Largest theft in U.S. history

[OP_Carl]

We have just witnessed the largest theft in U.S. history, fully sanctioned by the U.S. government now that it has been infiltrated to the highest levels by cutthroat corporate raiders.

The Bear Stearns building ALONE is worth more than JP Morgan paid for the entire company.

link to story (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/finance/article/bear-bailout-employees-fortunes-vanish_520815_9.html)

The treasury secretary that approved this used to work for Goldman Sachs, a direct competitor to Bear Stearns. Now the funds that were appropriated from the Fed to bail out Bear Stearns are going to be made available to Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan for lending. Forget that it is unconstitutional, immoral, and unethical to bail out an investment bank with taxpayers' money, this was an inside job that will harm thousands of people.


But let's all watch our presidential election/soap opera instead. :rolleyes2

[Sam]

I thought Banks and Bankers were protected against loss by the FDIC.



And I thought the FDIC stood for:
Foolish
Dumb
Innocent
Citizens

[simplyme]

Makes me almost glad I'm not rich. :D

[OP_Carl]

I thought Banks and Bankers were protected against loss by the FDIC. The FDIC insures deposits, not bankers. Your deposit is insured by the full faith and credit of the federal government, in any amount up to $100,000.

You'll notice, however, that treasury bills are rapidly turning into junk bonds and the dollar as a currency is in a death spiral. So not only might your bank, your bank network, and the fed be having serious solvency problems, but your deposit insurer as well.

And I thought the FDIC stood for:
Foolish
Dumb
Innocent
Citizens

Franklin
Delano
Is
Communist

[Sister Alvear]

I have always said to invest money in missions and church work...interest with many blessings never fail to come...

[Pressing-On]

Franklin
Delano
Is
Communist
:killinme

Jim Rogers on the Bear Stearns bailout

Bloomberg tracked down Jim Rogers somewhere in Asia and he was none too pleased with the way the U.S. government has been throwing its money around.

On why Bear Stearns was bailed out:

You know the reason they did it this way was because, if Bear Stearns had to declare bankruptcy, you'd realize that Bear Stearns paid out billions of dollars in bonuses in January - six weeks ago. If he let them go into bankruptcy, they all would have had to send back their bonuses.

This is what they're doing, they're doing it so they don't have to give back their bonuses. That's why they didn't put them into bankruptcy. Jamie Dimon has gotten a great deal because the Federal Reserve is paying for it. The Federal Reserve is using taxpayer money to buy a bunch of Bear Stearns traders' Mazeratis.

On letting banks fail:

Investment banks have been going bankrupt since the beginning of time. What are you talking about? Let somebody go bankrupt - it's not the end of the world.

You remember what happened in the 70s when they tried this tactic - when Arther Burns kept printing money. Finally, interest rates had to go to over 20 percent and they had to bring in Paul Volcker who had to take draconian measures and put the country into a serious recession. How much more money do you think the Federal Reserve has?

On risks to the banking system:

In 1966, the entire Japanese financial community went bankrupt. Every broker in Japan was in bankruptcy. Japan came out of that and became one of the great powerhouses of the world.

In 1907, everbody on Wall Street was bankrupt. Everybody was bankrupt in 1907. America recovered from that and had a very nice future. Are you telling me that we're never going to have bankruptcies in the financial community again?

On Alan Greenspan's role in this mess:

The first two central banks in America failed. Between Greenspan and Bernanke - I've written this, it's in my book, long before this happened - they're setting up the failure of the central bank. The demise of the Federal Reserve.

The first two failed, this one is going to fail too - because of Greenspan and Bernanke. Greenspan laid the perfect foundation for Bernanke.

Interestingly, four or five Bloomberg articles used quotes from this interview but none of the material above. They just used excerpts from the first part of the clip on the U.S. dollar and commodities.

http://themessthatgreenspanmade.blogspot.com/2008/03/jim-rogers-on-bear-stearns-bailout.html

[Digging4Truth]

Yep... this amounts to nothing less than taking the money and running because they know the economy is fixing to tank.

They are aligning their assets to best serve themselves as we plummet into financial disaster.

Jim Rogers has got his head screwed on straight... thats for sure.

I saw a youtube video the other day where he was being interviewed about the idiotic moves Bernanke is making.

They asked him what he would do if he had Bernanke's position.

He replied "I would abolish the Federal Reserve and then resign."

He has my vote.

[Pressing-On]

Yep... this amounts to nothing less than taking the money and running because they know the economy is fixing to tank.

They are aligning their assets to best serve themselves as we plummet into financial disaster.

Jim Rogers has got his head screwed on straight... thats for sure.

I saw a youtube video the other day where he was being interviewed about the idiotic moves Bernanke is making.

They asked him what he would do if he had Bernanke's position.

