It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
Let's review Again.edit on 9-5-2011 by HappilyEverAfter because: to add
Originally posted by gorgi
I have already showed how QE has worked and why we needed it.
Originally posted by nastyness19
reply to post by gorgi
He doesnt want to just get rid of institutions like these, he just believes they should not exist at the federal level because they become too powerful, as did our founding fathers.
He wants to let states chose what programs to have etc.
and as for being "wrong" he has predicted the swing of the economy more than almost anyone else. While most politicians talk about gay marriage and abortion hes talking about the real issue, our economy.
Originally posted by LexiconRiot
I don't think many people disagree on the issues. Not you or I. Where we don't see eye to eye is on how to deal with it.
The paranoia over Commie/Socialist/Marxist hiding in our closets is misplaced. Despite the increased shouting about it over the years, we're being done in by corporate control in govt and greed. Fight that, and you'll be battling the true enemy.
More than fifty years ago the Morgan firm decided to infiltrate the Left-wing political movements in the United States.
This was relatively easy to do, since these groups were starved for funds and eager for a voice to reach the people. Wall Street supplied both. The purpose was not to destroy, dominate, or take over but was really threefold: (1) to keep informed about the thinking of Left-wing or liberal groups; (2) to provide them with a mouthpiece so that they could "blow off steam," and (3) to have a final veto on their publicity and possibly on their actions, if they ever went "radical."
On a spring day in 1918 several government agents entered a print shop at Washington, D. C., where the original edition of this book was being printed. "Destroy all the Lindbergh plates in your plant," they told the head of the institution. He was forced to comply. The hysteria of war-time brooked no delays. Not only were the plates of this book "Why Is Your Country at War?" destroyed, but also the plates of Congressman Lindbergh's book "Banking and Currency," written in 1913 and attacking the big bankers and Federal Reserve Law. So was the painstaking effort of months wiped out.... www.campaignforliberty.com...
In 1976 A typical American CEO earned 36 times as much as the average worker. By 2008 the average CEO pay increased to 369 times that of the average worker. timelines.ws...
According to an article in The New Republic of Dec. 2, 1991, in 1948, a married couple with median income and two children, paid only 2% in state, federal, and Social Security taxes. In 1999, Social Security was 15.3%, plus 2.9% for Medicare, out of the first $62,700 in wages, or $11,411.40, and then perhaps 30% in federal taxes…if you were lucky.... www.gold-eagle.com...
Originally posted by nastyness19
While most politicians talk about gay marriage and abortion hes talking about the real issue, our economy.
Abortion-related legislation Paul calls himself "strongly pro-life" and "an unshakable foe of abortion." However, he believes regulation of medical decisions about maternal or fetal health is "best handled at the state level." He believes that, for the most part, states should retain jurisdiction, in accordance with the U.S. Constitution. Paul refers to his background as an obstetrician as being influential on his view, recalling inadvertently witnessing a late-term abortion performed by one of his instructors during his residency, “It was pretty dramatic for me to see a two-and-a-half-pound baby taken out crying and breathing and put in a bucket.” During a May 15, 2007, appearance on the Fox News talk show Hannity and Colmes, Paul argued that his pro-life position was consistent with his libertarian values, asking, "If you can't protect life then how can you protect liberty?" Furthermore, Paul argued in this appearance that since he believes libertarians support non-aggression, libertarians should oppose abortion because abortion is "an act of aggression" against a fetus, which is alive, human, and he believes possesses legal rights. Paul has said that the ninth and tenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion, stating that "the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue." Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, a bill that would have defined human life to begin at conception, and removed challenges to prohibitions on abortion from federal court jurisdiction. In 2005, Paul introduced the We the People Act, which would have removed "any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of ... reproduction" from the jurisdiction of federal courts. If made law, either of these acts would allow states to prohibit abortion. In 2005, Paul voted against restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. In order to "offset the effects of Roe v. Wade," Paul voted in favor of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. He has described partial birth abortion as a "barbaric procedure." He also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and would cause the court's precedents in these areas to no longer be binding. He once said, “The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction.” [ed
Originally posted by crimvelvet
First off we have not had capitalism in the USA for over a hundred years. Fractional Reserve Banking kills capitalism because counterfeit fiat currency drives out wealth based money.
[Gresham's law - “bad money drives out good.”]
Capitalism is a system where an individual invests his WEALTH to produce more wealth.
Fractional Reserve banking is a dead short across the productive element of society diverting unearned wealth directly into the pockets of the bankers. This is because the banker invest nothing of value. His "loans" are legally null and void because he provides no consideration
Reagan did major damage to this country by allowing the plague of "corporate Raiders" to tear apart good decent American companies.
And just for the record the bankers are on YOUR side. See: London School of Economics, Cecil Rhodes/Rothschild and the Fabian Society.
Did you really think Socialism and Communism would even be known to the general public without the wealth of the bankers to back them???
