Things that make your blood boil...

[WoVeU]

The Geithner plan explained:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-arbfLTCtI

That is wrong! There are flaws and available avenues for the banks to reinvest as the PI part of that. But his math and accounting are BS. The dude set there and showed in the top right depiction the PI (private investor) investing in a potential loss of 0 and the potential return of $25. First, the FED has secured the FIRST 50 of the 60 debt buyout. The 5 form the PI is a split investment on the amount the asset sells for above $50. And this can happen anytime, they don't have to sell because some fund comes calling...especially with 7....that is a PI portion. Ur umm uh...that 7 would be good if it is 50% of the 14 that allows the FED to only hold 36. Then he starts showing that 7 + 100 block....BS! The bank did not get that...they invested 7 to split the sale price, on the toxic asset, above the 36 in this case. Meaning the FED got its money back and the Treasury gets the same return as the PI. In his "concept" the PI (in his case the Bank again) and the Treasury split the amount above 36. So his whole bottom thing was bogus.

Furthermore I don't think the top is correct either. The bail-out is from the GOV, the GOV arm into the monetary circle is through the Treasury. The Federal Reserve is private and it is the central bank. How in the Hell is the Fed sitting on 5/6ths of the appropriated debt? Tax payers are sitting on this as the vehicle that funds the Treasury! This has to be a BS scam! I could go much deeper but this is trash!

[Spence]

They aren't trying to fix anything. They want a government take over of the banks. At least nationalization. Let them go for all the marbles early on. Then we can kick this bunch of idiots out in two to four years.

[WoVeU]

They aren't trying to fix anything. They want a government take over of the banks. At least nationalization. Let them go for all the marbles early on. Then we can kick this bunch of idiots out in two to four years.

I've been hearing more calls for that earlier than I ever have. And much of it isn't towards Obama but some of those around them and most Dems and some Pubs in the Senate and House.

[Spence]

I think the mandate was overestimated. I don't think people voted a socialist agenda, I think they were voting against the republicans for not holding to their platform. The more liberal this agenda is the more I think people will remember what liberals what to do. Let them move as quickly as possible and get all their cards on the table. People thought they were getting a Clinton type liberal. Clinton wasn't an ideolog, he was a politician who's primary goal was to get elected. He governed by public opinion not ideology.

[WoVeU]

That is fine!

But I know a magic show when I see one. Looks like how a car salesman shows figures. And i don't defend the govt methodology. But he pulled a bait and switch when he inserts the Bank as the PI and claims the $7 buys the entire holding (previously given to be the PI, Treas, and FED).

[WoVeU]

I have 2 main fears for the current banking crisis. I first worry that we could be heading to a public held bank, public not investor, this is read Socialist Bank. There is no greater lynch pin for a country going Socialist.
My 2nd biggest fear is that the plan as rolled will work just fine. This would not be a problem except for so many people saying this can't work and then you have all of the different stories about what is going on and confusion all around. Thus, if this works very well, anything this administration wants to do next will be perceived to be the way to go...as they knew that bank thing that I didn't understand at all!

The plan failing miserably is only my 3rd biggest fear! And I greatly prefer that over fear 1 and 2!

[WoVeU]

I knew there was a grand motivation to that POS car salesman explanation of the Geithner Plan. (Wow, this was real hard to find!!!!)

http://cift.haas.berkeley.edu/docs/nabi/nabi.html

His plan is for.....drum roll....."a people's bank!" Oh and part of the plan is for them to loan money to the existing and surviving banks. Hello, Hello, Hello....knock, knock, knock...that means given the current balance sheets of banks...this new bank would then be the new central bank in a dozen economic cycles or so.

He is a Socialist. And of the highest "American" sort...UC Berkeley!

I still find it remarkable how the Education System and Entertainment Community are the 2 most Super Left Wing and Socialist Infrastructures we have. People that takes a plan! (I love how so many people hate and distrust Churches for them wielding the power to control or influence and these 2 machines make the Catholic and Protestant Church look like Boy Scout Troop 113.) Anybody here dumb enough to believe this guy...I want to be your car salesman, insurance agent, and your mortgage broker! Lord I pray my 2 remaining freedoms hold out the next 2 to 4 years.

[WoVeU]

If the bank is indoctrinated,founded, and held by the public (tax-payer) it is then a full-fledged government institution. The board not being seated by chief investors but government oversight selection. That is Socialist!

