that you would be all over poor Arneoker's conundrum in here in a flash ....

I'm always curious about MASS PSYCHOSES, and SYNCHRONICITY, rla ....

In my estimation, the NOW COLLAPSED AMERICAN ECONOMY was based on MASS PSYCHOSES ....

If Karl Gustav Jung were here now, he would find these to be incredibly fascinating times, indeed ...

Would you and he get along, do you think, rla?

Or would you be down each other's throat?

Anyway, getting back on topic - THE POINT IS ....

HAS AMERICA BEEN SCARED STRAIGHT EN MASSE vis-a-vis their lifestyle habits, which in turn affect their fiscal practices ...

Will the American people en masse turn FRUGAL?

There is something Arneoker's economic model completely discounts ....

Arneoker's model assumes that a mouse that has been caught in a trap and has managed to escape, will only turn around and run right back to the same trap once it has been reset ....

I think that humans might be smarter than that, BUT .....

Arneoker could be right ....

I leave room for that distinct possibility ....

Human being may in fact be dumber than mice in that regard ....

In which case, Arneoker's economic model is FAR SUPERIOR to mine ....

And so ....

Isn't scientific method just wonderful?

And so ...

"Did Bernard Madoff act alone? Investors doubt it, investigators look for accomplices"
By DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press

Last updated: 7:15 p.m., Thursday, December 18, 2008

NEW YORK -- Bernard Madoff's contention that he pulled off one of the biggest financial frauds in history without any help is being met with disbelief by his investors and experts in the securities industry.

It normally takes a team of accountants, stock brokers, lawyers and more to operate the kind of multibillion-dollar investment fund that Madoff ran from the 17th floor of his Park Avenue headquarters.

The firm had clients around the globe.

Simply generating the detailed financial statements investors got in the mail every month would have been a monumental effort for just one person, observers said, even if those reports were pure fantasy.

"Someone had to create them."

"Someone had to create the appearance that there were returns," said attorney Harry Susman, who represents several Madoff investors.

"The guy was 70 years old."

"Could he have done it himself?"

"The computer systems would have needed to be extensive."

"Supposedly, he's selling puts, buying puts, selling calls, buying stocks."

"Somebody had to sit there and buy stocks."

"Where are these people?"

Federal investigators are still in the early stages of trying to answer those same questions as they decipher Madoff's operation.

Already, they have discovered multiple sets of books and what appear to be fraudulent documents in his Manhattan offices, raising the question of who prepared them.

It may take time before they can say whether he had accomplices.

Investigators have started serving grand jury subpoenas requiring witnesses to testify and seeking documents, according to an official familiar with the case.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, declined to identify who was served or specify what documents were wanted.

The investigation has been unfolding in a Manhattan office that was once Madoff's sanctuary but is now the site of a nonstop hunt for incriminating documents, with boxes of confiscated records stacked in the hallway.

"Every time I go out my office door to go to the ladies' room I've been tripping over FBI agents," said Muriel "Mickie" Siebert, whose namesake brokerage firm shares the 17th floor of the office building.

The investigation is being led by the FBI and Securities and Exchange Commission -- agencies already challenged with unearthing other financial scandals since the Wall Street meltdown.

One potential subject of the inquiry is the role played by Frank DiPascali, a top financial officer at Madoff's investment advisory business.

Several investors, their lawyers and a former Madoff employee who spoke to The Associated Press described DiPascali, of Bridgewater, N.J., as the man who appeared to be most responsible for the day-to-day operations of the business.

When clients had questions about the firm's investment strategy or its performance, DiPascali was the one who got on the phone.

If they wanted to add or subtract money from their accounts, DiPascali made the arrangements and distributed the checks.

Authorities haven't publicly accused DiPascali of any wrongdoing.

His attorney, Marc Mukasey, on Thursday declined to discuss his client's role or say whether he became aware of the fraud prior to Madoff's arrest.

"We are sitting with our client and reviewing his career at Madoff and his duties and responsibilities," said Mukasey, the son of the attorney general.

"I understand that people are extremely frustrated and upset ..."

"We would love to see people get as much of their money back as possible."

