Downsize DC Commits suicide by staking the bailout as TOTALLY unnecessary!
Received the following in my inbox today!
Subject: Downsize DC commits suicide
We've heard the Treasury Secretary and the Federal Reserve Chairman make their case for a $700 billion bailout of the financial markets. We're not persuaded. Quite the contrary. We reject their predictions of dire consequences if their plan doesn't pass. We're so convinced of this that we're willing to stake our continued existence on it.
If the economy goes into a deep slump because they didn't pass their bailout plan then charitable contributions will be among the first things cut from family budgets. If we're wrong then we'll be among the many institutions to fail. But we don't believe we're wrong. And we don't believe we'll fail.
In 2003 dire warnings about "weapons of mass destruction" were used to justify an unnecessary war in Iraq. We bucked the tide of public hysteria and dared to claim that there were NO "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq.
We were right, and popular opinion, driven by political fear mongering, was wrong. Now we're being told that our economy is threatened by "financial weapons of mass destruction," and we'll once again buck the hysterical trend by predicting that . . .
There are no "financial weapons of mass destruction" threatening our economy -- except for the $700 billion bailout plan.
We don't believe that mortgage defaults on a mere 3 million homes have the power to halt the mighty American economic engine. It's really that simple.
Many wild claims are being made. Yesterday, on CNBC, Jim Cramer predicted a Great Depression II if the bailout plan isn't passed. Cramer is even willing to let the Democrats cap CEO pay and take ownership positions in troubled firms (socialism), if that's what it takes to pass the bailout plan. Cramer, despite his great intelligence and personal charm, is madly, hysterically, wrong.
In the Great Depression 40% of homes went into foreclosure.
Today the foreclosure rate is only 6%, and the trend is toward fewer foreclosures rather than more.
We're far closer to the end of this problem than we are to the beginning.
Of course, the fear mongers will claim that we had a 40% foreclosure rate in the Great Depression precisely because the government didn't intervene soon enough, and that current foreclosure rates will spiral out of control if the bailout bill isn't passed. This reading of history gets the true story of the Great Depression exactly backwards . . .
The myth is that President Hoover did nothing after the stock market burst in 1929. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Hoover actually began the kinds of interventions that are commonly associated with FDR. Roosevelt was merely copying, and dramatically expanding on what Hoover had already done, not setting a new course. And look at what the results were . . . a Great Depression that lasted for 12 long years!
Hoover and Roosevelt both tried to stop market prices from falling, which is exactly what the current proposal aims to do. But the result in the late 20s and early 30s was that the market never cleared, and so the Depression went on and on and on.
We could have the same thing again today if we allow the government to once again intervene in natural market processes.
The fact is that the politicians, the bureaucrats, and various hysteria mongers, are misleading us. They tell us that the market is frozen, but the fact is that commercial loans are at an all-time high, and even real estate loans ARE HIGHER THAN THEY WERE LAST YEAR! The fact is that . . .
The current "crisis" is mainly centered among the highly leveraged investment banks on Wall Street, but even there the market is far from frozen. Merrill Lynch was able to sell its bad assets and was then bought by Bank of America (which had earlier bought CountryWide).
Does this look like a frozen market to you? It doesn't to us.
And would it really matter if the markets were "frozen?" Inactive markets simply mean that buyers and sellers of assets have a disagreement about what those assets are worth. We must not allow the politicians and the bureaucrats to substitute their judgement for the judgements of buyers and sellers who are, after all, SPENDING THEIR OWN MONEY, whereas the politicians and bureaucrats are asking to spend YOUR MONEY!
We've taken the time, and shown the courtesy, of hearing our "leaders" speak, and having done so, WE REJECT THEIR CLAIMS! THEIR MUST BE NO BAILOUT, OF ANY KIND!
Please be clear about what we're NOT saying. We're NOT saying that things are rosy, or even all that good. As we explained Monday, we're feeling the effects of a FED-generated bubble pop. We are very simply saying that a bailout is wrong-headed and unnecessary, and could even make things worse.
If you agree with us, please tell your elected representatives to OPPOSE ALL BAILOUTS! You can use our generic campaign for cutting federal spending to send your message. Use your personal comments to reject the bailout and to make any of the points we've made in this message, or additional arguments of your own. You can send your message using our Educate the Powerful System.
But don't stop there. Please take the following additional steps . . .
* Call your Representative and your two Senators after you've sent your message
* Pass this Dispatch to others -- SOUND THE ALARM AND SPREAD THE WORD
* Register for a Digg account, and then Digg this message on our blog.
