 |
|
Add to My Group
|
September 16, 2008 at 11:36:19
Promoted to Headline (H2) on 9/16/08: by E. Nelson Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
 
|
Over the weekend Alan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman, told Bloomberg News that he was "not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money" and that the United States could not afford big tax cuts such as those proposed by Republican John McCain. Alan Greenspan went on to say that the current economic crisis, that began with the collapse of the subprime-mortgage market last year, is so bad that he called it "a once in a century" crisis and will lead to the failure of more firms.
Back in July McCain's own economic advisor Phil Gramm said that the economic troubles and the recession that experts believe we are currently in was only in our minds and that we had become a nation of whiners. Really? I suppose a 300% increase in gas, a 50% increase in milk, and the highest unemployment and foreclosure rates in decades is in our heads as well. We have had more than six months of job losses, which is the worst in 22 years. Yesterday the stock market plunged 504 points making it the sixth biggest one-day loss in our history and it wiped out $700 billion in shareholder wealth. It was the biggest point drop since September 17, 2001, the day stock trading resumed after the September 11 attacks. The fundamentals of our economy are most definitely not strong.
McCain's economic plan caters to wealthy taxpayers and corporations by extending and expanding President Bush's tax cuts, slashing corporate taxes and weakening the estate tax. Never mind that McCain has flip-flopped on his previous position of being a deficit hawk and formerly a critic of the massive tax cuts launched in 2001 by the Bush administration. Now McCain embraces the tax policies of supply-side economists who contend that lifting the tax burden on the rich would encourage investment and stimulate the economy. "Wealth creates wealth," McCain said during a primary debate in Michigan last year.
Why are financial giants like Warrant Buffet and George Soros getting behind Barack Obama and strongly advocating that the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy be reversed? It is because they see where Bush's reckless fiscal policy, which will be continued by Republican John McCain, is taking us. You don’t have to look very hard to see that the "fundamentals" of our economy are NOT strong.
The reason that Wall Street is getting behind Barack Obama is because of exactly what is going on right now. The economy is collapsing because of pure greed, incompetence, and lack of any oversight and this is a direct result of failed Republican policies. One hundred year old Wall Street giants like Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch are disappearing and along with them go thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of retirement income. The survival of Wall Street is dependent on Barack beating McCain and in fact the survival of our country is dependent on this fact. There will be no Wall Street if the current path is not reversed.
Some on the far-left will say Barack Obama is selling out to the corporate Wall Street types because they are getting behind him. An alternative viewpoint and my viewpoint is they are getting behind Obama because they are scared that this economy is nearing complete collapse. A look at the negative sentiment shows that usage of the phrase "economic disaster" has been rising steadily over the past 6 months (Figure 1).
Figure 1
One of the greatest myths that the Republican party has been able to pull over the eyes of the American public is that they are the party of fiscal restraint and that the economy and the stock market does better under their watch. Like so much of their spin and propaganda the facts just aren’t on their side for this claim. The Nasdaq is still down over 50% from its high of 4572 at the end of 1999 under Bill Clinton's watch and the Dow Jones is testing another low, nearing 11,000, which has evaporated $2.5 trillion from our investment portfolios.
Not everyone on Wall Street believes in unadulterated greed and the doomed policies of unrestrained "Free Markets". Proponents of the "Free Markets" policies believe the government could not possibly run anything efficiently .…. that is until they come to the government with their hands out looking for corporate bailouts or corporate subsidies at the expense of us the taxpayers. "Free Market" policies are nothing more than a scam to privatize profits and socialize risk.
Much of the current Republican attitude, that has led to this mess, started with Ronald Reagan famously saying, "Greed is good". But if any one single event could be most directly linked to the current financial mess it would be the reversal of the Glass-Steagall act back in 1999. Led by the Republican controlled congress Phil Gramm, McCain's current top economic advisor, successfully repealed the Glass-Steagall act of 1933 which was put into place after the "Great Depression" and which established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and provided regulations designed to control dangerous speculation within the banking industry. Phil Gramm was the chief architect for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed much of the Glass-Steagall act and was eventually signed into law by Bill Clinton on November 12th, 1999.
Do we really want a president who yesterday said to an audience in Jacksonville, Florida that the economy is strong on the same day the stock market plunged 504 points and whose top economic advisor thinks the American people should stop whining about their economic woes?
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 15 comments |
|
McCain-Palin = Disaster
Dear concerned citizens of America and Mass Media of the U.S.A. by Ali khajawall (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:53:39 AM  (0+)
|
|
McCain is delusional
I wonder how many retirement accounts of senior citizens living in Florida were wiped out yesterday while they were sitting there listening to McCain tell them that the economy was fundamentally strong? by E. Nelson (40 articles, 8 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 511 comments [57 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:08:43 PM (0+)
|
|
THE ECONOMIST.
