11/7/13
Greece
The waiter who stood up for the people
These incredible photos from Greece of a waiter protecting protestors while police tried to enter the restaurant. He would not allow them to enter to arrest citizens. Saying boldly "there are only innocent people here" barring the police from entering and saving many from subsequent arrest. Another working class person standing up to the elite and their bullies of austerity. This is a heart warming story for you to pass on .
10/13/13
2/26/13
2/7/13
1/15/13
The Myth of Human Progress
https://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_myth_of_human_progress_20130113/
By Chris Hedges
Clive Hamilton in his “Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth About Climate Change”
describes a dark relief that comes from accepting that “catastrophic
climate change is virtually certain.” This obliteration of “false
hopes,” he says, requires an intellectual knowledge and an emotional
knowledge. The first is attainable. The second, because it means that
those we love, including our children, are almost certainly doomed to
insecurity, misery and suffering within a few decades, if not a few
years, is much harder to acquire. To emotionally accept impending
disaster, to attain the gut-level understanding that the power elite
will not respond rationally to the devastation of the ecosystem, is as
difficult to accept as our own mortality. The most daunting existential
struggle of our time is to ingest this awful truth—intellectually and
emotionally—and continue to resist the forces that are destroying us.
The human species, led by white Europeans
and Euro-Americans, has been on a 500-year-long planetwide rampage of
conquering, plundering, looting, exploiting and polluting the Earth—as
well as killing the indigenous communities that stood in the way. But
the game is up. The technical and scientific forces that created a life
of unparalleled luxury—as well as unrivaled military and economic
power—for the industrial elites are the forces that now doom us. The
mania for ceaseless economic expansion and exploitation has become a
curse, a death sentence. But even as our economic and environmental
systems unravel, after the hottest year in the contiguous 48 states
since record keeping began 107 years ago, we lack the emotional and
intellectual creativity to shut down the engine of global capitalism. We
have bound ourselves to a doomsday machine that grinds forward, as the
draft report of the National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee illustrates.
Complex civilizations have a bad habit of destroying themselves. Anthropologists including Joseph Tainter in “The Collapse of Complex Societies,” Charles L. Redman in “Human Impact on Ancient Environments” and Ronald Wright in “A Short History of Progress”
have laid out the familiar patterns that lead to systems breakdown. The
difference this time is that when we go down the whole planet will go
with us. There will, with this final collapse, be no new lands left to
exploit, no new civilizations to conquer, no new peoples to subjugate.
The long struggle between the human species and the Earth will conclude
with the remnants of the human species learning a painful lesson about
unrestrained greed and self-worship.
“There is a pattern in the past of
civilization after civilization wearing out its welcome from nature,
overexploiting its environment, overexpanding, overpopulating,” Wright
said when I reached him by phone at his home in British Columbia,
Canada. “They tend to collapse quite soon after they reach their period
of greatest magnificence and prosperity. That pattern holds good for a
lot of societies, among them the Romans, the ancient Maya and the
Sumerians of what is now southern Iraq. There are many other examples,
including smaller-scale societies such as Easter Island. The very things
that cause societies to prosper in the short run, especially new ways
to exploit the environment such as the invention of irrigation, lead to
disaster in the long run because of unforeseen complications. This is
what I called in ‘A Short History of Progress’ the ‘progress trap.’ We
have set in motion an industrial machine of such complexity and such
dependence on expansion that we do not know how to make do with less or
move to a steady state in terms of our demands on nature. We have failed
to control human numbers. They have tripled in my lifetime. And the
problem is made much worse by the widening gap between rich and poor,
the upward concentration of wealth, which ensures there can never be
enough to go around. The number of people in dire poverty today—about 2
billion—is greater than the world’s entire population in the early
1900s. That’s not progress.”
“If we continue to refuse to deal with
things in an orderly and rational way, we will head into some sort of
major catastrophe, sooner or later,” he said. “If we are lucky it will
be big enough to wake us up worldwide but not big enough to wipe us out.