Originally posted by crimvelvet
WHY ever would you think the bankers are AGAINST socialism when it is such a HUGE money maker???
Originally posted by Boomer1941
reply to post by gorgi
So ahh...how's your new job with the Obama Administration working out for ya?
Corporate raiders? Are you kidding me or what? The man is known for PRIVATISION and DEREGULATION of everything undert the sun in america, just like Thatcher privatised everything under the sun in the ex-socialist united kingdom.
A leveraged buyout (or LBO, or highly-leveraged transaction (HLT), or "bootstrap" transaction) occurs when an investor, typically financial sponsor, acquires a controlling interest in a company's equity and where a significant percentage of the purchase price is financed through leverage (borrowing). The assets of the acquired company are used as collateral for the borrowed capital, sometimes with assets of the acquiring company. Typically, leveraged buyout uses a combination of various debt instruments from bank and debt capital markets...
The leveraged buyout boom of the 1980s was conceived by a number of corporate financiers, most notably Jerome Kohlberg, Jr. and later his protégé Henry Kravis. Working for Bear Stearns at the time, Kohlberg and Kravis, along with Kravis' cousin George Roberts, began a series of what they described as "bootstrap" investments...
....Both economic and regulatory factors combined to spur the explosion in large takeovers and, in turn, large LBOs. The three regulatory factors were the Reagan administration's relatively laissez-faire policies on antitrust and securities laws, which allowed mergers the government would have challenged in earlier years; the 1982 Supreme Court decision striking down state antitakeover laws (which were resurrected with great effectiveness in the late eighties); and deregulation of many industries, which prompted restructurings and mergers. The main economic factor was the development of the original-issue high-yield debt instrument. The so-called "junk bond" innovation, pioneered by Michael Milken of Drexel Burnham, provided many hostile bidders and LBO firms with the enormous amounts of capital needed to finance multi-billion-dollar deals.... www.econlib.org...
...In January 1982, former US Secretary of the Treasury William Simon and a group of investors acquired Gibson Greetings, a producer of greeting cards, for $80 million, of which only $1 million was rumored to have been contributed by the investors. By mid-1983, just sixteen months after the original deal, Gibson completed a $290 million IPO and Simon made approximately $66 million. The success of the Gibson Greetings investment attracted the attention of the wider media to the nascent boom in leveraged buyouts. Between 1979 and 1989, it was estimated that there were over 2,000 leveraged buyouts valued in excess of $250 billion.....
...Both economic and regulatory factors combined to spur the explosion in large takeovers and, in turn, large LBOs. The three regulatory factors were the Reagan administration's relatively laissez-faire policies on antitrust and securities laws, which allowed mergers the government would have challenged in earlier years; the 1982 Supreme Court decision striking down state antitakeover laws (which were resurrected with great effectiveness in the late eighties); and deregulation of many industries, which prompted restructurings and mergers. The main economic factor was the development of the original-issue high-yield debt instrument. The so-called "junk bond" innovation, pioneered by Michael Milken of Drexel Burnham, provided many hostile bidders and LBO firms with the enormous amounts of capital needed to finance multi-billion-dollar deals....www.econlib.org...
Corporate takeovers became a prominent feature of the American business landscape during the seventies and eighties. A hostile takeover usually involves a public tender offer—a public offer of a specific price, usually at a substantial premium over the prevailing market price, good for a limited period, for a substantial percentage of the target firm's stock. Unlike a merger, which requires the approval of the target firm's board of directors as well as voting approval of the stockholders, a tender offer can provide voting control to the bidding firm without the approval of the target's management and directors.....
Because it allows bidders to seek control directly from shareholders—by going "over the heads" of target management—the tender offer is the most powerful weapon available to the hostile bidder. ... Although hostile bidders still need a formal merger to gain total control of the target's assets, this is easily accomplished once the bidder has purchased a majority of voting stock.
Hostile tender offers have been around for decades, but they were rare and generally involved small target firms until the mid-seventies. Then came the highly controversial multibillion-dollar hostile takeovers of very recognizable public companies. By the late eighties there were dozens of multi-billion-dollar takeovers and their cousins, leveraged buyouts (LBOs). The largest acquisition ever was the $25 billion buyout of RJR Nabisco by Kolberg Kravis and Roberts in 1989. [Editor's note: this was written in 1992.] .... www.econlib.org...
Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980's were hostile. The 1980's also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.'s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988...
THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers.... In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America....
THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another's.
Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages.
January 29, 1989 www.nytimes.com... New York Times
* Sound recording industries - 97%
* Commodity contracts dealing and brokerage - 79%
* Motion picture and sound recording industries - 75%
* Metal ore mining - 65%
* Wineries and distilleries - 64%
* Database, directory, Book and other publishers - 63%
* Cement, concrete, lime, and gypsum product - 62%
* Engine, turbine and power transmission equipment - 57%
* Rubber product - 53%
* Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing - 53%
* Plastics and rubber products manufacturing - 52%
* Other insurance related activities - 51%
* Boiler, tank, and shipping container - 50%
* Glass and glass product – 48%
* Coal mining – 48%
In the 1980s during the great takeover boom and hollowing out of the industrial heartland, many states adopted amendments to their corporate codes that codified directors' fiduciary duties, so-called "constituency statutes". In general, these provisions made it clear that a director need not "maximize shareholder value." Rather, in complying with their fiduciary obligations, directors may take all sorts of things into consideration - the impact of their decisions on various constituencies, including employees, the community, the environment, the color of the sky, whatever...