He replied "I would abolish the Federal Reserve and then resign."

He has my vote.

Right. I'm reading that McCain needs to say he will replace Bernanke. I agree!

[Digging4Truth]

Right. I'm reading that McCain needs to say he will replace Bernanke. I agree!

McCain needs to say...

"Just kidding... I'm not running for president.... it was all just a cruel joke"

:)

We need someone who will say "I am getting rid of the Federal Reserve (which is neither Federal nor a reserve)

[Pressing-On]

McCain needs to say...

"Just kidding... I'm not running for president.... it was all just a cruel joke"

:)

We need someone who will say "I am getting rid of the Federal Reserve (which is neither Federal nor a reserve)

:ursofunny

I, somehow, knew you a were going to say this. :ursofunny

I agree on the Federal Reserve, it will have to be one-stepped at a time. People have to understand the beginning, middle and end of a change before they will accept it. It has to be explained in layman's terms, in other words.

What do you think about the Fair Tax? They are putting out a new book pretty soon. I still have questions about some things, like savings. Some are saying they will be double taxed on that if the Fair Tax were implemented.

[Digging4Truth]

:ursofunny

I, somehow, knew you a were going to say this. :ursofunny

I agree on the Federal Reserve, it will have to be one-stepped at a time. People have to understand the beginning, middle and end of a change before they will accept it. It has to be explained in layman's terms, in other words.

What do you think about the Fair Tax? They are putting out a new book pretty soon. I still have questions about some things, like savings. Some are saying they will be double taxed on that if the Fair Tax were implemented.

I think the Fair Tax is an oxymoron. :)

[Pressing-On]

I think the Fair Tax is an oxymoron. :)

:ursofunny:ursofunny

Have you studied any of it?

[nahkoe]

:ursofunny

I, somehow, knew you a were going to say this. :ursofunny

I agree on the Federal Reserve, it will have to be one-stepped at a time. People have to understand the beginning, middle and end of a change before they will accept it. It has to be explained in layman's terms, in other words.

What do you think about the Fair Tax? They are putting out a new book pretty soon. I still have questions about some things, like savings. Some are saying they will be double taxed on that if the Fair Tax were implemented.

From what looking around I've done, the Fair Tax will hurt me and others in the same position I'm in. I may be wrong, I've been looking around about a thousand other things, but even their calculator says I'll be worse off with it implemented.

[Pressing-On]

From what looking around I've done, the Fair Tax will hurt me and others in the same position I'm in. I may be wrong, I've been looking around about a thousand other things, but even their calculator says I'll be worse off with it implemented.
I need more details. What do you mean? I'm trying to be more educated on this subject.

I feel as though there is something about it that needs to be ironed out to make it work, if it could work at all.

When I read the first book, I still felt as though so many questions went unanswered. I'd have to read it again to find out what the questions were. :killinme

[OP_Carl]

Update to story (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article3587090.ece)

[A_PoMo]

Oh, sorry. I thought this thread was about tithing. Sorry, my bad....{AP exits with the same expression on his face he had the other day when he accidentally went into the ladies room at Chilis} :)

[Pressing-On]

Oh, sorry. I thought this thread was about tithing. Sorry, my bad....{AP exits with the same expression on his face he had the other day when he accidentally went into the ladies room at Chilis} :)
:ursofunny:ursofunny

[Digging4Truth]

I need more details. What do you mean? I'm trying to be more educated on this subject.

I feel as though there is something about it that needs to be ironed out to make it work, if it could work at all.

When I read the first book, I still felt as though so many questions went unanswered. I'd have to read it again to find out what the questions were. :killinme

I may have to pay taxes this year... but for a person making my income with 3 kids I have not paid income tax for many, many years.

I file exempt and still get money back generally.

I would imagine that she is talking about that.

Lower income people with kids do not generally pay income tax. They generally get money back that they did not pay in.

So if the fair tax imposed any income tax on her at all it would probably not be a good thing in her situation.

[nahkoe]

I may have to pay taxes this year... but for a person making my income with 3 kids I have not paid income tax for many, many years.

I file exempt and still get money back generally.

I would imagine that she is talking about that.

Lower income people with kids do not generally pay income tax. They generally get money back that they did not pay in.

So if the fair tax imposed any income tax on her at all it would probably not be a good thing in her situation.

Right now, I don't even earn enough to have to file. I do get back money that I don't pay in, but I wouldn't mind if I didn't get that back. It's the across the board sales tax that would kill me. I already can't easily purchase what my family needs. If necessities cost me more, we'll be even further behind.

[Pressing-On]

I may have to pay taxes this year... but for a person making my income with 3 kids I have not paid income tax for many, many years.

I file exempt and still get money back generally.

I would imagine that she is talking about that.