Questions also loom about Madoff's auditor, Friehling & Horowitz, a relatively unknown accountant in the city's northern suburbs who appeared to operate from a one-room office with irregular business hours and a bare-bones staff.

Those audits apparently failed to detect the fraud, which Madoff told investigators was a Ponzi scheme that lost an estimated $50 billion.

The firm's principal, David G. Friehling, has not answered his telephone in days.

His attorney, Andrew Lankler, declined to comment Thursday.

Investigators were also expected to look at the potential involvement of several Madoff relatives who worked for his firm, including his brother, two sons and others who worked for his various business entities.

His wife has also come under scrutiny.

To date, however, they also have not been formally accused of any wrongdoing.

The law firm representing Madoff's sons, Andrew and Marc, released a statement saying they first learned of the fraud just days ago, when their father tearfully confessed, and immediately turned him in.

The two are said to have worked predominantly in another division of their father's company, not in the secretive unit that handled investor money.

By some accounts, Bernard Madoff appeared to take unusual steps to limit the number of people and outside companies that had a hand in running the business.

Much of the recruiting of new investors to his funds was done informally, by friends, or through a group of large, independently managed feeder funds, who also took most of the management fees for handling the investments.

They included the Fairfield Greenwich Group, which put all $7.3 billion of its Fairfield Sentry Fund in Madoff's hands.

It was unclear whether authorities were looking to see whether any of those funds, whose investors have emerged as some of Madoff's largest victims, may have been complicit in the scheme.

Each has claimed no knowledge that anything was amiss.

Usually, a fund like Madoff's would use an outside brokerage firm to complete its stock trades.

In his case, those duties -- if they actually occurred -- were apparently handled in-house.

He appeared not to have hired outside professional services firms to help calculate his performance or to produce electronic data for investors.

"He was still doing it the way you did it in the 1960s, with a paper ticket," said Suzanne Murphy, a hedge fund consultant who had examined Madoff's business two years ago before deciding not to invest in it.

"In most hedge funds, you have many partners in deals, but he was doing everything in a self-contained way," said Jake Walthour, head of advisory services for the due diligence firm Aksia LLC, which also examined Madoff's operation and decided something was wrong.

That lack of partners made it tough to verify that Madoff's business was really achieving good returns.

It may also reflect an effort to limit the number of possible accomplices.

------

Associated Press writer Tom Hays contributed to this report.

DID SOMEBODY SAY SOMETHING ABOUT ANOTHER BIG GUMMINT BAIL-OUT COMING HERE IN AMERICA?

EVERYBODY IN AMERICA WANTS A BAIL-OUT BY NOW ...

AND WHY NOT?

THE GUMMINT IS JUST ROLLING IN MONEY ....

THEY ARE GIVING IT AWAY BY THE TRILLIONS, ALREADY ...

SO WHY NOT A FEW TRILLION MORE ...

And so ...

"Madoff investors hope for bailout - Wiped out Madoff investors pray for bailout as SIPC money seen too small, too long to process"

By JOE BEL BRUNO, Associated Press

Last updated: 7:15 p.m., Thursday, December 18, 2008

NEW YORK -- One week ago, Ronnie Ambrosino was a millionaire.

Now, Ambrosino is among the long list of investors whose fortunes were allegedly wiped out by Bernard Madoff.

Like them, she's left hoping for a bailout that might never come.

She plans to sue Madoff but that could take years to work through the courts and yield little in the end.

Her best hope to recoup some of her money is from the Securities Investor Protection Corp., an industry-funded organization set up by the government to protect investors from fraud.

But, here's the problem: SIPC does not have enough money to pay out all the claims that are sure to come from one of the biggest fraud cases to ever hit Wall Street.

Securities attorneys say the organization has a reputation of being tough to squeeze money from, and each investor is only entitled to a maximum payout of $500,000 if a claim is approved.

SIPC officials say the books of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC are in complete disarray and could take six months or more to piece them together.

With bills piling up and her bank account vanishing, the one thing Ambrosino and others caught in the alleged $50 billion fraud don't have is time.

"It feels like I'm drowning, and someone is saying 'we're going to save you, but we have to build the boat first,'" said Ambrosino, 55, who had $1.6 million invested with Madoff.

