JustThinking.us

In case your wondering what Glass Steagall is in the first place, this vid provides a simple and sufficient answer to that question.

In a nutshell Glass Steagall is the shorthand name for legislation passed in 1933 that was specifically designed to help prevent another stock market crash ala 1929 and subsequent depression ala "The Great Depression".

It worked like a charm too ...... right up until the moment it was repealed.  

The following is a brief history lesson from Bill Moyers, followed by an interview with John Reed, former chairman and CEO of then Citicorp who along with Sandy Weil engineered the Citicorp merger with Travelers Group that screwed up everything.

Democrats are gonna hate this story as it totally blows up the notion that the powers that be within the Democrat party care one whit more about you than do those reprehensible fascists of the right.

It takes 36 minutes and is worthy of every second.

If you take the time to watch this, you'll at least have an understanding of what hit you.

American Readers

“US Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a ‘battlefield’ and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians without charge or trial. The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world.

The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself. The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday.

The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing…Now is the time to stop this bad idea.

Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.”

These provisions are being reviled across the political spectrum.

There are a number of petitions available at sites ranging from the ACLU to Ron Paul.

We selected the ACLU to link up to only because our Senator Levin is a well known card carrying member with an 84% lifetime score.

Take a minute and decide if you think it's a good idea for the United States Military to be arresting American citizens and holding them indefinately without charge or trial, for any reason.

It is our opinion that the potential for abuse is staggering and that it is a certainty that if enacted these provisions will be abused.

As always when Congress comes after the freedoms of the citizenry it is in the interest of protecting us from terrorists.

It is becoming increasingly clear to us that the interests of "Terror" and Congress are dovetailing quite nicely.

Click anywhere above to link up to the paper.

The above cartoon is part of a series we first saw posted at Don't Tread on Me who we have always thought of as being a lot like Just Thinking except maybe somewhat less random, more professional, polished, better edited and seemingly profitable.

Click on the photo for the original post of four cartoons, the last of which might be called provocative.

We've been having just the best time enjoying the haters on both the left and the right as they attempt to either dismiss or insert themselves into the Occupy Wall Street movement.

The trolls, media and politicians of the right religiously pursue the most cliche' ridden and ditziest possible occupiers for their film crews and interviews in an effort to portray the occupation as a gaggle of stupid, lazy, foul smelling, ner-do-well, hippy socialists.

The trolls, media and politicians of the left in a cynical attempt to ride it into electoral glory and in so doing provide themselves with yet another opportunity to plunder America for still one more election cycle, are now seeking to portray themselves as part of and ingratiate themselves into a movement that has correctly identified those very people to be a significant part of the problem.

Both will fail.

To quote anonymous,

"The abuse of corporations, banks and governments ends here."

Click on the above quote for the entire piece.

From Business Insider

Click on the photo of former Clinton Administration Treasury Secretary and Goldman Sachs CEO Robert Rubin for the entire list.

THE REVOLVING DOOR:

29 People Who Went From Wall Street To Washington To Wall Street
 

Sort of makes you wonder, don't it.

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.

Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion.That is “trillion” with a “T.” That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.

Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.

And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.

Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities.

Senator Barack Obama

Senate Floor Speech on Public Debt

March 16, 2006

Here's a nice little chart that comes with an editorial from the Wall Street Journal.

The chart is so good at making it's point I don't think you necessarily need the editorial, but if you want it you can link it up by clicking on the chart ..... as usual.

This is pure human nature at work here.

If most of your profits are going to go to the government anyway but your losses are your own, why bust your ass, why put your capital at risk, why do anything other than the bare minimum?

If you want some more revenue for public development, your social programs, a couple more wars or straight out vote buying, you are going to have to figure out how to grow the economy.

Distractions abound in this country.

Cynical Roany thinks that this is by design.

The example of this that best speaks to me has to do with taxes.

Your "Silly Little Democrats ............." are always whining about tax cuts for the "The Rich".

Your "Formerly (although still mostly) Feckless Republicans ............." counter that "The Rich" pay almost 90% percent of all the income taxes paid in this country.

The American people pick a side and go to arguing and finger pointing.

Anger and upset are the only outcome.

Media is complicit.

Everybody benefits except the citizenry.

Democrats have their union and legal haters pumping up the masses.

Republicans have their wealthy and middle class constituents feeling themselves to be under siege.

The media get their ratings and sell their advertising because promoting drama is good for business.

As for me?

I got questions.

First of all, who the hell is "Rich"?

As opposed to, who the hell is Rich?

I would truly love to hear the debate where "Rich" finally gets defined.

Is "Rich" a function of income?

Are you "Rich" if you made $250,000 last year?

What if you've never made anywhere near that number ever before?

What if you're unlikely to ever make that much again?

That doesn't happen you say?

I know a raft of guys in the real estate business who had a big year that they have never duplicated.

How about if you're only making $60,000 a year, but it's from a $1,800,000 in CDs or treasuries, and you happen to be living in a nice little, paid for condo in Destin.

"Rich"?

