Fannie, Freddie bailout may have $25 billion tag

Congressional budget analysts on Tuesday put a $25 billion cost estimate on a Bush administration plan to bolster mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but raised questions about a key assumption underlying the plan.

[Pdamerica org]

Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense
(And Stick You with the Bill) January 18, 2008
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston joins us to talk about his new book,“Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You with the Bill).” Johnston reveals how government subsidies and new regulations have quietly funneled money from the poor and the middle class to the rich and politically connected.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18/free_lu...

Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense / Video
(And Stick You with the Bill) January 18, 2008
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston joins us to talk about his new book,“Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You with the Bill).” Johnston reveals how government subsidies and new regulations have quietly funneled money from the poor and the middle class to the rich and politically connected.
http://play.rbn.com/...

[Pdamerica org]

David Cay Johnston Free Lunch Audio
http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlay...

----------

Perfectly Legal: The Covert Campaign to Rig our Tax System to Benefit the Super Rich- and Cheat Everyone Else
http://tinyurl.com/ydf6r6 / April 18, 2004
One of the country's top investigative reporters reveals how the richest people within the top 1 percent of the country has rigged the tax code and other laws in its favor.
Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter David Cay Johnston has been breaking pieces of this story on the front page of The New York Times for nine years, work for which one business school professor calls him ìthe de facto chief tax enforcement officer of the United Statesî. With Perfectly Legal, he puts the whole shocking narrative together in a way that will stir up media attention and make readers angry about the state of our country. And he has sound advice on what to do.
http://www.booknotes.org/Program/...

[Pdamerica org]

THE CONSERVATIVE NANNY STATE
How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer
By Dean Baker / http://tinyurl.com/e7gyr
This book is written in frustration and hope. People in the United States who consider themselves progressive must be frustrated over the extent to which conservative political ideologies have managed to dominate public debate about economic policy in the last quarter century. Even when progressives have won important political battles, such as the defeat of efforts to privatize Social Security, they have done so largely without a coherent ideology; rather, this success rested on the public’s recognition that it stood to lose its retirement security with this “reform.” It also helped that the public was suspicious of the motives of the proponents of Social Security privatization. However, success in the goal-line defense of the country’s most important social program is not the same thing as a forward looking agenda.

The key flaw in the stance that most progressives have taken on economic issues is that they have accepted a framing whereby conservatives are assumed to support market outcomes, while progressives want to rely on the government. This framing leads progressives to futilely lash out against markets, rather than examining the factors that lead to undesirable market outcomes. The market is just a tool, and in fact a very useful one. It makes no more sense to lash out against markets than to lash out against the wheel.

The reality is that conservatives have been quite actively using the power of the government to shape market outcomes in ways that redistribute income upward. However, conservatives have been clever enough to not own up to their role in this process, pretending all along that everything is just the natural working of the market. And, progressives have been foolish enough to go along with this view.

The frustration with this futile debate, where conservatives like markets and progressives like government, is the driving force behind this book, along with the hope that new thinking is possible. We shall see. http://www.conservativenannystate.org/cns.htm...

[Inquiry]

Complete bullcrap. They should let the company tank, to hell with it. The costumers are already screwed, why save a company that had bad business practices?

[John Briner]

wow thats a big bill

- John Briner

[Lance Winslow]

Only $25 billion.
Bush and buds have already pumped nearly $350 billion in liquidity into Wall Street financial giants since Bear Stearns melted down.

[Pdamerica org]

President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security
http://tinyurl.com/bp7h8 / Nov. 8, 1954
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp

Testimony of Ralph Nader
Before the Committee on the Budget U.S. House of Representatives
June 30, 1999
CORPORATE WELFARE
http://tinyurl.com/rdsoq
http://www.nader.org/releases/63099.html

Lou Dobbs: Congress stiffs working Americans
http://tinyurl.com/muc89
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/20/dobbs.june21...

Tom Delay & Bush Republicans Only Benefit The Wealthy
http://gobnf.org/v/td/tomdelaymovie_tease_sm....
----------
Under The Influence
60 Minutes' Steve Kroft Reports On Drug Lobbyists' Role in Passing Bill That Keeps Drug Prices High
http://tinyurl.com/ytolh8
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/29/60m...

Spending on Lobbying Thrives
Drug and health products industries invest $182 million to influence legislation
http://tinyurl.com/394mnn
http://www.publicintegrity.org/rx/report.aspx...

----------

[Pdamerica org]

The Best Energy Bill Corporations Could Buy: Summary of Industry Giveaways in the 2005 Energy Bill
http://tinyurl.com/n7ofd
On August 8, 2005, President Bush signed into the law the energy bill; on July 28,the U.S. House of Representatives voted 275 to 156 to approve the energy bill; and on July 29, the U.S. Senate voted 74 to 26 to approve the energy bill.
Since 2001, energy corporations have showered federal politicians with $115 million in campaign contributions—with three-quarters of that amount going to Republicans. This cash helped secure energy companies and their lobbyists exclusive, private access to lawmakers, starting with Vice-President Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force, whose report provided the foundation of the energy bill passed by Congress and signed by President Bush on August 8.
http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuc...

