Quantcast
Politicians | Boom2Bust.com


Archive for the ‘Politicians’ Category

The Next Great Depression

Taking it down a few notches today, I enjoyed a nice cigar from the Dominican Republic this afternoon out on my balcony here in the Windy City. Kind of bummed out that one of my suppliers raised their prices, though. Too bad. I almost pulled a JFK and ordered a stockpile of cigars last year after Washington Democrats were looking to increase the tax cap from a nickel per cigar to $10 a stick— or 20,413%. Unbelievable. By the way, never heard of the JFK cigar story? Well, if you have time, I highly recommend you watch the following video (a little over 3 minutes long) of Pierre Salinger, JFK’s secretary, telling the story (and other cigar-related ones)…

YouTube Video Link

While puffing away, I got the chance to listen to a portion of last weekend’s “Financial Sense Newshour” broadcast. Jim Puplava and John Loeffler have been talking about a financial crisis window for a while now, which they expect to take place between 2009 and 2012. Puplava and Loeffler had this to say last weekend:

JOHN: So looking forward, say, 12 to 24 months, we would say, given where we’re going, we can probably look towards higher gold and metals prices; there will be another money crisis – another currency crisis – and all it would seem like they’re [Congress] doing right now is staving off the day of reckoning. Let’s face it, we said that 2008, that’s the ramp up to 2009 to 2012 – it’s accelerated a little more than I thought it would be and it’s a little more violent than I thought it would be, but nevertheless we’re still on that; and somewhere in that window, all of this stuff begins to fall apart and you can’t tell what’s going to trigger it, but it will go.

JIM: It’s going to trigger. And I think that the thing that’s scaring the heck out of them [Congress] is all of this is starting to unfold – whether it’s $4 gasoline at the pumps, headline inflation with foods, banks going under, stock market manipulation – all of this – and they’re desperately just trying to buy time to get elected because you’ve got 535 people in Congress who are worried about keeping their jobs. And what I think is going to happen is as this worsens the country is going to lurch very hard to the left in the November election (we’re going to get into this in the next segment) and then as a result of the policies that are going to put us in place, that is going to give us our great depression that I anticipate.

By 2010, the United States is going to be in a major depression.

And then, what is going to happen is we’re going to lurch – almost do a 180 degree turn – and lurch very hard to the right as one disaster after another unfolds upon the country.

Great cigar, not so great forecast…

Source:

Financial Sense Newshour
3rd Hour, Part 2
FinancialSense.com, July 19, 2008

Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices

Sphere: Related Content

How Politicians Make Themselves Look Stupid, Part 2

Yesterday, I noted in part 1 that Senate Democrats, led by Senators Byron Dorgan and Harry Reid, rolled out the “Stop Excessive Speculation Act” Tuesday morning to scare off crude oil speculators, who they blame for high prices.

Crude for August delivery, scheduled to expire Tuesday, dropped $3.09, or 2.3%, to settle at $127.95 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the lowest close since June 5.

Ironically, later in the day a task force chaired by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (the agency assigned with investigating/punishing speculators in the bill) found that fundamental supply-and-demand factors, rather than speculators (as the politicians claimed), were most likely to blame for the high prices.

CNN Money picked up on the findings, which you can watch here. The segment lasts 1 minute 46 seconds.

Source:

“CFTC: No oil market manipulation”
Video
CNN Money, July 23, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

Washington’s Bear Hunt

From all the action coming out of the nation’s capital today, you’d almost think the various government entities in Washington coordinated efforts against the oil, dollar, and housing bears. Almost.

First, it was crude oil. Senate Democrats, led by Senators Byron Dorgan and Harry Reid, rolled out the “Stop Excessive Speculation Act” to scare off oil speculators, who they blame for high prices.

Crude for August delivery, scheduled to expire Tuesday, dropped $3.09, or 2.3%, to settle at $127.95 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the lowest close since June 5.

Ironically, later in the day a task force chaired by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (the agency assigned with investigating/punishing speculators in the bill) found that fundamental supply-and-demand factors, rather than speculators (as the politicians claimed), were most likely to blame for the high prices. Doh!

