[b]j[/b]

I agree w/ the gentleman above that suggests massive deportation.

When do you leave?

Peace.

DS

President Clinton also signed the commodities modernization act, which caused as much or more damage as repealing Glass Steagal. This allowed derivatives to be sold as unregulated securities and let loose the forces that have created over 500 Trillion in worthless paper held by the banking system.

These two events were required as a package, one would not work alone. By this fact we can deduce that it was purposefull in design and intent. The goal was to unchain restrictions placed on banking system in 1933 and 1934. These restrictions were placed on Banking system as result of congressional investigations to cause of the great depression during the 1930′s.

President Clinton created the environment for todays banking crisis, President Bush Fed the Raging Monster steroids; massively increased Debt that forced Federal Reserve to borrow huge amounts. This massive borrowing fueled credit markets which created ever increasing volumes of derivatives sold in packaged bundles to each other. It was a Game of Musical Chairs, the exact same scenario that occured during the Roaring Twenties.

There was no regulatory body in place to oversee and restrict the flow of Bank Paper (with no assets backing them), it was basically a repeat of the famous Tulip craze 400 years ago in Holland. At least during the Tulip debacle the individual ended up with an armful of flowers, in the derivatives mess there is only pretty paper.

The only rational solution is to nationalize USA banking system until true depth of Damage derivatives have caused is confirmed, We dont know which bank owns what amounts to whom. This is the main reason any funds recieved by banks is immediately sucked up by bank and not extended to people and companies seeking credit. Banks refuse to identify the amount of derivatives they hold, which today total about 550 TRILLION in US dollars.

We can keep sending banks funds, it will not help or solve the problem. The economy is not suffering because there isnt enough liquidity, the economy is suffering because liquidity is absorbed by banking system to offset derivative losses before it can get to commercial marketplace. Until the weak link is eliminated ( banks hijacking the funds), we will continue to throw money at the problem without any hope of fixing it.

Western consumer economies have been pulling the rest of the world along for many years, but globalization means that we are no longer competitive as either a vendor or a workforce. Which means that our standard of living needs to drop significantly. Which means that we won’t have the consumer power to pull the rest of the world along, etc., etc. Contract, deflate, repeat.

At some point, the whole planet will reach some sort of entropic equilibrium state — midway between Angola and Libya — but we really don’t know what happens then. Once the banks and corporations went global and free trade pacts were installed, nations lost the capacity to accumulate or horde wealth that wasn’t strictly natural-resource based. Nations, as such, will be mostly interchangeable and irrelevant, and we can only hope that the remaining banks and transnational business entities are inclined to rule benignly over their 7 billion minimum-wage minions.

The obvious wild card is that the few nuclear-armed nations might see the writing on the wall and decide to re-establish regional empires, complete with the colonial inequities that enable a wealthy, small ruling class. Of course, that could go wrong about a million ways, resulting in massive die-offs and a largely “Beyond Thunderdome” scenario.

In defense of Obama, you can imagine how badly the American public would react to hearing it laid out in plain words that we’ve only been living large on the basis of war economies and the developing world’s willingness to float our long-term debt in exchange for current real dollars that helped them reach a point where we’re no longer necessary…and that we all need to think about planting a garden and treating hot water as a luxury.

From a purely practical standpoint, a promise of hope and one last round of crazy-ass borrowing is definitely a happier choice.

The stimulus will fail. So would tax cuts. So would everything. So we might as well have one last party before we face the music and figure out what we’re going to be on the other side of the Apocalypse.

It’s both puzzling and mind-boggling. Republicans that didn’t have a care in the world for budget deficits and national debts are suddenly declaring themselves “fiscally conservative.” And a mince-wording President Bush is suddenly forgotten, while a right-wing debate swirls around Obama’s defense – angry or joking? – about his ears.

It’s absurd, and a sort of “prolefeed” offered up instead of debate on more substantial issues.

I mean – really – Obama’s ears?

Some of the posters here have made some questionable statements as well. For example, AlexinCT said:

“Remember the left, like every other vile entity on this planet, believes that the end justifies the means.”

Hmmm, unlike the Bush administration that “fixed the facts” in its push to invade Iraq? Many Americans feel that the right-wing and Republicans believe that the “end justifies the means as well.” That supporting cocaine-dealing Nicaragua Contras is fine as long as they oppose a socialist Sandinista regime. That supporting a dictator in Saddam is fine, as long as he oppose an Islamic Iran. That misleading the US public isn’t an issue, as long as it fits the need to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam.

Do you really believe that it’s the Left which believes that the end justifies the means? I would argue against that particular belief.

The hypocrisy seething from the American Right is incredible.

And if my life depended on it, I would take a hard working midwesterner or southerner over the metrosexual elite when it comes to survival. People who know how to grow and preserve their own food, who know how to hunt and fish to provide food, who know how to use tools to build shelter and produce clothing. Can you see some Hahvahd elitist capable of any of those things? Shoot they’d be crying that they messed up their expensive manicures or that any kind of physical labor is beneath them.

Ha ha ha ha! Now we’re criticizing President Obama for not being Hittler-y enough!? You’re out of your mind!

You cite those trsditionall Democrat voting states as the ones receiving the lest subsidy while the ones receiving most are traditionally Rupublican you claim (I don’t doubt you but can’t be bothered checking) Does it not occur to you that Team Obama are confident of retaining the support of the Democrat states and so are aiming to buy the votes of the Republican ones. Don’t forget, only a day after the inauguration Obama supporters were calling for a change in the law you allow him to serve as many terms as he wished rather than the statutory maximum two.

Obama is hardly the most deft political operator ever. When Adolf Hitler pulled the same stunt in Germany around eighty years ago he did it with much more subtlety.