"We can't wait for SIPC to go through all the papers."

The government created SIPC in 1970 to reimburse investors duped by brokerages in areas such as unauthorized trading or theft.

SIPC is set up to cover losses of up to $500,000, and $100,000 of that amount can be claims for cash holdings that were lost.

The scope of what SIPC covers, however, can be limited.

SIPC, for example, typically won't cover claims for cases involving stock manipulation or investments made into hedge funds.

Since its inception, SIPC has paid out $508 million to reimburse some 625,000 investors who lost money.

The Madoff case will be SIPC's biggest test, and experts are raising questions about whether the organization can handle the massive amount of claims that are expected.

Some experts suggest the government might have to assist.

"There's no doubt that hearings will be held on this, and some government aid is a very logical request," said Robert Schachter, an attorney with New York-based Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling, which is representing several Madoff victims.

"If we're bailing out Wall Street and the auto industry, maybe these individuals should be bailed out too."

Madoff was arrested last week and charged with securities fraud.

On Wednesday he appeared at the federal courthouse in Manhattan, where a judge imposed a curfew and a monitoring bracelet.

When the government established SIPC a generation ago, nation's brokerages were ordered to fund it by kicking in a percentage of their revenue.

Once the amount hit $1 billion in 1996, those brokerages were allowed to reduce their contribution to $150 a year.

Any changes now much be approved by Congress, SIPC said.

SIPC currently has $1.6 billion on hand to make payouts -- a small amount compared with the more than $17 billion that Madoff managed at the start of the year.

However, SIPC said it can tap a $1 billion line of credit and a $1 billion injection from the Treasury Department to gain access to more money.

This theoretically means that about 7,000 customers who entrusted their money to Madoff can receive the maximum amount.

It is still not known how many customers Madoff's investment arm had, and investigators have not speculated.

While brokerages often highlight the fact that they are covered by SIPC, securities attorneys say the process of recouping money can be daunting and time consuming.

"This is not going to be a full recovery, even if your claim is valid and proved," said J. Boyd Page, senior partner of Page Perry LLC, an Atlanta-based law firm that represents investors in securities fraud.

"They have taken a miserly approach to evaluating claims in the past."

"The process can be long and painful."

Investigators are poring over paperwork at Madoff's Manhattan office trying to identify exactly how many customers his brokerage operation had.

That could prove to be an arduous task, with SIPC President and Chief Executive Steve Harbeck describing Madoff's books as being "totally unreliable and in complete disarray."

Once the names are collected, SIPC and the court-appointed trustee in charge of liquidating the brokerage will send investors claim forms.

SIPC typically mails out generic claim forms to investors, but this will be the first time the organization sends paperwork that is specific to just one case.

Investors then have up to six months to return the claim forms, along with monthly statements and other documents that prove how much money they thought were in the accounts.

Approval of these documents gives the investors a preferred status when it comes time to split up assets left in Madoff's firm.

"It can take years," said Leo Asaro, partner in the St. Louis office of law firm Bryan Cave LLP.

"People need to think of other options, not waiting on these matters to wind their ways through the courts."

"It is not going to happen fast enough to get the relief that they need."

SIPC's Harbeck does not dispute filing a claim and getting reimbursed can be a long process.

In this case, investigators are being delayed because it is difficult to determine how much of Madoff's assets will be available, and what the size of the claims are.

He has received calls from many investors caught in the alleged scam who question why they can't recoup higher amounts.

Harbeck also deflected recent criticism that SIPC might not even have enough money to cover the amount of claims that might come in.

"It is way too early to speculate about the claims," he said.

"We don't know the number of customers, how much each is owed, and I don't want to be prematurely alarmist."

That's not exactly what angry investors like Ambrosino want to hear.

She used the money she thought was secure with Madoff to retire early, buy a luxury motor home, and travel around the country.

The only assets she has now are the pieces of furniture inside the motor home she's been making payments on for the past four years.

Now living in Surprise, Ariz., she felt helpless watching Madoff enter the court house Wednesday for a bail hearing.

Ambrosino, who invested in Madoff's firm some three decades ago, knows that others are in the same position.