Next, dollar bears were targeted. Reuters reported:

The dollar rallied Tuesday, after a Federal Reserve official suggested that U.S. rates may have to rise to stem inflation and a top Treasury official repeated that a strong currency is in the interest of the country.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson reiterated on Tuesday that a strong dollar is important to U.S. interests and the underlying strength of the economy, as well as policies aimed at shoring up confidence, would be reflected in currency markets. At the same time, Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser said rising inflation could force the Fed to start raising interest rates even before labor and financial markets recover.

Gold for August delivery dropped $15.20 to end at $948.50 an ounce on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Rising interest rates? Strong dollar policy? Looks a lot like jawboning to me. But don’t take my word for it. On July 15, Reuters ran a piece about legendary investor George Soros. From the interview:

All told, Soros said Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, is in a bind.

“When he recognized the seriousness of the credit crisis, he acted very radically lowering interest rates and he used the tools that are at his disposal,” Soros said. However, now the “armory” is depleted, he said adding that Bernanke can’t lower interest rates because of the effect it would have on the dollar and he can’t raise interest rates because of the looming recession. Soros said.

“Therefore, his options are limited — he is boxed in.”

And how many times have we heard about this supposed “strong dollar policy” of ours? Actions speak louder than words, right? Back on March 17, Soros’ former partner, Jim Rogers, said during a Bloomberg Television interview:

Now, please, do we even bother reporting that anymore? Poor Hank Paulson, had a reasonable education, and a reasonably-good career, head of Goldman Sachs, now he goes around the world making a fool out of himself. Goes around saying we want a strong dollar, the next day he goes to China and says we want a weak dollar, and then he goes to Japan and says we want a weak dollar. I mean, you have to feel sorry for the guy. At least, I do.

Finally, it was housing naysayers who fell under the gun. From the CNBC website this afternoon:

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said America’s housing market could turn a corner and begin recovering within months, but it will take longer to resolve all housing-related problems.

“Obviously, it will go on beyond months with some of the issues in the housing market, but I believe we can get to the point within months where we turn the corner on housing,” Paulson said in a televised interview with Fox Business Network.

Sound familiar to anyone? From my post “Paulson Weighs In On Housing” from July 2, 2007:

Today, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson spoke to Reuters about a number of economic issues, including housing. Paulson said the U.S. economy is healthy, despite problems with the subprime mortgage sector. The former chairman of Goldman Sachs stated that the downturn in the housing market is “at or near the bottom. It’s had a significant impact on the economy. No one is forecasting when, with any degree of clarity, that the upturn is going to come other than it’s at or near the bottom.” Beyond subprime mortgage woes, Paulson declared that the financial markets looked sound. He said, “Markets are volatile. I haven’t seen a single thing that surprises me – it’s hard to surprise me.”

DJIA down 1,933 points since then, S&P 500 down 243 points, global credit crunch, $453 billion of write-downs, Bear Stearns, IndyMac, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac… surprise!

Sources:

“Dollar Jumps on Paulson, Plosser Comments”
Reuters, July 22, 2008

“Soros says Fannie, Freddie crisis not the last”
Jennifer Ablan
Reuters, July 15, 2008

Jim Rogers Interview
Bloomberg News Video
Bloomberg, March 17, 2008

“Paulson: Housing Market Could Turn Corner Soon”
CNBC, July 22, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

How Politicians Make Themselves Look Stupid

Earlier today, CNN Money’s Scott Anderson wrote about new legislation introduced by Senate Democrats that is meant to “crack down” on oil speculators, who they claim are responsible for high crude oil prices. The bill, known as the “Stop Excessive Speculation Act,” is sponsored by Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), along with other Democrats. According to Anderson:

It would provide more resources and authority to the Commodities Futures Trading Commission to detect and punish speculation, stop speculators from using foreign markets to manipulate the price of oil in the United States, require more transparency in oil markets and limit the trading of market players who do not intend to take delivery of the oil they purchase.

In particular, the bill will give the CFTC greater power to regulate the “swap” market for futures and differentiate between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” hedge trading that, the Democrats say, has lead to increased prices.