That is me! I have an m.a. in that dismal science. I know that their is truth in micro-economic studies. But, macro-economics is a game played by shills. Stop fiat money. Abolish the "Federal reserve -private bankers- system". See that McCain, Obama, Palin, Biden as the Anti-Christs that they are. Love is real. These shills are all but Love. That makes them FEAR. And to be feared by one and all. Brother Wolfie wishes that we all just focus on what is real and not the Illuminati crap. Vote for Cynthia McKinney, a true patriot! by Wolfie (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 33 diaries, 1208 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:40:52 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: No Offense Wolfie
But standing behind someone who used to be in the Democratic party and probably still would be if she had only apologized for assulting a Capital Hill police officer is not exactly what I would consider being a true patriot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_29,_2006_Capitol_Hill_Police_Incident Sorry but she is polling at a number that hasn't even reached a single digit yet. by E. Nelson (40 articles, 8 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 511 comments [57 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:03:53 PM (0+)
|
|
This IS Not A Republican Thing
This is a systemic issue with the lobby system in Washington. Excerpt From Bill Moyers Journal Sept 12 2008 in Ref to NEW YORK TIMES by Jackie Calmes. Both Barack Obama and John McCain say the Fannie and Freddie mess is the result of the cozy ties between lobbyists and politicians, the very thing they will "change" if elected. But guess what? Neither one of them has ever had, quote, "A record of directly challenging the companies." To the contrary, Obama is second among members of Congress in donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's employees and political action committees, even though he's only been in the Senate since 2005. The former chairman of Fannie Mae originally led Obama's vice presidential search committee but had to step down in a controversy over favorable loans he received, while at Fannie, from a company doing business with Fannie. Among Obama's contributors are three directors and one senior vice president of the two companies. Furthermore, Obama's fellow Democrats in Congress have long been enablers of both corporations. And what about John McCain? His entire campaign team stepped right out of a predator's ball. His confidante and top adviser lobbied several years for Freddie Mac. His deputy fundraiser lobbied Fannie Mae, and his campaign manager lobbied for both of them, leading a coalition of beltway insiders whose goal was to "stave off regulations" that might have short circuited this nightmare. One wealthy member of Freddie Mac's board has contributed more than $70,000 to McCain and Republican Party members working for McCain's election. Even the guy who vetted John McCain's vice presidential options is a former lobbyist for Fannie Mae. Wish More People Would Have Debated Ron Paul Rather Than Dismissed Him. The Worst Is Yet To Come. by Brad Evans (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 221 comments [11 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 5:43:58 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: If it not a Republican thing what is it??
Hate to break it to you but Phil Gramm is a Republican and he has pushed for and gotten deregulation of the financial for years. Guess what?? This is the result. In terms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac I am not sure what point you are trying to make other than the grip that lobbyists have on Washington needs to be weakened. Duh .. I think everyone knows that. Interestingly Barack said the following a few weeks ago to the Wall Street Journal. Sen. Obama derided Fannie and Freddie as a "weird blend," advocating that "If these are public entities, then they've got to get out of the profit-making business, and if they’re private entities, then we don’t bail them out.” He said later that he has "no sympathy" for the CEOs of Fannie and Freddie, and that the government shouldn’t bail out "investors who had made a killing. I guess they didn't get their money's worth from Barack with all their lobbying dollars. Good for Barack. I don't fault him for taking their money. Maybe they will learn next time and not expect something in return. If you want to give me some money I will not turn it down ... just don't be sad if you don't get something in return. by E. Nelson (40 articles, 8 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 511 comments [57 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 7:20:24 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: It's a "Bipartisan thing." Every single crime the Repubs
have committed was aided & abetted by Democrats. The Dems never offered serious resistance to any of it, & often provided active assistance. Furthermore, the Dems never made the slightest attempt to educate the public as to the dangers of the Republican initiatives. You try to blame the "Republican controlled Congress" for the repeal of Glass Steagall. That's baloney. Clinton could have vetoed it, but didn't. He also could have used the bully pulpit to take his case to the public, if he'd seriously opposed the repeal -- but he didn't. Furthermore, both NY senators were Democrats, & they also helped the repeal to go through (in keeping with the traditional position of NY senators, which is to function as "The Senators from Wall St"). Here you're trying to portray Obama as "standing up to" corporate lobbyists. That's pure bunk. You write, "Maybe they will learn next time and not expect something in return." Oh, sure. Like that ever happens -- that an American politician of either party ever takes the money and stiffs the corporation! There's no such thing as that anymore. You're dreaming a little schoolboy's dream to imagine that Obama is any different. Giant corporations rule this country; it's been that way for many, many decades. Things didn't get like this by themselves. The powerful aren't used to being stiffed -- they've perfected the art of controlling both parties. They know what they want, and they always get it, regardless of which party is in control. In fact, the candidates & the Congress only sit where they do, because the corporations approve of them. If Obama weren't a certified 100% reliable candidate from the corporate viewpoint, he wouldn't be the nominee. by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 12:25:26 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The spin continues
I love how someone can honestly blame this on the democrats when, even though the entire Repbulican party was for and pushed to repeal the Glass Steagall act, but because Bill Clinton, who had just fought off an impeachment trial and was fighting for his political life, wasn't able to stop them and veto the bill that it is somehow the Democrats fault? That is like saying that it is your fault if I shoot you because you didn't dodge the bullet. Oh wait that already happened when Dick Cheney shot his friend in the face and his friend went on National television to apologize for not dodging being shot in the face. by E. Nelson (40 articles, 8 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 511 comments [57 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 8:54:32 AM (0+)
|
|
I am for our country!