"We need to get out there and get names and get unified so that we can go to the government and make our case," she said.

"Everybody has a horror story, everybody has bills, and everybody is devastated."

I'm in blissfull ignorance...

Liv
You forgot about the Pavlovian response to the scheme of things.
(That goes to whether humans are smarter than mice)

The Fear factor - is that Pavlovian?

People are downright scared when they are unemployed. And the US is facing very scary unemployment estimates.
For many, employment defines their self worth. Regardless of whether its right or wrong or stupid or smart, for many
you are what you do. Employment defines one's economic realities. Employment can also be the bedrock of certain marriages. The human suffering and misery among the ranks of the unemployed is rising. And it will make all estoeric discussions about scientific methods for predicting people's economic behavior meaningless. One thing is clear, the growing fear, frustration, anxiety, exasperation with government failures, corruption, and greed, make for an interesting recipe for rising insurrection and possible anarchy. This time, the US won't be immune. This time its global. Witness what is going on in Greece. Watch how the Chinese are responding to their growing concern about what happens when the entire manufacturing sector in China gets laid off due to fallen world demand. It won't be pretty. And what happens to individual rights and freedoms - that won't be pretty either.

Well, Snuf ....

I am betting against Arneoker's theory here .....

Although I have nothing concrete to base my bet on ....

This for us is largely uncharted territory in terms of human responses to the SENSORY STIMULI that we are now being bombarded with - THE WORLD IS ENDING, THE SKY IS FALLING, WALL STREET IS FAILING, MAIN STREET IS NEXT ....

I just talked with a young person that I know out in SF who is a consultant presently working for a large brokerage out there ....

He believes that right after New Years, his consultant service contract is going to be terminated ....

"OH, WELL!"

Time to hunker down and not get crazy ....

That is how he is responding to the possibility and probability .....

He is going to tighten up his belt even further, and do without more ....

All of what you say about people identifying their lives with their jobs is very true ....

I have been there, I know that there is truth in what you say ....

BUT NOT ABSOLUTE TRUTH ....

We have it in ourselves to be more than just our jobs ....

BUT WHAT?

Arneoker believes that based on some greatly outdated ideas of Keynes, Barack Obama can simply toss a TRILLION DOLLARS at the problem, and America will then return to being as it was yesterday .....

He says because I cannot articulate an alternative, outside of metaphors, that I don't have any meaningful solutions to offer him ....

And that is true ....

That is why "B-52 BEN" Bernanke is out there dropping BILLIONS of dollars in new money out of every helicopter in the world that he can find ....

I personally think, for a number of reasons, that WE, all of us, regardless, are in the midst of a GREAT REORDERING ...

How that will shake out, I cannot yet say, because all of the information needed to make further predictions does not yet exist ....

This "MADE-OFF-WITH-BILLIONS" dude, for example ....

The impacts-yet-to-be of that alone are not yet fully knowable ....

But I am betting that people are going to be greatly changed by this experience ....

And that in its turn will shape what form the future economy is going to be in, since economy and human psychology are inextricably intertwined ....

WILL PEOPLE BE LESS GREEDY TOMARROW?

Arneoker say no ....

WILL PEOPLE BE AS EASILY SCAMMED TOMARROW?

Arneoker seems to say yes ....

As for me, Snuf ....

I can't say that he is wrong ...

And so ....

An interesting thought, Snuf ....

But is it applicable here?

"Pavlonian" implies "conditioned response" ...

Ring a bell, and give a dog food ....

Ring a bell and give a dog food ....

Ring a bell, the dog drools in anticipation of a meal that might never come ....

Put an electric shocker on the dog's dish so that every time the dog begins to eat, it will get shocked ....

After a while, the dog will either starve or suck up the pain ....

It has no third choice available ....

These people who are facing unemployment have been conditioned to expect to have a job and paycheck coming in every week ...

Now, for many, that conditioning is about to be broken ....

Will they survive the shock?

And so ...

Sorry, my response got embedded in yours.

rla's response: Skinner made the techniqe popular that is most used plitically.

That is negative reinforcement, where you keep a mild shock going all the time until the subject moves in the desired direction, when it is briefly turned off.

