dagblog - Comments for "Just Desserts"

But couldn't I please,

kgb999 — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 01:41:09 +0000

In reply to That's an interesting way of

But couldn't I please, please, please have Glass-Steagall back?

I'm fine. Just having a busy

Orlando — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 01:12:46 +0000

In reply to I was worried about her, too,

I'm fine. Just having a busy week. Both the earthquake/tsunami and the volcano were far away from Jakarta and life goes on in the city uninterrupted. Thanks for worrying!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com

we are stardust — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:50:19 +0000

In reply to Just Desserts

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-sheldon-whitehouse/why-we-need-a-foreclosure_b_776172.html

Sheldon Whitehouse, Good Guy.

I was worried about her, too,

wws — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:38:15 +0000

In reply to Well, as a Charlottesville

I was worried about her, too, C'Ville. But she has posted after the disaster and seemed both very objective, and very empathetic about the damage which would suggest that she, herself, was not imperiled.

But, hey -- Orlando! -- are you OK? Please say, OK?

C'Ville -- cannot wait for your on-the-scene feedback about the ralley. TELL EVERYTHING, OK?

Well, as a Charlottesville

CVille Dem — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:27:33 +0000

In reply to Just Desserts

Well, as a Charlottesville resident, I can say that our President's visit in support of Tom Periello was absolutely wonderful. He was so inspiring, and hit all the right buttons. I sincerely hope that his words will get people out to vote, and since I am canvassing on Sunday, I hope everyone is fired up!

Tomorrow: I'm taking the train to DC to go to the Rally to Restore Sanity. My signs:

REFUDIATE INSANITY! You Betcha!

and

I WANT MY COUNTRY FORWARD

PS == Is anyone except me worried about Orlando? She is in Indonesia, and I am hoping that the only problem is one of connectivity, but she is on my mind every day as I check to see if she has posted.

Ya got that right,

stillidealistic — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:38:23 +0000

In reply to It's all good Destor.Hell it

Ya got that right, Arthur...

But we will have shown them!

That's an interesting way of

Michael Maiello — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:11:11 +0000

In reply to I was about to comment on

That's an interesting way of looking at things. Though I'd stress that no new laws need to be passed to solve this problem. President Olympia Snowe doesn't have to go along. We own: Citigroup, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Ally Financial -- businesses with substantial cash and mortgage related assets that could be run for the express purpose of mitigating this crisis, if we as owners chose. If we had acted sooner we could have done it when we owned equity in even more banks.

Or, the Fed could act.

But we don't need any new laws.

I must be misunderstanding

kgb999 — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:20:32 +0000

In reply to What was the crisis that

I must be misunderstanding your point. I take this as an argument against passing laws to address these loopholes. That to me is full-on insane. And I didn't say they were spotted and taken advantage of, I said they were engineered. "Same as it ever was" can also be applied to that, but it isn't the same thing at all. In either event, we have a pretty extensive history of passing new laws in response to both passive identification and intentional engineering of regulatory holes for the purpose of exploitation. To my knowledge, that is the only mechanism by which such abuses have *ever* been effectively reigned in.

Not that new laws are the ONLY thing I'd like to see brought to bear. Let's face it, legislation faces hurdles and delays that the executive agencies simply don't face. So I do look more to the executive to employ and interpret their authority under the existing laws - creatively if necessary - to go after these SOBs with both barrels and a bayonet. That is why I find Obama's apparent priorities on this issue so disheartening ... at this point, I'd be happy if they'd at least break out a rubber-band gun.

I see the executive's role to aggressively knock back the acute symptoms (as experienced by the majority of Americans) to keep this from killing us giving congress breathing room to address the underlying chronic disease. Sadly, the current method of declaring the economy "stabilized" seems to be taking one guy who makes $500 million ... averaging him with 500 people who make $0 - and calling us all millionaires. We're pretty fucked because the ultra-wealthy get to choose how to do the math right now. We really do need some better laws.

What was the crisis that

LisB — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:06:22 +0000

In reply to What was the crisis that

What was the crisis that Prohibition theoretically addressed? My point being, until prohibition there was no systemic lawlessness related to alchohol - prohibition *created* the lawlessness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement#United_States

Granted, there was no crisis at the time, but 36 states went for it...BEFORE "prohibition *created* the lawlessness."

Just sayin'.

And as I said, it's a poor example, but it's still an example. In the case of the current topic, however, may I just add that loopholes have been spotted and taken advantage of for decades, if not centuries, in many cases, not just this current one.

What was the crisis that

kgb999 — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:55:12 +0000

In reply to I was about to comment on

What was the crisis that Prohibition theoretically addressed? My point being, until prohibition there was no systemic lawlessness related to alcohol - prohibition *created* the lawlessness.

In the case of the current topic - bad actors have engineered holes in our legal and regulatory system that allow them to rip people off and reap mind boggling personal rewards (the top earners now average $500 million dollars a year from this rip-off .... up from $90 million last year). Doesn't that seem to be the exact situation we as a nation implemented a body to create legislation to protect society from?