Well, a test vote on the legislation took place today, with the result being 94-0 in favor of. At this point, it’s not clear when a final vote would take place. Senator Dorgan remarked:

First things first. If you are running a race with hurdles, jump the first hurdle first. The reason we have oil at $130, $140, $145 a barrel - like a roman candle going up, up, up - is because we have excessive, relentless speculation in these markets… Nothing in supply and demand in the last year justifies the price of oil.

Now, here’s where it gets funny…

From the Associated Press Tuesday afternoon:

A federal task force set up to examine the sharp run-up in oil prices says in an interim report that fundamental supply-and-demand factors are most likely to blame

The Interagency Task Force on Commodity Markets, chaired by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, was formed last month to examine investment practices and fundamental market factors.

I recall something that Jim Puplava said this past weekend on his show “Financial Sense Newshour.” He said:

We’re posturing here, rather than dealing, and that’s why we’re going to be heading into a crisis. Instead of trying to solve the crisis, it’s like Matt [Simmons] said- they’re on a witch hunt. You’ve seen it. They’ve tried to blame it on the weather, the war, the dollar, the oil companies, and now, the latest witch hunt is speculators. And, instead of solving the problem, they’re just making the problem worse, which is why we see a full-blown crisis in the year ahead.

Maybe Congress should focus on something they’re good at, like conducting hearings on steroids in Major League Baseball…

Sources:

“Democrats: Crackdown on oil speculators”
Scott Anderson
CNN Money, July 22, 2008

“Fundamentals led to $130 oil – report”
Associated Press, July 22, 2008

Financial Sense Newshour
3rd Hour, Part 1
FinancialSense.com, July 19, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

Weekend Videos

Just got back to blogging late Friday evening. Had to entertain my relatives from Canada who are in. Like the Irish a couple of weeks ago, they shopped liked it was Christmas in July to take advantage of the weaker dollar. I know one thing for sure. Foreigners sure love our “strong dollar” policy…

“Oil Crisis”
Becky Quick
CNBC, July 18, 2008

From the CNBC website:

The House may vote on releasing oil from the strategic petroleum reserve, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and CNBC’s Becky Quick.

You can view the 3 minute 18 second video here.

Note to Congress- there is no quick-fix for the energy crisis. I’m starting to consider donating funds to Jim Puplava’s proposed program, “No Congressman Left Behind.”

Apparently, it’s a non-issue now anyway, seeing that after oil prices suffered their biggest weekly drop ever, Yahoo! Finance asks tonight, “So is it time to declare the energy bubble popped?” By the way, the Associated Press is reporting that terrorists are trying to enter the United States with European Union passports. Good thing Congress wants to deplete oil stockpiles meant for a national emergency. Like a major terrorist attack, for example. If you think 9/11 was a one-off event, I have a bridge that spans the East River out in NYC that I can sell you for a really good price…

“Is government clueless about economy”
Jim Jubak
MSN Money, July 18, 2008

From the MSN Money website:

Washington is talking us into a deeper crisis. Neither the President nor Congress gets it: When you owe as much as the US does, keeping your overseas creditors happy is the most important thing, says Jim Jubak.

You can view the 4 minute 7 second video here.

Jubak said in the segment:

The U.S. is a debtor nation. And debtor nations need to remember one thing. You have got to keep your creditors happy. So the creditors, the people who hold all those treasury bonds, hold all those U.S. dollars, all over the world, are looking to see how credible the U.S. government is at this point. And if they think there’s some danger the dollar’s going to slide further, or the mortgage-backed securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac aren’t going to hold up, you’re likely to see a big retreat from the dollar by those creditors, that will drive up U.S. interest rates, it will drive the dollar down further, and make the crisis even worse. The Treasury and the Fed get that. But it’s pretty clear that no one else in Washington really understands.

Jubak pointed out some really stupid things that American politicians are saying. This, in turn, isn’t convincing our creditors that we know what we’re doing when it comes to our economy. As a matter of fact, we’re doing such a great job that Jubak noted:

The Saudi government has gone into serious discussions about taking its currency off the dollar peg.