This is the method of nagging spouse.

This is the Method of Coercive Negotiation.

Is that where we are now?

Yes, and this is what most needs to change if we move toward a more adaptive foreign policy.

"Madoff scandal could lead to tax losses nationwide - Bernard Madoff scandal could burn Uncle Sam if spurned investors seek tax break on losses"

By RACHEL BECK, Associated Press

Last updated: 6:16 p.m., Thursday, December 18, 2008

NEW YORK -- Even Uncle Sam may get burned by Bernard Madoff.

Investors who lost their fortunes in Madoff's alleged Ponzi scheme will end up paying far less in taxes and may even be eligible for refunds, according to accounting experts.

By some estimates, the Internal Revenue Service could be out as much as $17 billion in lost tax revenue.

"This is one more thing federal, state and local officials will have to deal with," said John Berrie, a tax partner at the law firm Bryan Cave in New York City.

"It's another heavy box on their back."

In addition, investors may be counting on a federally mandated insurance fund to bail them out, but that program lacks the money to pay for all the claims that are likely to come.

The timing couldn't be worse.

Unemployment has surged, meaning fewer workers are paying payroll taxes.

And housing prices have dropped, reducing property taxes.

The recession so far has cost the federal government $200 billion in tax revenues for the 12 months that ended in November, according to estimates by Moody's Economy.com.

The Madoff case, which reportedly involves $50 billion, adds another layer to the fiscal crisis gripping the nation.

In New York, for instance, where thousands of workers have lost jobs on Wall Street and big-name investment firms have tallied massive losses, State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli has estimated tax revenues will be down at least $3.5 billion by March 2010.

In wealthy enclaves nationwide, Madoff's investors are desperately seeking ways to get some of their money back.

Some refunds might come from the Securities Investor Protection Corp., an industry-funded organization set up by the government to protect investors from fraud.

Investors who qualify could get as much as $500,000 from the SIPC.

But that will not replace the millions of dollars than many lost, and such payments, if they come, will not happen fast.

SIPC officials this week said the books of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC are in complete disarray.

It could take six months or more to untangle them.

In addition, there are concerns that SIPC does not have enough money to pay out claims.

It currently has $1.6 billion to make payouts, though the agency can tap a $1 billion line of credit and a $1 billion injection from the Treasury Department to get more money.

That's why some investors are considering the option of reporting "theft losses" under the IRS rules.

Taxpayers who are defrauded by investment advisers or brokers can claim a deduction, as well as offset tax liabilities from the past.

Under the rules, an investor who lost $20 million with Madoff and whose adjusted gross income was $10 million can claim a theft loss of about $19 million.

To calculate the theft loss, investors must reduce the amount of the loss by 10 percent of their adjusted gross income plus $100, according to Robert Willens, an expert on tax and accounting issues for Wall Street clients.

That theft loss would wipe out the $3.5 million in taxes that would otherwise be payable on the $10 million in income.

The losses can be carried back for three years or carried forward for 20 years.

If the losses wipe out current, past or future taxes, the end result is the same: The government loses money.

"I think the $50 billion of Madoff's losses, if they really are that big and we're not sure, could cost the government $15 to $17 billion in lost tax revenues," Willens said.

Investors are not automatically eligible for such deductions.

They must prove to the IRS that they cannot recover their Madoff investments.

The IRS also has not indicated yet whether Madoff's investors can apply the theft provision.

"The IRS is aware of the situation, but beyond that, we have no comment," the federal agency said in a statement Thursday.

Another potential recourse for investors would be to claim that the past taxes they paid on "fictitious income" from Madoff should be recouped, said Stephen Brietstone of the law firm Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Breitstone who is representing Madoff investors on taxation issues.

The hurdle there is the three-year statute of limitations on amending a tax return, so that would limit investors to only the recent past even if the Madoff fraud existed long before that.

"A lot of investors put all their eggs in one basket, and they have been wiped out, so going back and getting a tax refund might be a remedy for them," Brietstone said.

"AP study finds $1.6B went to bailed-out bank execs"

By FRANK BASS and RITA BEAMISH, Associated Press Writers

21 DECEMBER 2008

Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year, an Associated Press analysis reveals.