Finally, we've staked our existence on our principals and our best judgement. We expect to thrive, not die. But we are struggling in this economy too. Many DC Downsizers have had to cut their pledges because of the current downturn. Some have lost their jobs. We really need those of you who are still doing well to come to our aid. We especially need new monthly pledges to replace $400 a month we've lost so far this Summer. You can make a contribution here.
Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC army!
Jim Babka & Perry Willis
President & Communications Director
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.





















This should go everywhere
See what he says about Section 8: ".....may not be reviewed by any court of law or any adminstrative agency" www.jsmineset.com
Jim Sinclair's Commentary
A view from London said by another. It would not be printed in full if that was not so.
Paulson cannot be allowed a blank cheque
By George Soros
Published: September 24 2008 20:28 | Last updated: September 24 2008 20:28
Hank Paulson’s $700bn rescue package has run into difficulty on Capitol Hill. Rightly so: it was ill-conceived. Congress would be abdicating its responsibility if it gave the Treasury secretary a blank cheque. The bill submitted to Congress even had language in it that would exempt the secretary’s decisions from review by any court or administrative agency – the ultimate fulfillment of the Bush administration’s dream of a unitary executive.
Mr Paulson’s record does not inspire the confidence necessary to give him discretion over $700bn. His actions last week brought on the crisis that makes rescue necessary. On Monday he allowed Lehman Brothers to fail and refused to make government funds available to save AIG. By Tuesday he had to reverse himself and provide an $85bn loan to AIG on punitive terms. The demise of Lehman disrupted the commercial paper market. A large money market fund “broke the buck” and investment banks that relied on the commercial paper market had difficulty financing their operations. By Thursday a run on money market funds was in full swing and we came as close to a meltdown as at any time since the 1930s. Mr Paulson reversed again and proposed a systemic rescue.
Mr Paulson had got a blank cheque from Congress once before. That was to deal with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. His solution landed the housing market in the worst of all worlds: their managements knew that if the blank cheques were filled out they would lose their jobs, so they retrenched and made mortgages more expensive and less available. Within a few weeks the market forced Mr Paulson’s hand and he had to take them over.
Mr Paulson’s proposal to purchase distressed mortgage-related securities poses a classic problem of asymmetric information. The securities are hard to value but the sellers know more about them than the buyer: in any auction process the Treasury would end up with the dregs. The proposal is also rife with latent conflict of interest issues. Unless the Treasury overpays for the securities, the scheme would not bring relief. But if the scheme is used to bail out insolvent banks, what will the taxpayers get in return?
Barack Obama has outlined four conditions that ought to be imposed: an upside for the taxpayers as well as a downside; a bipartisan board to oversee the process; help for the homeowners as well as the holders of the mortgages; and some limits on the compensation of those who benefit from taxpayers’ money. These are the right principles. They could be applied more effectively by capitalising the institutions that are burdened by distressed securities directly rather than by relieving them of the distressed securities.
More...
Simply maddening... "You are
Simply maddening...
"You are a den of Vipers.I intend to rout you out and by the Eternal God I will rout you out
For an informed citizenry, individuals must discard the television set in favor of the acquisition of information via either books and/or the internet. An uneducated populous will remain in ignorance and thus continue to suffer the sharp ax of tyranny.
AMEN to your tagline!
Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips
But that man should play the tyrant over God, and find Him a better man than himself, is astonishing drama indeed!~~D. Sayers
There is no difference between an authoritarian government from the right or the left...F. A.Schaeffer
Yes, I agree!
I'm a girk! Chatta me kort please!
Please donate to the rolling money bomb!
https://www.coasttocoastmoneybomb.com/JONES_SODA-MONEY_BOMB.php
Historic moment at WA State Convention at minute 4 here!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4cVL_TdwZk
What are you fightin' for?
Caught in the middle?
Freedom is only for those with the guts to defend it!
They seem to all think that we are only
concerned about the Executives' Payment Scheme. No one seems to be addressing:
Section 6: The Secretary's authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this ACT shall be limited to $700Billion outstanding AT ANY ONE TIME.
This means the $700Billion is a rolling amount, NOT A CEILING
Section 8: Decisions by the Sec'y. pursuant to the authority of this ACT are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any COURT OF LAW or any administrative agency.
Why secrecy - we need transparency.
Shout it from the mountaintops, Lysa!
And thanks to daughter for posting the OP!
Thank god you said it Lysa.
Thank god you said it Lysa. I wanted to punch Anderson Cooper and the rest of them in the face last night because they were only focusing and picking out
one thing (mostly the CEO pay item) and ignoring ANY goddamn detail that has been proposed.
Beyond maddening.
Puppets come and puppets go but the world's stage is getting cluttered.