[WoVeU]

If the bank is indoctrinated,founded, and held by the public (tax-payer) it is then a full-fledged government institution. The board not being seated by chief investors but government oversight selection. That is Socialist!

And that ain't something a Libertarian wants.

I think most Republicans are truly Libertarian. I am a Libertarian, but I am not a practicing Libertarian. I don't see the political representation to support. If we could get someone to run with good backing...a Libertarian would go a long way these days.

I'd have to be a Libertarian I guess, more so everyday. I want to abolish the IRS, the DEA, the ATF and reduce and redirect many government agencies and control the courts and greatly reduce most government programs. I want to let smokers smoke and drinkers drink and have nothing being criminal until it "definitively" hurts someone else. I hate HOA's and want to constrain most City Council and County level administration, little jerk regimes if you ask me. I also want to see more Laissez-Faire capitalism of course. I'd like to see legalized drugs and prostitution and it sure ain't because I am a consumer of either.

I guess I am more Libertarian than Republican. I'd be interested to here how others here feel they align with this!?!?

I think if you found a good name and coalesce what it seems many like from different parties you'd really have a platform that could not be beat. Caring for the environment (practically), and backing renewable energy from the Liberals. Having a strong national power and defense platform, along with allowing mom and dads to run families, and making bums work and reducing hand-outs significantly from the Republicans. Then add in the freedoms, small government, and other subtle attributes of Libertarians with a mix of Libertarian and Liberal views of civil liberties. I think this party could carry 65% of the vote!

[WoVeU]

If the bank is indoctrinated,founded, and held by the public (tax-payer) it is then a full-fledged government institution. The board not being seated by chief investors but government oversight selection. That is Socialist!

Every solution being floated around now is socialist. The non-socialist solution is to allow the banks to fail, abolish fannie, freddie and the Fed and restore the gold standard. Then let the whole mess sort itself out.

If the People's bank is owned by the US Treasury Dept then it's socialist. If it is owned and directed by individual americans then it isnt. If it's owned by individuals but directed by the Treasury Dept or the Fed then it's fascist. I don't have enough info to know which it is, but what I read is that the shares would be held by the public, not the government so it cannot be called a socialist institution.

Rather true! But the current methodology is limited to a temporary holding...an emergency holding if you will. But it is close enough that I don't like it! But not the FED so much, it is "private", well not quite, independent agency of the federal government. Howbeit you have a quasi-government attachment with the manner of the FED Chairman selection and him reporting to congress...though they haven't the power to remove him. So I guess it could be looked at as 60% government or even more by some. But it is a pretty good "hybrid" system.

I think some standard is needed. As forwarded by many, it would be difficult to have a gold standard...that is a whole lot of gold. But we could have a PM system, it may sound crazy but I'd have Platinum, Gold, Silver, Uranium, and Plutonium. The latter have much much greater value than the jeweling metals. And we have a good deal of both. And I'd alter aspects of the held portion of the program. One of the problems with a non-fiat system is idled value...it just sits and does not circulate. We are talking about having a set aside level of $1.3 Trillion dollars to cover M1. I'd probably want a system that also counts for held oil and gasoline reserves along with reserve ores of coal, steel, and copper. I'd have to look at it closer but I think this is doable.

[WoVeU]

Deep down, most americans are libertarians, but even a moderately libertarian politician like Ron Paul doesn't garner much support because people get distracted by things they don't approve of. For the religious right, it's social issues where they actually like government controls (drugs, abortion, immigration, entertainment). For democrats, its the free market stuff they fear and for the rest, it's foreign policy...it's been so long that the US has been non-interventionist, most folks have a hard time even understanding what it means...

I'm basically a small "L" libertarian myself, in that I don't see pure anarchy as a workable solution, but I'd sure love to see how close to it we could get.

I have to agree on every one of those points. Many Christians would let go of the drug and entertainment things, more so every day. And I think they'd accept a simple policy of no government funding of abortion and stand pat with most other laws as they currently are. They understand more than most think that the issue can't ever be handled right. Immigration is an economic and security issue...much bigger than a Republican platform...if you ask me it got worse (purposely with the Republicans.) Democrats that really fear a free market...I don't want on my team...they fear everything including themselves. Foreign Policy is just tough, I'd get 30 guys in a room and find a centered policy and make that the platform, highly invested on "don't start none and don't take none!"