That is the best we can hope for. We must transcend our evolutionary
history. We’re Ice Age hunters with a shave and a suit. We are not good
long-term thinkers. We would much rather gorge ourselves on dead
mammoths by driving a herd over a cliff than figure out how to conserve
the herd so it can feed us and our children forever. That is the
transition our civilization has to make. And we’re not doing that.”
Advertisement
<a
href='http://www.truthdig.com/banners/www/delivery/ck.php?n=abee66dc&amp;cb=1796272321'
target='_blank'><img
src='http://www.truthdig.com/banners/www/delivery/avw.php?zoneid=8&amp;cb=1796272321&amp;n=abee66dc'
border='0' alt='' /></a>
12/18/12
via: http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/12/the-second-great-betrayal-obama-and-cameron-decide-that-banks-are-above-the-law.html
By William K. Black
One of the “tells” that reveals how embarrassed Lanny Breuer (head of the Criminal Division) and Eric Holder (AG) are by the disgraceful refusal to prosecute HSBC and its officers for their tens of thousands of felonies are the false and misleading statements made by the Department of Justice (DOJ) about the settlement. The same pattern has been demonstrated by other writers in the case of the false and disingenuous statistics DOJ has trumpeted to attempt to disguise the abject failure of their efforts to prosecute the elite officers who directed the “epidemic” (FBI 2004) of mortgage fraud.
HSBC was one of the largest originators of fraudulent mortgage loans through its acquisition of Household Finance.
Three recent books by “insiders” have confirmed earlier articles revealing the decisive role that Treasury Secretary Geithner has played in opposing criminal prosecutions of the elite banksters and banks whose frauds drove the financial crisis and the Great Recession.
Bair, Sheila, Bull by the Horns: Fighting to Save Main Street from Wall Street and Wall Street from Itself” (2012); Barofsky, Neil, Bailout: An Inside Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street (2012); Connaughton, Jeff, The Payoff: Why Wall Street Always Wins (2012).
Geithner’s fear is that the vigorous enforcement of the law against the systemically dangerous institutions (SDIs) that caused the crisis could destabilize the system and cause a renewed global crisis. I have often expressed my view that the theory that leaving felons in power over our largest financial institutions is essential to producing financial stability is insane. Geithner, it turns out, is very sensitive to that criticism. I will return to that subject after setting the stage.
The UK authorities admit openly the arrival of “too big to prosecute”
The title of the article in The Daily Telegraph says it all: “Banks are ‘too big to prosecute’, says FSA’s Andrew Bailey.”
The FSA was the U.K.’s faux financial regulator during the run-up to the crisis. The U.K. “won” the regulatory “race to the bottom” that destroyed effective regulation and supervision in the U.K. and Europe and helped degrade to near impotence in the U.S. The FSA’s goal was to attract the world largest financial firms to relocate much of their operations to the City of London. The FSA offered “light touch” (non) regulation and (non) supervision to firms operating in the City of London. The results were the typical result – the City of London attracted the worst of the worst. The “control frauds” produced a “Gresham’s” dynamic (Akerlof 1970) because the frauds gained a crippling competitive advantage over honest competitors and dishonest and unethical officers became wealthy through fraud and modern executive compensation’s perverse incentives. “Control fraud” refers to criminal enterprises in which the people that control a seemingly legitimate enterprise use it as a “weapon” to defraud. Control frauds can create a Gresham’s dynamic causes markets to become so perverse that bad ethics drive good ethics out of the marketplace. The result was that the City of London became an intensely criminogenic environment and many of the largest financial firms in the world became criminal enterprises.
The newly designated head of the FSA decided to endorse the concept of “too big to prosecute.”