“Christmas In July”
The Dandy Warhols, “Little Drummer Boy” (1995)
YouTube Video Link

Sphere: Related Content

Wall Street Journal’s Smack Down Of Senator Schumer

If U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) is a subscriber to the Wall Street Journal, I’m pretty sure he’s in the process of cancelling it as we speak. Even if it was a complimentary subscription. Last night, I happened to come across an op-ed on the Journal website that makes it pretty clear how they feel about “Bank Run Charlie” in the wake of the IndyMac failure. From the Review & Outlook piece entitled “$4 Billion Senator” of July 15:

The federal takeover of IndyMac Bank over the weekend could cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. between $4 billion and $8 billion. But Senator Chuck Schumer, who helped to precipitate the collapse by publicizing a letter to the bank’s regulator last month, has no remorse.

He was, he says, just doing his job in telling regulators that the bank “could face a collapse,” a prophecy that quickly proved to be self-fulfilling. “It’s what legislators are supposed to do,” the New York Democrat told the Journal. Depositors who spent Monday trying to recover some of their money might beg to differ.

The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), whose job it actually was to regulate IndyMac, took a different view. “The immediate cause of the closing,” the OTS wrote in a press release, “was a deposit run that began and continued after the public release of a June 26 letter to the OTS and the FDIC from Senator Charles Schumer of New York.” The OTS added: “In the following 11 business days, depositors withdrew more than $1.3 billion from their accounts.”

As the op-ed piece noted, nobody is pretending that IndyMac wasn’t in bad shape before Senator Schumer wrote his letter. But the Journal argued:

Mr. Schumer was not content merely to share his profound concern with regulators. He also leaked the June 26 letter to the press – which is more like shouting “fire” in a crowded bank than dialing 911.

Yet, “Bank Run Charlie” continues to dodge any blame, as most successful politicians routinely do. According to the WSJ:

Mr. Schumer now argues that OTS was asleep at the switch, and that blaming him is like blaming “the fire on the guy who called 911.” In fact, it’s blaming the guy who poured on the gasoline. Very few banks, if any, would remain standing for long in the current tense financial environment after a Senator, in effect, told its depositors to run for the exits. In the 1930s, such tipsters were derided as rumormongers and often faced indictment for encouraging depositors to stampede banks.

Only last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced an investigation into the role of rumor-peddlers in the run on Bear Stearns. We somehow doubt that Mr. Schumer will receive similar SEC scrutiny for his very similar role in bringing about a liquidity crisis at IndyMac. But he may be more deserving.

Source:

“The $4 Billion Senator”
Review & Outlook
Wall Street Journal, July 15, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

House Speaker Pelosi Announces Second Stimulus Package

Looks like another stimulus check may soon be on its way to American households. According to Reuters today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi met with several economists Tuesday and announced afterwards:

We will be proceeding with another stimulus package.

Reuters’ Andrew Taylor wrote:

Pelosi said that recently issued tax rebate payments of $600 to individuals and $1,200 for married couples have helped the economy but that more is necessary to offset the drag of higher gasoline prices and other costs…

The Democratic effort is still in its formative stages, but most of the proposals mentioned by Democrats were rejected by Bush during negotiations that produced the earlier stimulus measure. A new package probably won’t be acted on before Congress returns in September from its annual summer vacation.

According to Taylor, this second stimulus package could consist of additional tax rebates, heating and air conditioning subsidies for the poor, infrastructure projects, higher food stamp payments, and aid to the states.

Speaking of seconds, back on April 29 I talked about humor columnist Dave Barry, who published the following in the Miami Herald on April 13 in response to the first stimulus package:

…this year, filing taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format:

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.
Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.
Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgen.
Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.
Q. But isn’t that stimulating the economy of China?
A. Shut up.

Source:

“Democrats plan second economic stimulus bill”
Andrew Taylor
Associated Press, July 15, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

Quote For The Week

quotes.jpg

The administration is doing what they always do, blaming the fire on the person who called 911.

