Let me ask you something, reader.
Let's assume you live and drive in a state where motor vehicle liability insurance is mandatory. If you were in a car accident involving another vehicle, and you were the innocent party, wouldn't you expect to get insurance coverage for your non-fault damages to the car and medical expenses for your personal injuries?
That is the essence of insurance, is it not? To get coverage when you're injured? To get compensated?
In Great Britain, insurance is called "assurance." I like that word better, it's more accurate and intuitive. You are buying peace of mind, assurance.
Now, what if your insurer was willing to give you the coverage, but instead of paying you for your car's damage and your personal injuries, it paid those sums to the at-fault driver... and then increased your insurance premium rates as well?
Don't you expect that when you're injured by someone else's fault, the reparations will go to you, as the injured innocent party?
Isn't that basic human social justice?
Now, let's say you are a "struggling" bank, seeking money from Mr Barack Obama, Mr Henry Paulson, Mr Timothy Geithner. You're asking them (along with the Mighty and Noble Mr Harry Reid and Ms Nancy Pelosi) to give you money earned by American citizens and paid to Uncle Sam.
But who ran your business down, caused it to "struggle"? Wasn't that you? Weren't you operating the business?
So why are you expecting that your bad business decisions have earned you free US Taxpayer money that isn't even yours and wasn't even earned by anyone related to you, commercially or contractually speaking?
Mr Barack Obama has asked us all to make some sacrifices so that the bank bailout may work. Has he asked the banks to make any sacrifices?
Will the banks be making any sacrifices?
Almost certainly not.
No, instead they will receive gifts, very large gifts. With almost no strings attached, so that there is no assurance
that the US Taxpayer $$ will be used to rehabilitate the banks. For example, it might just be used to buy the Bank's Chairman of the Board a new Audi, Mercedes-Benz, or BMW. Or to buy the Bank President a new house in Aspen. Or to buy the Bank's majority shareholder's mistress a new condo in Palm Beach. Or on a gambling spree weekend in Las Vegas.
Yet who caused the bank troubles in the first place?
* * * * * * * * * *
The Fed Govt is preparing to help the failing mortgage banks by giving money to the banks.
The justification is that it will help restore "the economy."
The justification is not
that it will help people remain in their homes, instead of being foreclosed upon by their mortgage lender.
Think about that, reader.
The justification says that "the economy" is more important than having a place of shelter for yourself and your loved ones, where you may sleep in peace, store goods, cook food, feed yourself.
The justification says that the mortgage banks are the ones really being hurt here.
The justification says that the human cost is irrelevant.
And the justification, it's being offered to us by our Federal Government.
Which is supposed to represent us.
But which is representing corporate business entities instead.
* * * * * * * * * *
It seems to me that if you want to take US Taxpayer $$$$ and pump it into "the economy," the place to put it is in the hands of the US Taxpayer.
Are there individual people in dire need of assistance right now, for financial/economic purposes, for reasons beyond their control? Such as, losing their job (not being fired), or incurring extraordinary medical expenses from an unexpected illness?
Wouldn't the money be better in the hands of those who have suffered, rather than in the hands of those who have caused the suffering?
And shouldn't our Fed Govt be responding to us, rather than to corporate business entities?
Anyone with a mote of self-respect should be steaming, honking mad right now. Mr Barack Obama and his Administration, and the US Congress, are prepared to bankrupt innocent individual Americans in order to line the pockets of the people who bear primary responsibility for our economic crash.
Clearly, they're not serving us any longer.
* * * * * * * * * *
Read all about the chicanery from these writers:Arthur SilberMichael HudsonMike WhitneyBruce Dixon
and then, if you would, be reminded that I said this was what would happen, and I said it back before the election in 2008 -- that we'd get flayed, drawn & quartered by the masters of Big American Finance.
First in July 2008 I made the general thematic observation in Small Scale Example No. 3: the saga of Donald Key
And then in September I said we were being Wrecker'd
by a group of sharp con men in Big Finance, and in October I expanded upon the Wreckage
, and asked whether the housing bubble was predictable... whether the claim of unexpected corporate deficits is a bunch of malarkey
. And based on work I did for AIG as outside counsel on corporate, regulatory and coverage matters, I also offered some skepticism on the claim that AIG was legitimately blind-sided and left crippled by unexpected devaluations in its own investments, and argued that we've been CHUMPED by AIG
Another significant development in October was Cook County, Illinois Sheriff Tom Dart saying that his Department would not enforce foreclosure evictions
during the winter months, and observed that in that situation, the banks were accusing the Sheriff of improper acts!
So this isn't anything new, really. It's just becoming more and more obvious to me, and as I read the comments around the interwebtubez, apparently to others.
If you're not convinced that things are as I say, or as Arthur Silber, Mike Whitney, Bruce Dixon and Michael Hudson say, then maybe you should give yourself a half-hour or so to sit down and read Dmitry Orlov's recent entry, Social Collapse Best Practices
, and see if some of Orlov's observations don't sound wise and prophetic, with some of the past prophecy being justified by quite a few developments in the American economy and global politics. Orlov's also got a good presentation on the stages of a society's collapse, as taken from the collapse of the USSR and compared to the recent history in the USA. It's called Closing the Collapse Gap
What I'm saying here, reader, is that we can't expect to be saved by the Federal Government, for two very practical reasons. First, we don't have any say in its operation any longer -- well at least those of us who aren't very wealthy, we don't. And second, a lot of what is happening now is an inevitable result of the way our businesses have pursued profit and ignored long-term effects of using shell-game vehicles (derivatives, credit swaps, massaging interest rates, finding new things on which to impose specious fees) for profit.
We're going to have to fix this one ourselves, people. We are going to have to set up a parallel system that isn't waiting to be saved by the Feds. Or we can throw all the bastards and bitches out. The latter course would require lots of bloodshed; the former course is safer but longer in duration.