I'm saying we need a balanced core party where the trade-offs are made in the platform...not at the Senate and House floor...that is why nothing gets done. If we had it developed that way...that means fluiddude, Spence, Donovan, WoVeU, billybud, Derek, Dossenator, BYUfan1, Howdy, WVU, Colorado....all set and said, "I can allow for that at that level seeing as ho you are allowing me this at that level!" Then you get a mandate at 60+% to walk in at the federal level and get spit done. We clean up the peripheral mess before we go into address the mess. Founding the party on a base resolution that we will take certain hot-buton issues say top 3, and after 6 years of cleaning up the Federal act...we kick some of those issues down to state legislation and monitor 5 to 8 differentiated programs across the country to see which course of action most closely approximates the results America is looking for.

[Spence]

If the bank is indoctrinated,founded, and held by the public (tax-payer) it is then a full-fledged government institution. The board not being seated by chief investors but government oversight selection. That is Socialist!

Every solution being floated around now is socialist. The non-socialist solution is to allow the banks to fail, abolish fannie, freddie and the Fed and restore the gold standard. Then let the whole mess sort itself out.

If the People's bank is owned by the US Treasury Dept then it's socialist. If it is owned and directed by individual americans then it isnt. If it's owned by individuals but directed by the Treasury Dept or the Fed then it's fascist. I don't have enough info to know which it is, but what I read is that the shares would be held by the public, not the government so it cannot be called a socialist institution.

It all comes down to who makes the decision's for the bank. If it is the government then it isn't the peoples bank. They call China the People's Republic, but it is anything but the people's.

[WoVeU]

OK I had to play with a Standard.

These materials would form my VMI (Valued Material Index), these are shown with annual consumption (globally)
Gold - 3800 tons
Platinum - 130 tons
Silver - 850M oz
Petroleum - 31 Billion
Uranium - 105 mil-lbs
Plutonium - 4200lbs
Copper - 16 bil tons
Nickel - 500k tons
Tin - 400k tons
Coal - 6.2B tons

Then I calculated those values at current prices. I adjusted to reduce how much Coal or Petroleum I'd use due to velocity and altered some others by factoring US Production rates. To cover the current M1 of $1.3 Trillion I'd hold the following values...in Billions of Dollars

Gold 260
Platinum 13
Silver 13
Petroleum 520
Uranium 65
Plutonium 32.5
Copper 65
Nickel 3.25
Tin 3.25
Coal 325

What would be nice about this is we'd be the only Monetarily Standardized company. I'd then place a subcommittee over these holdings and the index and allow them to acquire values above M1 currency. Place percentage caps on each of the 10 items and allow buying and selling to allow the VMI to earn interest. (Meaning - Copper is down while Tin is up...sell some Tin and buy some Copper. Then the board reviews the proportions annually and can give the Trade Commissioner a 3 month correction requirement as based on volatility and US leverage in the production/consumption of the material. This correction is not public information.) The acquisition of levels above M1 then also provide a protection for US manufacturing companies. I wouldn't even publicize the move to this system. Once established this would create a leveraged position in the global community.

[WoVeU]

Ha!

I wouldn't calculate exchange rates and no currency based transactions would take place, countries would go crazy if that big dog started doing that. They'd be upset the day I announced it. The fund would sit there in the shadow. You just look at the US commodity prices (free work). And no knee jerking required. 1 to 2.5% under is no big deal and I'd be goaled at having an excess say 5% surplus. Any moves say even 2 or 3 a week would have been initiated for profitable adjust, taking advantage of ups and downs, and I wouldn't do this until those differences were notable. And in doing that we'd be acting as a stabilizing factor in the market place.

Also note...

US Govt currently holds 1.4Billion Barrels of Petroleum = $640B

US Govt currently holds 88Billion Short tons of coal = $4.752T

Note that I know all of that coal is not at a mined and ready state, looks like about something between 1/8 to 1/4 of the total. And the value would be more than a 1/4 of that given.

I also know we reserves to some degree of all the above. (Especially uranium, plutonium, gold, and platinum.) That means we could readily start the Standard now and institute an equivalency waiver for trade-offs between certain commodities (say to be corrected in 4 years.) But I can find no problem in finding we could rather quickly back up our currency. I'd also then have to think many countries could do this and they'd probably move to do the same in somewhat short order once we did. I think this would do one whole Hell of a lot to put confidence back in the US and Global markets.

[WoVeU]

The US has gold reserves estimated in the range of $305B at market value.