-New York Senator Charles Schumer, deflecting blame that he was partially responsible for the IndyMac bank run and failure last week.

When a senior senator who is in a number of influential posts regarding oversight of bank regulators directly attacks the confidence of a depository institution, it matters. Not surprisingly, the director of the Office of Thrift Supervision concluded that the collapse of the bank immediately following the Senator’s comments was not a coincidence. Director Reich concluded that Senator Schumer had ‘given the bank a heart attack’.

Why? Why would a federal official with enormous power, destroy an institution on which tens of thousands of depositors (not all of whom are insured) and employees depend? Why would a New York Senator attack a Pasadena bank, acting as some sort of amateur, self-appointed, long-distance bank examiner?

-Jerry Bowyer, CNBC “Kudlow & Co.” Contributor

Sphere: Related Content

IndyMac Collapse Second Largest Bank Failure In U.S. History

Well, it wasn’t long before all those recalled FDIC employees were put to good use. From MarketWatch tonight:

IndyMac Bancorp Inc. became the biggest casualty of the subprime mortgage crisis on Friday, as federal regulators shut down the troubled Pasadena, Calif.-based savings bank in one of the largest U.S. bank failures ever.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said in a statement it will take over operations of IndyMac, which will open for business on Monday as IndyMac Federal Bank. The thrift had total assets of $32.01 billion as of March 31.

IndyMac Bancorp Inc. now has the distinction of being the second-largest financial institution to fail in U.S. history, according to the Office of Thrift Supervision, which had regulated IndyMac.

MarketWatch reporters Jonathan Burton and John Letzing noted:

Regulators said the “immediate cause” of IndyMac’s failure was a deposit run in recent days that began after a June 26 letter to the OTS and the FDIC from New York Senator Charles Schumer was made public. The letter voiced concerns about IndyMac’s soundness.

By July 10, depositors had pulled more than $1.3 billion from their accounts, the OTS said in a statement.

“The institution failed today due to a liquidity crisis,” said OTS Director John Reich. “Although this institution was already in distress, I am troubled by any interference in the regulatory process.”

Schumer couldn’t immediately be reached for comment late Friday.

It must be pretty lonely up there on that pedestal right now…

Bank Slayer?

Source:

“Latest victim of mortgage crisis, IndyMac taken over”
Jonathan Burton, John Letzing
MarketWatch, July 11, 2008

Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices

Sphere: Related Content

New Study: Housing Bust Causing Massive Losses In Household Wealth

Just wanted to share a press release with you from the think-tank of our old friend, Dean Baker:

Housing Market Meltdown Will Cause Massive Losses in Household Wealth

Plummeting house prices will leave millions of homeowners dependent almost exclusively on Social Security in their retirement

For Immediate Release: July 9, 2008
Contact: Alan Barber, (202) 293-5380 x 115

WASHINGTON, DC- As Senators McCain and Obama fine-tune their plans for Social Security in preparation for the 2008 presidential election, a new report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) shows that, due to the collapse of the housing bubble, the vast majority of Americans have accumulated little or no wealth. This means that they will be almost completely reliant on Social Security and Medicare to support them in their retirement years.

The study, “The Impact of the Housing Crash on Family Wealth,” analyzed the wealth holdings of families in all age cohorts in 2004 and projected the wealth of these families in 2009. The findings are presented by income quintile under three scenarios- real house prices remain at current levels, real house prices fall by an additional 10 percent, or real house prices fall by an additional 20 percent. In all three scenarios, the vast majority of these families will have little or no housing wealth in 2009.

“This extraordinary destruction of wealth will have tremendous implications for millions of families,” said report co-author Dean Baker. “Coupled with a very low personal savings rate, this means that many people, especially those near retirement will only have Social Security and Medicare to rely on once they leave the workforce.”

The report projects that if house prices stay the same through 2009, the median household headed by a person between the ages of 45 and 54, those in their prime earning years, will have 24.7 percent less wealth than did the median household in this age group in 2004. These households will have accumulated just $113,268 in net worth in 2009, barely $15,000 more than their counterparts in 1989, whose net worth totaled $97,600.