Lower income people with kids do not generally pay income tax. They generally get money back that they did not pay in.

So if the fair tax imposed any income tax on her at all it would probably not be a good thing in her situation.


The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including:

* A progressive national retail sales tax.
* A prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level.
* Dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality.
* Repeal of the 16th Amendment through companion legislation.

More detail:

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Tax%20Notes%20article%20on%20FT%20rate.pdf

[OP_Carl]

I may have to pay taxes this year... but for a person making my income with 3 kids I have not paid income tax for many, many years.

I file exempt and still get money back generally.

I would imagine that she is talking about that.

Lower income people with kids do not generally pay income tax. They generally get money back that they did not pay in.

So if the fair tax imposed any income tax on her at all it would probably not be a good thing in her situation.

I have my withholding set to a minimum, yet I still will get a refund that is thousands more than my federal withholding. Now thanks to the incumbent reelection (ooops . . . economic stimulus :rolleyes2) bill, I'm going to get $2700 more smackers from the federal treasury.

Hey, folks, I'm a professional at a major corporation. I'm not the highest-paid man in the room, but I do just fine. And I didn't ask for the gov't to subsidize my large family. It's just stoopitt. :doh

If we're truly in a recession, we cannot exit it by increasing federal spending. This is pandering; this is the wasteful wanton re-distribution of wealth. The founding fathers are spinning in their graves. The more the federal government spends, the less money is available for private exchange and capital investment - the true genesis of economic growth.

:ranting
:p

I'm done now.
:gaga

[Rico]

I have my withholding set to a minimum, yet I still will get a refund that is thousands more than my federal withholding. Now thanks to the incumbent reelection (ooops . . . economic stimulus :rolleyes2) bill, I'm going to get $2700 more smackers from the federal treasury.

Hey, folks, I'm a professional at a major corporation. I'm not the highest-paid man in the room, but I do just fine. And I didn't ask for the gov't to subsidize my large family. It's just stoopitt. :doh

If we're truly in a recession, we cannot exit it by increasing federal spending. This is pandering; this is the wasteful wanton re-distribution of wealth. The founding fathers are spinning in their graves. The more the federal government spends, the less money is available for private exchange and capital investment - the true genesis of economic growth.

:ranting
:p

I'm done now.
:gaga

Then send the money back. Nothing says you are obligated to accept it just because the government sends it to you. If you feel that bad accepting it lemme know, and I will PM you my address where you can forward the funds! :D

[jaxfam6]

I have my withholding set to a minimum, yet I still will get a refund that is thousands more than my federal withholding. Now thanks to the incumbent reelection (ooops . . . economic stimulus :rolleyes2) bill, I'm going to get $2700 more smackers from the federal treasury.

Hey, folks, I'm a professional at a major corporation. I'm not the highest-paid man in the room, but I do just fine. And I didn't ask for the gov't to subsidize my large family. It's just stoopitt. :doh

If we're truly in a recession, we cannot exit it by increasing federal spending. This is pandering; this is the wasteful wanton re-distribution of wealth. The founding fathers are spinning in their graves. The more the federal government spends, the less money is available for private exchange and capital investment - the true genesis of economic growth.

:ranting
:p

I'm done now.
:gaga

The biggest problem is that they are spending it on more salary for themselves and their healthcare. When do we the people actually get a say in what they get to spend our tax dollars on. Isn't that a lot of the reason we fought with England so many years ago? No taxation without representation? Well I am not so sure we are being represented very well now days and we are still taxed, and taxed, and then taxed some more.
Is it time to fight England again?

[smurfette]

The biggest problem is that they are spending it on more salary for themselves and their healthcare. When do we the people actually get a say in what they get to spend our tax dollars on. Isn't that a lot of the reason we fought with England so many years ago? No taxation without representation? Well I am not so sure we are being represented very well now days and we are still taxed, and taxed, and then taxed some more.
Is it time to fight England again?

You just said what I think! I'm to the point to where I think we'd all be better off if we took our money and burried it in a coffee can in the back yard like they did in the old days. I also agree with Dave Ramsey, get out of debt ASAP. God Bless.

[Sam]

The biggest problem is that they are spending it on more salary for themselves and their healthcare. When do we the people actually get a say in what they get to spend our tax dollars on. ...

There are a couple of ways to control how our paid servants (elected representatives) spend the tax money they take from us.

One is to vote out the person that you do not think is doing what you hired him (voted him/her in) for.

A second way was done here locally several years ago. We had a Presbyterian minister who was a pacifist. He thought military spending was wrong so he refused to pay his taxes. He was arrested numerous times but he would go on a hunger strike so he would be released so he would not die in jail. The Presbyterian church organization was embarrassed by him and defrocked him. I worked at GE from 1966 to 1998 and I remember him sitting in front of the gate and the police carrying him away. Eventually the government gave up on him. Then, years later the Presbyterians reinstated him and made him a hero. He lived in a house owned by or which was part of a church so he had no property or salary or assets available for the government to seize. So, he got by without paying taxes but he paid a price.