The rewards came even at banks where poor results last year foretold the economic crisis that sent them to Washington for a government rescue.

Some trimmed their executive compensation due to lagging bank performance, but still forked over multimillion-dollar executive pay packages.

Benefits included cash bonuses, stock options, personal use of company jets and chauffeurs, home security, country club memberships and professional money management, the AP review of federal securities documents found.

The total amount given to nearly 600 executives would cover bailout costs for many of the 116 banks that have so far accepted tax dollars to boost their bottom lines.

Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services committee and a long-standing critic of executive largesse, said the bonuses tallied by the AP review amount to a bribe "to get them to do the jobs for which they are well paid in the first place."

"Most of us sign on to do jobs and we do them best we can," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat.

"We're told that some of the most highly paid people in executive positions are different."

"They need extra money to be motivated!"

The AP compiled total compensation based on annual reports that the banks file with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The 116 banks have so far received $188 billion in taxpayer help.

Among the findings:

_The average paid to each of the banks' top executives was $2.6 million in salary, bonuses and benefits.

_Lloyd Blankfein, president and chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs, took home nearly $54 million in compensation last year.

The company's top five executives received a total of $242 million.

This year, Goldman will forgo cash and stock bonuses for its seven top-paid executives.

They will work for their base salaries of $600,000, the company said.

Facing increasing concern by its own shareholders on executive payments, the company described its pay plan last spring as essential to retain and motivate executives "whose efforts and judgments are vital to our continued success, by setting their compensation at appropriate and competitive levels."

Goldman spokesman Ed Canaday declined to comment beyond that written report.

The New York-based company on Dec. 16 reported its first quarterly loss since it went public in 1999.

It received $10 billion in taxpayer money on Oct. 28.

_Even where banks cut back on pay, some executives were left with seven- or eight-figure compensation that most people can only dream about.

Richard D. Fairbank, the chairman of Capital One Financial Corp., took a $1 million hit in compensation after his company had a disappointing year, but still got $17 million in stock options.

The McLean, Va.-based company received $3.56 billion in bailout money on Nov. 14.

_John A. Thain, chief executive officer of Merrill Lynch, topped all corporate bank bosses with $83 million in earnings last year.

Thain, a former chief operating officer for Goldman Sachs, took the reins of the company in December 2007, avoiding the blame for a year in which Merrill lost $7.8 billion.

Since he began work late in the year, he earned $57,692 in salary, a $15 million signing bonus and an additional $68 million in stock options.

Like Goldman, Merrill got $10 billion from taxpayers on Oct. 28.

The AP review comes amid sharp questions about the banks' commitment to the goals of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), a law designed to buy bad mortgages and other troubled assets.

Last month, the Bush administration changed the program's goals, instructing the Treasury Department to pump tax dollars directly into banks in a bid to prevent wholesale economic collapse.

The program set restrictions on some executive compensation for participating banks, but did not limit salaries and bonuses unless they had the effect of encouraging excessive risk to the institution.

Banks were barred from giving golden parachutes to departing executives and deducting some executive pay for tax purposes.

Banks that got bailout funds also paid out millions for home security systems, private chauffeured cars, and club dues.

Some banks even paid for financial advisers.

Wells Fargo of San Francisco, which took $25 billion in taxpayer bailout money, gave its top executives up to $20,000 each to pay personal financial planners.

At Bank of New York Mellon Corp., chief executive Robert P. Kelly's stipend for financial planning services came to $66,748, on top of his $975,000 salary and $7.5 million bonus.

His car and driver cost $178,879.

Kelly also received $846,000 in relocation expenses, including help selling his home in Pittsburgh and purchasing one in Manhattan, the company said.

Goldman Sachs' tab for leased cars and drivers ran as high as $233,000 per executive.

The firm told its shareholders this year that financial counseling and chauffeurs are important in giving executives more time to focus on their jobs.

JPMorgan Chase chairman James Dimon ran up a $211,182 private jet travel tab last year when his family lived in Chicago and he was commuting to New York.

The company got $25 billion in bailout funds.