If real house prices fall 10 percent, the median household in the 45 to 54 cohort will see a 34.6 percent loss in wealth compared with the median in 2004 while families in the 18 to 34 cohort will lose of 67.6 percent. If prices fall by 20 percent, the most pessimistic scenario, families in the 55-64 cohort will experience a loss of 49.6 percent of their wealth compared to the same cohort in 2004.

This analysis should also prompt serious re-examination of policy proposals to cut Social Security and Medicare for near retirees. Baker commented, “policies that perhaps could have been justified at the peak of the housing bubble make much less sense now that tens of millions of near-retirees have just seen most of their wealth disappear.”

In analyzing wealth holdings for these families, the authors used data from the Federal Reserve Board’s 2004 Survey of Consumer Finance. The authors also used the S&P 500 and the Case-Shiller 20-City Composite Index to adjust for equity values and home price changes between 2004 and 2009.

###

The Center for Economic and Policy Research is an independent, nonpartisan think tank that was established to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people’s lives. CEPR’s Advisory Board of Economists includes Nobel Laureate economists Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz; Richard Freeman, Professor of Economics at Harvard University; and Eileen Appelbaum, Professor and Director of the Center for Women and Work at Rutgers University.

Source:

“Housing Market Meltdown Will Cause Massive Losses in Household Wealth”
Press Release
Center for Economic and Policy Research, July 9, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

Housing Industry Buying A Bailout?

Let the people think they govern, and they will be governed.

-William Penn (English religious leader and colonist. 1644 - 1718)

This weekend I came across the following by Elizabeth Williamson of the Wall Street Journal:

The housing industry already has given more money in political contributions this election cycle than in the entire previous cycle, while winning favorable provisions in an emergency housing bill moving through the legislature.

Through May, mortgage bankers and brokers, real-estate companies and home builders had given more than $95 million to federal candidates and political parties so far this election cycle, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. That compares to about $57 million at this point in the 2006 cycle.

The recipients include people with key roles in the legislation. On the Senate Banking Committee, they include Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), ranking Republican Richard Shelby of Alabama, and Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R., N.C.). On the House Financial Services Committee, recipients include Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D., Pa.), committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) and Rep. Spencer Bachus (R., Ala.)

Lawmakers say the money is needed to pay rising campaign costs. The idea that it would influence their positions on legislation is “B.S.,” said Rep. Frank.

Ever heard of a “conflict of interest?”

“Keep it fair! Keep it fair!”“I can’t. I can’t.”
Scene From “Caddyshack” (1980)

Bloomberg’s Nicholas Johnston also wrote on July 5:

Contributions are given to lawmakers who support industry positions and withheld from those who don’t, the newspaper reported.

The contributions, which are allowed by law, are a means toward “relationship building,” Steve O’Connor, senior vice president for government affairs at the Mortgage Bankers Association, told the newspaper.

“Relationship building?” Come on, man. When Mark Twain said “we have the best government money can buy,” is this what he meant?

Sources:

“Housing Industry Ramps Up Political Donations”
Elizabeth Williamson
Wall Street Journal, July 5, 2008

“Housing Industry Political Donations Top $95 Million, WSJ Says”
Nicholas Johnston
Bloomberg, July 5, 2008


Sphere: Related Content

Depression 2010?

The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop.

-Unknown

I always try to tune into “Financial Sense Newshour” with Jim Puplava and John Loeffler every week. During part one of the third hour of the June 21 broadcast, Jim Puplava dropped a bomb with the following statement:

The U.S. economy, John, in my opinion, is heading into a depression by the year 2010. Now, rebuilding the country may be the only thing that brings us out of that depression. And remember, severe bear markets in depressions, as we’ve been talking about on this program, are caused by politicians. It takes a politician to turn a recession into a depression. And given the current debate, and the holes that we’ve dug ourselves in, I don’t see how we’re going to avoid this crisis. I mean, the things we’re talking about doing today, should have been done over 10 years ago.

next-depression.jpg

Source:

“Financial Sense Newshour”
Third Hour, Part One
June 21, 2008, Broadcast
FinancialSense.com

Sphere: Related Content

Mozilogate?