[jaxfam6]

There are a couple of ways to control how our paid servants (elected representatives) spend the tax money they take from us.

One is to vote out the person that you do not think is doing what you hired him (voted him/her in) for.

A second way was done here locally several years ago. We had a Presbyterian minister who was a pacifist. He thought military spending was wrong so he refused to pay his taxes. He was arrested numerous times but he would go on a hunger strike so he would be released so he would not die in jail. The Presbyterian church organization was embarrassed by him and defrocked him. I worked at GE from 1966 to 1998 and I remember him sitting in front of the gate and the police carrying him away. Eventually the government gave up on him. Then, years later the Presbyterians reinstated him and made him a hero. He lived in a house owned by or which was part of a church so he had no property or salary or assets available for the government to seize. So, he got by without paying taxes but he paid a price.


Thanks but I will pass on the second option. I have been and will step up my practice of not voting for those I do not agree with.

[OP_Carl]

Then send the money back. Nothing says you are obligated to accept it just because the government sends it to you. If you feel that bad accepting it lemme know, and I will PM you my address where you can forward the funds! :D

I've thought about it. A friend of mine says he is going to tear his in two, frame it, and display it in his office.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Maybe I'll just try to spend it as patriotically as possible - by buying American!

Like a good-old reliable Ford Crown Vic . . . made right here in . . . oops, Canada.

Or how about some GE appliances . . . made right here in . . . . Mexico. Rats.

I know! I'll just spend it at red-blooded American Wal*Mart! . . . . on stuff made in China

:(

[Rico]

I've thought about it. A friend of mine says he is going to tear his in two, frame it, and display it in his office.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Maybe I'll just try to spend it as patriotically as possible - by buying American!

Like a good-old reliable Ford Crown Vic . . . made right here in . . . oops, Canada.

Or how about some GE appliances . . . made right here in . . . . Mexico. Rats.

I know! I'll just spend it at red-blooded American Wal*Mart! . . . . on stuff made in China

:(

Well, I'm made in America! Ready for me to send you that address? :D

[Mosby48]

We have just witnessed the largest theft in U.S. history, fully sanctioned by the U.S. government now that it has been infiltrated to the highest levels by cutthroat corporate raiders.

The Bear Stearns building ALONE is worth more than JP Morgan paid for the entire company.

link to story (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/finance/article/bear-bailout-employees-fortunes-vanish_520815_9.html)

The treasury secretary that approved this used to work for Goldman Sachs, a direct competitor to Bear Stearns. Now the funds that were appropriated from the Fed to bail out Bear Stearns are going to be made available to Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan for lending. Forget that it is unconstitutional, immoral, and unethical to bail out an investment bank with taxpayers' money, this was an inside job that will harm thousands of people.


But let's all watch our presidential election/soap opera instead. :rolleyes2
When I saw the heading, I thought they were talking about the 2000 election, or Enron, or Haliburton!!!

[pelathais]

When I saw the heading, I thought they were talking about the 2000 election, or Enron, or Haliburton!!!
No, the "theft" in the 2000 election was avoided when the US Supreme Court ruled that the Florida State Legislature writes the laws in the state of Florida and not the courts. They even cited the Florida Constitution to make that point. That's called "the rule of law." Anything less would have been "theft."

Enron, you may have a point; but Haliburton? What did they "steal?"

[pelathais]

We have just witnessed the largest theft in U.S. history, fully sanctioned by the U.S. government now that it has been infiltrated to the highest levels by cutthroat corporate raiders.

The Bear Stearns building ALONE is worth more than JP Morgan paid for the entire company.

link to story (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/finance/article/bear-bailout-employees-fortunes-vanish_520815_9.html)

The treasury secretary that approved this used to work for Goldman Sachs, a direct competitor to Bear Stearns. Now the funds that were appropriated from the Fed to bail out Bear Stearns are going to be made available to Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan for lending. Forget that it is unconstitutional, immoral, and unethical to bail out an investment bank with taxpayers' money, this was an inside job that will harm thousands of people.


But let's all watch our presidential election/soap opera instead. :rolleyes2
Bear Stearns should have been allowed to go down - but then they wouldn't have even gotten the $242 million that Morgan paid. And I question the statement about the "Bear Stearns building's" worth. $242 million seems a little high. And given that they leveraged everything else, did they really even own that building?

[Sam]

When I saw the heading, I thought they were talking about the 2000 election, or Enron, or Haliburton!!!

Even the power of the Daley political machine brought in from Chicago could not steal the election for the Dems from Dubya.