Banks cite security to justify personal use of company aircraft for some executives.

But Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., questioned that rationale, saying executives visit many locations more vulnerable than the nation's security-conscious commercial air terminals.

Sherman, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said pay excesses undermine development of good bank economic policies and promote an escalating pay spiral among competing financial institutions — something particularly hard to take when banks then ask for rescue money.

He wants them to come before Congress, like the automakers did, and spell out their spending plans for bailout funds.

"The tougher we are on the executives that come to Washington, the fewer will come for a bailout," he said.
___

On the Net:

SEC Filings & Forms: http://www.sec.gov

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act: http://www.treas.gov/initiatives/eesa/

If Congress should stumble into any kind of real over-sight, they could get a lot of uncles quick...

The United States Congress is a big, ******* joke, rla ....

John Boehner is an eater of CRAP or **** sandwiches and Nancy Pelosi is possessed of a head that is as devoid of content inside of it as is a perfect vacuum inside a leak-proof sphere ....

When Barack Obama states that there is NO ADULT SUPERVISION here in the USA, he is talking about them ....

There is NO ADULT SUPERVISION in the U.S. Congress, rla ...

Just CRAP EATERS and EMPTY HEADS ....

Are you going to put YOUR life in THEIR hands?

And so ...

The only soluti9n is revolution.

Except everybody in America is too obese for that, rla ....

And so ...

We focus too much of our study on how things go wrong. We need to study how things go right.

Humorous take on the bail out Sometimes you can reach too far.




But when you find yourself over-extended and you're stuck in a situation that you can't get out of there is one thing you should always remember.......





Your government is here to help you!

Bailed-Out Bank Executives Got $1.6 Billion usatoday.com — Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year, an analysis reveals. The rewards came even at banks where poor results last year foretold the economic crisis that sent them to Washington for a government rescue. Some trimmed their executive compensation due to lagging bank performance, but still forked over multimillion-dollar executive pay packages. Benefits included cash bonuses, stock options, personal use of company jets and chauffeurs, home security, country club memberships and professional money management, the AP review of federal securities documents found. The total amount given to nearly 600 executives would cover bailout costs for many of the 116 banks that have so far accepted tax dollars to boost their bottom lines.

Hedge Funds Get Access to $200 Billion ft.com — Hedge funds will be allowed to borrow from the Federal Reserve for the first time under a landmark $200 billion program intended to support consumer credit. The Fed said on Friday it would offer low-cost three-year funding to any US company investing in securitized consumer loans under the Term Asset-backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF). This includes hedge funds, which have never been able to borrow from the US central bank before, although the Fed may not permit hedge funds to use offshore vehicles to conduct the transactions. The TALF is a key plank of the unorthodox strategy set out by the Fed last week as it cut interest rates virtually to zero.

MICHAEL SCHERER
The Bank Executive Bailout Shame swampland.blogs.time.com — This current financial crisis, we now know, began in the summer of 2007, a year and a half ago. And these men are already rich — ridiculously so. And they have failed, in many cases almost completely, in their mandates, not just to protect their own investors, but to protect the public trust. If they now beg of the public trough, if they feel themselves fit to claim the mantle of the "public interest" for their own enterprises and fortunes, then they must also accept a public responsibility, not just a private one.

SAM PIZZIGATI
America's Greediest: A 2008 Year-End Top Ten Has any year ever showcased greed as dramatically as 2008? We sift through the avarice to bring you the lowlights — and a little hope for a less greedy 2009.

The Democratic Party got its self elected without making much of an issue about cleaning up the corruption and incompetence at all level of government and its contracting Entities which has to be
present in order for there to exist this level of corruption and incompetence in Business and the
other institutions in the Social System--including Churches...

Who has said that there is anything tolerable about what Blagoevich has done?

It seems you are throwing another straw man into the conversation. No one here or anywhere that I can tell has defendeed his conduct.

But the fact that corruption exists and that we have recently some very vivid examples of same, does not mean that corruption is the main problem.

I think by taking this line of thinking that you accept the erroneous nature of John McCain's logic in the campaign where he decried the greed that was made possible by his repeatedly supporting the deregulation of Wall Street...