Comment from Ratings: I think that voting for Barack Obama would be a terrible mistake for anybody to do! He is for the RICH! If you think that BO. is going to do anything for the next four years but carry on like his cousins Dick Cheney and George W. Bush in the U.S.A., with all of his Democratic friends that he has in the Senate, on wall street, all those comedians who just love him to death, I would like for him to answer just one question....He says that he prays everyday. All I see his campaign trying to do is tear down the othe candidate! It used to be Hillary Clinton, but now it became John McCain and Sarah Palin. He should be talking more and leave the funny stuff to the comedians as they are getting paid for it! by nestacal (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 39 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:36:53 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Dude you need to put down your bong for a minute
I am glad you are for your country ... not sure what country you are referring to. But here in the United States we are all for our country, that is why we fighting to take back our country from the corrupt Republican party. Second you rambled on for a little while and said you wanted Barack to answer one question. Problem is you never asked the question. I think you must have taken another hit and gotten distracted. That's okay we have all done it. In terms of your other comment that "Barack is for the RICH"! Feel free to go to his website, do a little research, and then report back here on what platform you find that favors the rich over the middle class. Take your time. by E. Nelson (40 articles, 8 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 511 comments [57 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 7:03:22 PM (0+)
|
|
Hmmm
The master of disaster, Sir Bubbles himself, calling an economic plan based on tax cuts financed with borrowed money a disaster, cuts he himself approved of under Bush. He also favoured Glass Steagall repeal, refused to intervene in the Dot.Com bubble by limiting margins, thought the sub-primes were a good idea, as was the housing bubble, and jumped ship the year before the bubble was burst. The guy should be in GITMO, he did more damage than AQ. by pft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 601 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:44:39 PM (0+)
|
|
Palestine
Given how cash strapped the US is: if the Saudis and Gulf States can't buy Palestine’s freedom they aren’t serious. by kwalsh (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 275 comments [10 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:16:55 PM (0+)
|
|
um...
perhaps I am blind but I didn't see anywhere in your post where Greenspan actually said "McCain's plan" is a "Disaster for the country" so if that is the case then the thread title is sure to be provacative but also blatantly misleading by Ben Marble, M.D. (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 230 diaries, 349 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:50:11 PM (0+)
|
|
The economy will continue to be a disaster, period.
Sorry folks but at this stage of the situation it really does not matter who, McCain or Obama get elected. That's because the USA is bankrupt. In all seriousness, USA IS BANKRUPT. $11T in federal debt, $500B in annual budget deficit, $400B in annual trade deficit, $850B per year paid to foreigners for oil, a population who just saw their home value wiped out by $4T, and who has a total of $5T credit card debt most of which can't be repaid. Now add on to this - Federal assumption of the massive liabilities of failed FDIC banks, failed investment banks, failed mortgage companies, and now failed private insurance company. The government has no money for these - other than to print trillions more out of thin air. Trillions of USD created and add onto an existing money supply without adding economic values - just to pay debts and interests with ever more debts. USA IS BANKRUPT. Inflation will hit 1000%. And McCain has zero clue what that mean while Obama will complaint "Hope costs money. Get me some money ..." by TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 330 comments [22 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:35:47 AM (0+)
|
|
Shaking my head in disbelief
Comment from Ratings: I am starting to believe in paralel universes. by Stickshift (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:29:42 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