What if you're 62 years old and have a defined benefit retirement plan from a pair of government entities paying $86,000 a year with escalators for inflation until the day you die, plus Social Security, plus all the health care you can eat for $142 a month, and you happen to be living in the nice little paid for condo in Destin right next door to the one mentioned above?

The reason I ask is that my HP 12C (financial calculator) is telling me that the above deal has a "Present Value" of $1,292,228 if capped at 3% (That there is real estate guy talk. Capped is short for cap rate which is an assumed rate of return for some specified investment, which in this case it is arbitrarily set by me at 3% because there is almost negligible risk in a defined benefit government retirement plan.  The less risk, the lower the cap rate.) and amortized over 20 years.

That $1,292,228 is before you even begin to figure for the Social Security benefit, and the true cash value of the health care.

"Rich"?

 First of all, apologies to whomever put together the below chart.

I grabbed it off from somewhere thinking that there was some identification on the chart to acknowledge and link to.

There is not.

Now I can't remember where I found it.

If somebody has seen it before, let me know.

I will cheerfully give credit and link to the source.

The following chart provides an outstanding example of how our government keeps us apart and at each other's throats.

Anybody paying the slightest bit of attention has heard that the rich pay the lion's share of the INCOME TAXES in this country.

It is true.

The top 1% of taxpayers pay about 35% of our nations INCOME TAX.

The top 25% pays about 83%.

The top 50% pays about 96%.

It is also true, the rich earn the lion's share of our national income, but on a percentage basis they pay more in taxes than they earn in income.

But INCOME TAXES on individuals only makes up 43.5% of the total tax receipts of the federal government.

42.3% is paid in in the form of "PAYROLL TAXES" aka "WITHHOLDING TAXES" aka FICA, aka Social Security and Medicare taxes which are deducted directly from wage earners paychecks and are sent to the government.

The balance mostly comes from by corporate taxes which we all pay when using the goods or services provided by corporations, and some other relatively minor sources.

The withholding rate for "The Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI), again what most of us call Social Security or FICA is 12.4% of one's taxable income.

The rate for Medicare is 2.9% of one's taxable income.

For a total of 15.3% tax on wage earners above the INCOME TAX.

In the case of Social Security, the tax is largely paid by middle and lower income taxpayers because the income against which it is applied is capped at $106,800.

Here's where the truth gets bent.

 I'm trying to put the best construction on this.

You are told that the funds go to the "Social Security Trust Fund" or the "Medicare Trust Fund".

And that's true as far as it goes, but what really happens is that the Federal Government issues debt (bonds) which is exchanged for your (cash) payroll taxes.

And subsequently sends your payroll taxes (cash) to the general fund.

Every dime of income the Government collects regardless of source, ends up in the general fund where it is spent as though it were exactly the same thing as "INCOME TAXES".

Name an activity that the Federal Government participates in, and that is where your FICA is being spent.

Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, now Libya, maybe Iran.

Defending Europe (NATO) from Russia, or Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan and South Korea from North Korea and China, the Saudis from Iran.

Not to mention from their own people. 

Welfare benefits, unemployment compensation, food stamps.

Government salaries, pensions, benefits and perks.

National parks, roads, bridges, education, research.

Office supplies.

Now, some of that stuff you can legitimately call an investment in America.

But is it appropriate to be investing people's health and retirement monies on all of the above?

Here's the government's argument,

"Some people are not able, or prepared to invest their retirement money themselves.  What if they make bad investment decisions and lose their money?

Were some people in control of their retirement funds they would indeed make some bad investments and suffer losses.

But just for fun, imagine a prospectus selling an investment in the defense of Europe.

Here's the offering.

You provide military equipment and personel to Europe free of charge, and in so doing allow the average European citizen a month of vacation every year, mostly free health care, and retirement at around age 58.

You don't get a plug nickel back, get to work until your 61.5 at least, but ................. you get to say that you're making the world safe for Democracy.

You can be a drooling moron and you're still passing on that opportunity.

So, here's the consequences:

Upper income people feel abused because they're thinking they're doing all the heavy lifting.

The middle class feels abused because they thought they were saving for their retirement, but are starting to realize that Social Security is likely to go broke, their money having been squandered. 

In truth, it ain't gonna go broke.

The government will print the dollars to pay you back.

The bad news is that each dollar is likely to be worth a helluva lot less than the one you payed in.

Retirement money is just being spent and not invested, which results in the poor feeling abused because there are no jobs, and subsequently no future.

While all they hear is "The Rich" bitching about their taxes.

Imagine the uproar if President Bush had unilaterally launched air attacks against Libya's Moammar Gadhafi.

But since it's Mr. Obama's finger on the trigger, Democratic leaders in Congress have kept quiet - demonstrating that their opposition to presidential power during the Bush years was political, not principled.

John Yoo, the Wall Street Journal, 3/25/2100

Interesting guy, John Woo.

Here he is enjoying the company of Jon Stewart.

The lesson of course here being that the more you're out there having something to say, the more likely you are to faux pas.

A lesson that some of our more poisonous, hate filled and bigoted friends of the liberal/progressive/Democratic persuasion would do well to internalize.

Thank you Kirby.

We're all very pleased that you've stopped kidding yourself about being a nice person.