----------

Bush’s 2005 Inauguration Celebration:
Brought to You by Corporate America
http://tinyurl.com/yp779w
An analysis of Bush’s Presidential Inaugural Committee records reveals that $17.1 million, or 96
percent, of the $17.8 million raised so far came from corporations or their senior executives,
including two corporations that effectively skirted the $250,000 cap on contributions by giving
multiple checks through subsidiaries. The analysis also shows that these same special interests
are the ones that played a leading role in funding Bush’s campaigns—nearly half of the
contributors to the inaugural belong to, or employ, an elite class of Bush fundraisers known as
“Rangers,”“Pioneers” and “Super Rangers.
http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/documents/In...

[wyojake]

Let them fail. Enough of business welfare. Enough of no regulation. Enough of lower tax rates for the rich if we continually have to bail out their businesses. Enough of Republican corruption. Enough.

[Tooth4U]

Inquiry wrote:

Complete bullcrap. They should let the company tank, to hell with it. The costumers are already screwed, why save a company that had bad business practices?

Agree. But see that giant sucking sound Ross Perot talked about south of the Border is now a giant Tidal wave of deafening roar from China. China owns 486 billion of the bonds on Fannie Mack. What a great way to make them pay for the trade deficit!
These losers who are both elected and appointed should be in jail for de regulations which caused the subprime. First two to go, would be Phil Grahm and Bill Clinton. Then, those lenders who recomended Fannie/Mack to borrowers without having a current financial statement from the companies. Fanny is 18 months behind having a current financial statement. That amounts to fraud on the part of those who recommended thier use. Dont forget Fanny spent 180 million in lobbying last year. Free Lunch is right.

[Worrywart]

Quotes from the hearing on mortgage crisis:

"I think there's merit to pay for performance. But it seems like CEOs hit the lottery when their companies collapse.

As the financial columnist Allan Sloan put it, even if you flame out on Wall Street, you still get to keep the money.

All three companies have suffered enormous losses.

Countrywide lost $1.6 billion in 2007, and its stock lost 80 percent of its value.

Merrill Lynch lost $10 billion, and its stock lost 45 percent of its value.

Citigroup also lost $10 billion and its stock lost 48 percent of its value.

In light of that terrible performance, the CEOs of Merrill Lynch and Citigroup resigned last year. Mr. Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide, is also making plans to step down if Countrywide is acquired by Bank of America.

But the pay they received from their companies and their stock sales was extraordinary. Any reasonable relation between their compensation and the interests of their shareholders appears to have been broken down.

Mr. O'Neal left Merrill Lynch with a $161 million retirement package. Mr. Prince was awarded a $10 million bonus,$28 million in unvested stock options and $1.5 million in annual perquisites when he left Citigroup. And Mr. Mozilo received over $120 million in compensation and sales of Countrywide stock.

Well, the obvious question is: How can a few executives do so well when their companies are doing so poorly? Mr. Mozilo, Mr. O'Neal and Mr. Prince are each classic American success stories.
...(rags to riches story of each)
Each of these men achieved incredible success through hard work and ability. And each was richly compensated when their companies prospered. And on behalf of this committee, I want to commend them and thank them for
their many contributions to our country."

http://www.knowledgeplex.org/news/1493441.htm...

[Worrywart]

Go Nader. He's cared about fellow citizens his own whole life. Proven record.

[Pdamerica org]

Bank Scam How The Illuminati Gets And Keeps All Of Your Stuff
Control Society Through Monetary and Banking Systems
http://tinyurl.com/e9zdw
http://www.starttherevolution.org/video/strea...

----------

TAX HAVENS CAUSE POVERTY
"Taxes are what we pay for civilized society"
http://tinyurl.com/9jlsk
Tax havens are a major cause of inequality and poverty. They function as a result of collusion between banks and other financial intermediaries and the governments of states and micro-states which host their activities. The major culprits include the United States, Britain, Switzerland and other European countries which promote tax havens and prevent efforts to clamp down on their activities.
http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/front_content.p...

[Pdamerica org]

GM Courts Talk Radio Hosts
by Ralph Nader August 11, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/2a45e3
Just when one guesses that the standards and practices of national talk radio could go no lower, General Motors comes along to show the way to new lows.
Automotive News (August 6, 2007), the leading trade journal for the industry, reports that GM is wooing the radio stars. Its article led with the headline:“Puff Piece. Rush Limbaugh is one of the radio personalities GM is working with to talk up its vehicles.”

What is surprising is that GM purportedly enlisted not only the expected suspects like Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Bill O’Reilly but also Bill Press and Ed Schultz, know for their liberal views. Attempts to reach Press, Schultz and Hannity were unsuccessful. Surely, they will be explaining their relationship shortly.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/1...