Leave it to Diana Olick, CNBC’s real estate reporter, to come up with another doozie. This time, she’s unearthed some skeletons that belong to a few U.S. Senators regarding their dealings with Countrywide Financial. Earlier today, Olick wrote:

Apparently, Countrywide has a VIP program, known as “Friends of Angelo,” where the lender gives certain people better deals, maybe shaves a point or something, simply due to who those certain people are, basically saving them all thousands of dollars.

Now how about Senator Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, who has been spearheading the Senate’s housing rescue plan? Or Senator Kent Conrad, who is a member of the Senate Finance Committee? They got the deals. Conrad put out a statement saying, “Although I did not ask for or know that I was receiving a discount, and even though I was offered a competitive loan from another lender, I do not want to have received preferential treatment.” Conrad now says he’ll donate $10,500 to charity (Habitat for Humanity) and refi his loan (good luck with today’s mortgage market!).

I thought penance only worked for the Catholics. The CNBC reporter continued:

Senator Dodd’s statement reads: “As a United States Senator, I would never ask or expect to be treated differently than anyone else refinancing their home.”

I’m pretty sure there a number of Senators who would be upset if they weren’t treated differently. Their staff could vouch for that. Olick concluded:

So am I to believe that these high-ranking Senators, and a former Fannie CEO, didn’t read their loan documents to figure out that they were getting a special deal?? Did they not know enough about how mortgages work to figure it out? And why would Mozilo give these folks a special deal if he didn’t expect them to at least know about it??

The Senators are claiming they had no idea. Come on. I realize I’m supposed to accept that all those subprime borrowers didn’t understand their loans, but to accept that these well-educated leaders of our government didn’t–well that insults my intelligence, and every borrower’s out there.

I wonder if the next time we hear about Conrad, Dodd, and the Countrywide issue, they’ll be pleading the Fifth…

Source:

“Senators As Confused Borrowers? Don’t Insult Our Intelligence”
Diana Olick
CNBC, June 16, 2008

Sphere: Related Content

Are Rich Americans Leaving The Country?

I heard the rumor the other week. A number of wealthy Americans are leaving, or making plans to leave, the country. The player-haters can’t wait (of course). Consider the following comment that appeared on DemocraticUnderground.com:

LEAVE. Take your money and go. America will survive without you…

So rather than ruin our country for the other 90% whom you despise. Go away. Take all of your precious money and go elsewhere. Even if it means depression we will be better off in the long run without your manipulation of our government just for the sake of having your cake and eating it too.

And it appears some politicians can’t wait for the rich to leave either. On June 11, CNN Money senior writer Jeanne Sahadi talked about the 2008 U.S. presidential candidates’ proposed tax policies. She wrote:

But voters really want to know one thing: How would the presidential candidates’ views trickle down to their tax bills? A report released Wednesday by a nonpartisan policy group in Washington, D.C., takes a big first step toward answering that question.

According to the Tax Policy Center’s findings, Sahadi wrote that under presumptive Democratic nominee for president Barack Obama:

High-income taxpayers would pay more in taxes, while everyone else’s tax bill would be reduced…

Obama’s plan would keep the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in place for everyone except those making more than roughly $250,000, and he would increase the capital gains tax.

…the highest-income households – those with at least $603,000 in income - would see a dramatic decline in their after-tax income - a drop of 8.7%, or $116,000.

The CNN Money senior writer noted:

Jason Furman, a newly appointed senior economic adviser to Obama, said his preliminary response is that the report’s findings bear out what Obama’s campaign has been saying: that he’s for the middle class.

At the expense of the rich, apparently. Just this afternoon, the Associated Press reported:

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama on Friday called for higher payroll taxes on wage-earners making more than $250,000 annually, a step that would affect the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans.

The presidential candidate told senior citizens in Ohio that it is unfair for middle-class earners to pay the Social Security tax “on every dime they make,” while millionaires and billionaires pay it on only “a very small percentage of their income.”