This is not just a problem of corruption.

You really need to understand that which is why I think the premise of this thread is absolutely wrong.

This rescue was a result of three forces at work....government failing to regulate appropriately the banking and finance industry --- and the credit rating industry who decided that they could make money by giving these pieces of paper bogus valuations --- the finance industry making loans that they should not have -- and some of the American people who were imprudent enough to seek such loans which they in no way could afford.

All are culpable -- but they acted within the mandates of the law -- at least most of them did...so if most of them acted within the mandates of the law -- then there can not be any looting by most persons -- because looting by definition involves illegally taking assets...

So, let's try and get some perspective in this thread....before it spins out of control...

I will grant you -- it does look like a race in decline.

For the first time ever parents are having children who are not doing better on balance than they did financially ---

BUt why is that?

Well, it is two things...the materialistic society which promotes coveting what your neighbor has -- and the state of our economic system which has not provided the real wage increases that we should have to go along with an economic recovery -- or the job increases that we should have to go along with an economic recovery...

People do not save for the most part because they cannot afford to...they need every little bit to live on...

rla -- do you disagree with this?

Wall Street Exec's Exorbitant Pay in 2007 Could Have Covered Bailout Costs?

by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly -

bonuses for STEALING!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28337800/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28344965/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28344688

WASHINGTON – It's something any bank would demand to know before handing out a loan: Where's the money going?

But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it.

"We've lent some of it. We've not lent some of it. We've not given any accounting of, 'Here's how we're doing it,'" said Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money. "We have not disclosed that to the public. We're declining to."
source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081222/ap_on_...eltdown_secrets

I've been doing that for years now, rla, studying how things can go right .....

Since the 1970's, in fact ...

But you don't find much of it, things going right ....

And it is not HOW, in this case, rla ......

We are not studying how hypothetical things go wrong in some hypothetical system somewhere ....

WE ARE STUDYING WHAT WENT SO WRONG HERE IN THE USA THAT WE ARE REDUCED AS A NATION TO THE PENURIOUS STATE THAT WE ARE NOW IN ...

WE ARE HERE IN THIS PRECARIOUS FINANCIAL STATE BECAUSE ALL OF THE WAYS THINGS GO RIGHT WERE TOSSED OUT THE WINDOW BY THOSE IN POWER WHO HAVE ****** AMERICA'S DOG FOR US, AND BROUGHT THIS NATION TO ITS KNEES AS NO OUTSIDE OR FOREIGN ENEMY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO ....

And so .....

I heard this story on the radio news earlier, Snuf ...

Thanks for posting the "hard copy" in here ...

And they don't have to say where the money went, because Hank "HENRY" Paulson set no such conditions on how it be spent .....

He gave it to them with NO strings attached ...

"HI, MY NAME IS HANK O'CLAUS, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF GEORGE W. BUSH TO GIVE YOU A REAL NICE CHRISTMAS PRESENT OF $25 BILLION FROM THE U.S. TREASURY!"

"GET SOMETHING NICE FOR THE WIFE WITH IT!"

"AND DON'T FORGET THE KIDS!"

"IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN APPEARANCES, AFTERALL, WHEN YOU ARE SUCH A VITAL PART OF CIVILIZED SOCIETY ..."

And so ...

And where have you been, tazvil04?

Have you been up here where I am?

Were you here this morning?

If so, I must have missed you ....

Or were you surreptitious?

The people who think BLAG-O is a hero are THOSE PEOPLE, tazvil04 .....

People in Convenient Shops getting coffee, or in coffee shops have coffee ....

Not places that you are probably likely to be found .....

But who knows ....

PEOPLE THINK THAT WAY IN REAL LIFE UP HERE, tazvil04 ....

And I report on it ....

And the only one who is trying to SPIN this thread out of control is YOU, tazvil04, who I have dubbed HORTENSIUS in here, for your ability to DANCE all around the real issues in here by your spreading of strawman arguments all over the place as a means of obfuscation ...

And so ....

I will be up there on December 31st and January 1st...I think -- if my plans do not change...not yet...

ONly here in the PM today...

And who on this site has defended Blag-o and thinks he is a hero?

No one that I can tell.