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.
Benito Mussolini

TEXAS REPUBLICAN SENATOR PHIL GRAMM & ENRON MANIPULATING OIL PRICES./ Michael Greenberger, Former Director, Commodities Future Trading Commission 1997-1999.
Michael Greenberger discusses the role of unregulated oil speculators on the buying and selling of oil futures. He says legislation passed in 2000 created an environment where oil speculators influence the current day price of oil and other crude products.
5/27/2008: WASHINGTON, DC: 28 min.
http://www.c-span.org/VideoArchives.asp...

[OneRyder]

Inquiry wrote:

Complete bullcrap. They should let the company tank, to hell with it. The costumers are already screwed, why save a company that had bad business practices?

You probably should learn more about how Fannie and Freddie Mac operates in our economy, and how so many financial investment instruments are backed by these two orgs. Let them fall, and Wall Street collaspes.

Unfortunately, I don't think we could take that hit, financial and from a security standpoint.

Also as unfortunately, McCain's former (he quit last Friday) Senior Economic Advisor thinks the reality of these two financial institutions needing a bailout is just "whinning" on the part of Americans. It's only a mental thing Graham thinks. American's are only imaginging the financial issues we face as a country.

Bvllcrap. Our financial situation after 8 years of Bush is a complete mess. When Bush said "we're turning the corner", he forgot to mention he was driving backwards.

[LocalBoy]

Lance Winslow wrote:

Only $25 billion.
Bush and buds have already pumped nearly $350 billion in liquidity into Wall Street financial giants since Bear Stearns melted down.

Congressional estimates.........Now there is a group who can estimate cost properly.

If they say 25 billion they mean 100 billion and a 25% reduction of purchasing power for those not making money on the scam.

[LocalBoy]

OneRyder wrote:

<quoted text>
You probably should learn more about how Fannie and Freddie Mac operates in our economy, and how so many financial investment instruments are backed by these two orgs. Let them fall, and Wall Street collaspes.
.

Great !!!
If wall street collapses then the citizen entreprenuer will have a chance again and the US will come back better than ever.
Just what we need is a collapse of this great big charity whore known as wall street.
And maybe they will take their lap dogs with them, the federal lackies who sold out.
And the greatest threat of all is the luquidation of the private central bank known as Federal Reserve. HA
Thats exactly what we need...... If your a part of the working class....

[LocalBoy]

wyojake wrote:

Let them fail. Enough of business welfare. Enough of no regulation. Enough of lower tax rates for the rich if we continually have to bail out their businesses. Enough of Republican corruption. Enough.

Its government corruption, both parties are getting rich off of this ponzi scheme.

This did not occur because of "no regulation".
This happened under the watchfull eye of years of regulation, that was used for greedy reasons by a federal government who sold out to large corporations.
To put more well intentioned regulation into a corrupt regulatory entity (feds) is to add to the problem, not reduce it.

The solution is to reduce federal authority and eliminate corporate corruption of what is left.

Nowhere in the constitution will you find rights or authority given to corporations or capitalism.

Central economic planning is not constitutional.
It erodes citizen freedom for corporate profit and public losses.
Its fascism - text book example.

[Pdamerica org]

Back to the 1880s
This is not the first time that America has looked as if it was about to succumb to what might be termed the British temptation. America witnessed a similar widening of the income gap in the Gilded Age. It also witnessed the formation of a British-style ruling class. The robber barons of the late 19th century sent their children to private boarding schools and made sure that they married the daughters of the old elite, preferably from across the Atlantic. Politics fell into the hands of the members of a limited circle—so much so that the Senate was known as the millionaires' club.
Yet the late 19th and early 20th centuries saw a concerted attempt to prevent America from degenerating into a class-based society. Progressive politicians improved state education. Philanthropists—many of them the robber barons reborn in new guise—tried to provide ladders to help the lads-o'-parts (Andrew Carnegie poured millions into free libraries). Such reforms were motivated partly out of a desire to do good works and partly out of a real fear of the implications of class-based society. Teddy Roosevelt advocated an inheritance tax because he thought that huge inherited fortunes would ruin the character of the republic. James Conant, the president of Harvard in 1933-53, advocated radical educational reform—particularly the transformation of his own university into a meritocracy—in order to prevent America from producing an aristocracy.

[wyojake]

LocalBoy wrote:

<quoted text>Its government corruption, both parties are getting rich off of this ponzi scheme.
This did not occur because of "no regulation".
This happened under the watchfull eye of years of regulation, that was used for greedy reasons by a federal government who sold out to large corporations.
To put more well intentioned regulation into a corrupt regulatory entity (feds) is to add to the problem, not reduce it.
The solution is to reduce federal authority and eliminate corporate corruption of what is left.
Nowhere in the constitution will you find rights or authority given to corporations or capitalism.
Central economic planning is not constitutional.
It erodes citizen freedom for corporate profit and public losses.
Its fascism - text book example.

A fox running a hen house isn't regulation even though he has a watchful eye. A shot-gun to the head of a fox is thoughtful regulation. Start with Reaganomics and deregulatory practices for good intentions. Where did that ultimately get us.