The 6.2 percent payroll tax is now applied to all wages up to $102,000 a year, which covers the entire amount for most Americans. Under Obama’s plan, the tax would not apply to wages between that amount and $250,000. But all annual salaries above the quarter-million-dollar amount would be taxed under his plan, Obama said.

I know what you may be thinking. It’s about time the rich starting paying their fair share of taxes. However, last fall, the Washington, D.C.-based tax research organization The Tax Foundation looked at the latest release of Internal Revenue Service data on individual income taxes. In 2005:

The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5 percent of the nation’s income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2 percent of the nation’s income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95 percent of tax returns.

Stephen Moore, a senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal editorial board and a contributor to CNBC, wrote in the November/December 2007 issue of The American magazine:

Yes, income in America is skewed toward the rich. But taxes are skewed far, far more. The top 5 percent pay well over half the income taxes.

Maybe the rich ain’t so bad after all. Get rid of them, and who will pay for all those precious government programs?

But the question still remains. Are rich Americans leaving, or planning to leave, the country? Consider a poll conducted by Zogby International which asked adult Americans if they had ever considered moving outside the United States. The survey, which had more than 115,000 respondents, excluded anyone relocating offshore for less than two years and anyone who relocated because of government requirements, the military or their jobs. Bob Bauman of offshore experts The Sovereign Society wrote on October 16:

The Zogby results are shocking – especially compared to the entire U.S. population (now about 303,116,000). The numbers below are for households, not individuals.

1.6 million U.S. households already decided to move offshore and are headed in that direction.
Another 1.8 million households are seriously considering moving and are likely to do it. Many have taken preliminary steps.
• 7.7 million households are “somewhat seriously” considering moving and “may” do it.
• Nearly 3 million households are seriously considering buying a vacation home or other property outside the United States. Another 10 million are “somewhat” seriously considering it.

This means that almost 10% of U.S. households are considering leaving the country. Another 10% are considering living outside the country part-time. Most analysts are ignoring this silent massive emigration.

These would-be emigrant households plan to spend an average of US$260,000 on buying or building a house. They’re also planning to spend at least US$36,000 annually on living expenses outside the United States.

In total, they represent hundreds of billions of dollars leaving the U.S. economy each year.

Bauman quoted John Gaver of ActionAmerica.org, who said:

The problem is that increasingly, the wealthy perceive that they are under attack by their own government and they are taking the only rational option left open to them. They’re taking their wealth and leaving.

And regarding the number of wealthy Americans who have already left the country, Bauman wrote:

Every year, about 250,000 U.S. citizens and resident aliens leave America to make a new home in some other nation.

In 2005, the U.S. Bureau of the Census upped this estimate. They guessed that over 350,000 U.S. citizens and resident aliens would leave the United States permanently.

On February 15, John Gaver wrote in a piece on ActionAmerica.org:

Wealthy US citizens continue to leave the US at an alarming rate

Tax haven countries are recording significantly larger numbers of US applicants for permanent residence or second citizenship every year. Keep in mind that most of those expats are wealthy, since poor people can’t afford to leave. In fact, millions of poor people risk their lives in the back of trailers or crossing Arizona desert every year, to take advantage of our increasing welfare state. It is the wealthy, who are leaving and they represent lost US investment dollars and subsequently, LOST US JOBS

When big money is forced out of the US, it is the average citizen who has to make up the difference in higher taxes. The Income Tax and US government attacks on wealth is costing you money in more ways than you know.

Sources:

“What they’ll do to your tax bill”
Jeanne Sahadi
CNN Money, June 11, 2008

“Obama wants payroll tax on incomes above $250,000”
Charles Babington
Associated Press, June 13, 2008

“Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data”
Gerald Prante
The Tax Foundation, October 5, 2007

“Guess Who Really Pays The Taxes”
Stephen Moore
The American, November/December 2007

“Why the Well-to-Do Are Escaping America”
Bob Bauman
The Sovereign Society, October 16, 2007

“US Taxpatriates Compiled by the Internal Revenue Service”
John Gaver
ActionAmerica.org, February 15, 2008

Sphere: Related Content