When these statutes were first passed, they were heralded as way to protect jobs, etc....
My problem with these statutes is that they strike me as a bit of a head fake. While they certainly give boards the power they need to protect local communities, etc should they so desire, they don't actually require directors to protect those constituencies. In effect, such statutes, simply give directors another fiduciary lever to pull when negotiating with a potential acquirer.
I've said this before, but you know a board might be very concerned about the impact of a potential acquisition on employees and the community when the bid is $69. At $75, the board's concerns about the impact on the community might start to fall away. Why not move the HQ to Paris? It's so much nicer there than Cambridge. At $85? Employees ... we have employees?!
There's no requirement that a board share the incremental price increase with those stakeholders who will lose out when a transaction is ultimately done..... lawprofessors.typepad.com...
‘Whitewashed Windows and Vacant Stores’
As I drive around my town, I can’t get the lyrics or somber melody out of my head. It is like witnessing old friends drop dead one by one.
Last week I went into town to buy some guitar strings. Band Central Station, a friend of 30 years, was gone. In its place? Nothing....
And, it isn’t just small enterprises. We lost a Circuit City, a Chevrolet dealership, tried-and-true franchises like Dairy Queen and Arby’s. Last week Sam’s Club announced it will close its local big box bulk store. Then came news that Wal-Mart, the parent company, intends to lay off 10,000 Sam’s Club Employees. Even the ubiquitous 99 cent stores have been cut in half....
So, the businesses that provided jobs are gone, the office and retail space sits vacant, likely in default. The windows get broken, the walls get tagged, the weeds grow, trash blows, and, with no one to stop it, nature begins the process of permanent destruction. The value of those businesses and real estate is now gone.
Each of these failed enterprises is a sad testament to the times we live in, but taken in their entirety, they foretell an even grimmer future. It will be a longtime before the jobs return...
The failure of Linen’s and Things is a prime example of how Wall Street plundered Main Street, robbing retailers, big and small, and leaving a trail of failure, unemployment and boarded up buildings behind.
Once Wall Street realized that success can only be so profitable but failure has unlimited potential, the race was on to loan money and securitize the debt.
....You might be familiar with the mall-based, teen-focused, accessories chain, Claire’s Stores. It was taken over in 2007 by Apollo Management LP for $3.1 billion. At the time, the chain had over $245 million in cash on hand. Today, the cash is gone. Struggling under the weight of $2.3 billion in debt, sales continue to decline....
Underlying all of this are the same activities that led to losses in sub-prime residential equities. Money was looking for a home, and some investors saw that cash could be leveraged out of these enterprises by buying them with someone else’s money and looting the assets.
The making of more and bigger loans was driven by the fees and bonuses Wall Street could earn by finding a home for private equity. They didn’t care about the quality of loans because, just like sub prime mortgages, these loans were being pooled into securities and sold.
As the market overheated, it became a breeding ground for fraud. A flurry of new court cases reveals the disturbing extent to which commercial mortgage borrowers may have doctored loan documents...
The counter parties who sold the default swaps, but only have fractional reserves to offset losses will have to turn to the government for further bailouts or not pay the banks. That is why AIG was bailed out in 2007. Should we do it again?
The investors in these commercial properties, pension funds, hedge funds, etc. will bear the losses, and will probably bring numerous class action law suits against the originators of the investment pools, further tying up vacant commercial property until the case makes it’s way through court.
But, as these were mostly Special Purpose Vehicles, registered in the Cayman Islands, the enormous profits are not only unrecoverable but cannot be taxed.
Everyone says it’s the economy and that we are “coming out of it” as though it were all a drug-induced haze. But, we aren’t coming out of anything, we are going deeper. Nothing has improved except Wall Street compensation. We still don’t make anything, export anything, or do anything that is creating marketplace returns sufficient for the profits of these firms.
They aren’t living off of the fruits of our excess, or adding value, they are eating the seed corn.
/ˈkæpɪtlˌɪzəm/ Show Spelled[kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth. dictionary.reference.com...
An essential definition of capitalism is a political definition:
Capitalism is a social system based on the principle of individual rights.
In order to have an economic system in which "production and distribution are privately or corporately owned", you must have individual rights and specifically property rights. The only way to have an economic system fitting the first definition is to have a political system fitting the second definition. The first is an implication of the second. Because the second, political, definition is fundamental and the cause of the first, it is the more useful definition and is preferable. www.importanceofphilosophy.com...