By William K. Black
One of the “tells” that reveals how embarrassed Lanny Breuer (head of the Criminal Division) and Eric Holder (AG) are by the disgraceful refusal to prosecute HSBC and its officers for their tens of thousands of felonies are the false and misleading statements made by the Department of Justice (DOJ) about the settlement. The same pattern has been demonstrated by other writers in the case of the false and disingenuous statistics DOJ has trumpeted to attempt to disguise the abject failure of their efforts to prosecute the elite officers who directed the “epidemic” (FBI 2004) of mortgage fraud.
HSBC was one of the largest originators of fraudulent mortgage loans through its acquisition of Household Finance.
Three recent books by “insiders” have confirmed earlier articles revealing the decisive role that Treasury Secretary Geithner has played in opposing criminal prosecutions of the elite banksters and banks whose frauds drove the financial crisis and the Great Recession.
Bair, Sheila, Bull by the Horns: Fighting to Save Main Street from Wall Street and Wall Street from Itself” (2012); Barofsky, Neil, Bailout: An Inside Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street (2012); Connaughton, Jeff, The Payoff: Why Wall Street Always Wins (2012).
Geithner’s fear is that the vigorous enforcement of the law against the systemically dangerous institutions (SDIs) that caused the crisis could destabilize the system and cause a renewed global crisis. I have often expressed my view that the theory that leaving felons in power over our largest financial institutions is essential to producing financial stability is insane. Geithner, it turns out, is very sensitive to that criticism. I will return to that subject after setting the stage.
The UK authorities admit openly the arrival of “too big to prosecute”
The title of the article in The Daily Telegraph says it all: “Banks are ‘too big to prosecute’, says FSA’s Andrew Bailey.”
The FSA was the U.K.’s faux financial regulator during the run-up to the crisis. The U.K. “won” the regulatory “race to the bottom” that destroyed effective regulation and supervision in the U.K. and Europe and helped degrade to near impotence in the U.S. The FSA’s goal was to attract the world largest financial firms to relocate much of their operations to the City of London. The FSA offered “light touch” (non) regulation and (non) supervision to firms operating in the City of London. The results were the typical result – the City of London attracted the worst of the worst. The “control frauds” produced a “Gresham’s” dynamic (Akerlof 1970) because the frauds gained a crippling competitive advantage over honest competitors and dishonest and unethical officers became wealthy through fraud and modern executive compensation’s perverse incentives. “Control fraud” refers to criminal enterprises in which the people that control a seemingly legitimate enterprise use it as a “weapon” to defraud. Control frauds can create a Gresham’s dynamic causes markets to become so perverse that bad ethics drive good ethics out of the marketplace. The result was that the City of London became an intensely criminogenic environment and many of the largest financial firms in the world became criminal enterprises.
The newly designated head of the FSA decided to endorse the concept of “too big to prosecute.”
Mr Bailey told The Daily Telegraph that some banks had grown too large to prosecute. “It would be a very destabilising issue. It’s another version of too important to fail,” he said,The U.S. and U.K. have made noise lately about how they had ended the pernicious doctrine of “too big to fail.” As I explained in a prior column, this pretense lasted about four hours before both nations’ true preferences were revealed. The systemically dangerous institutions (SDIs) already had crippling competitive advantages because the government bailed out their general creditors. Conservative economists agreed that this advantage was so large that it made “free markets” a farce. The doctrine “too big to prosecute” grants SDIs that are control frauds two additional advantages over their smaller, honest competitors. First, fraud pays enormously for the controlling officers. It is a “sure thing.” (Akerlof & Romer 1993.) The HSBC compliance officers (the minnows) may lose, but the controlling officers were made very wealthy by HSBC’s manifold frauds. (continued at link above)
“Because of the confidence issue with banks, a major criminal indictment, which we haven’t seen and I’m not saying we are going to see… this is not an ordinary criminal indictment,” he said.
His comments come days after HSBC’s record $1.9bn (£1.2bn) settlement with the US authorities over money-laundering linked to drug-trafficking. US assistant attorney general Lanny Breuer said of the decision not to prosecute: “In this day and age we have to evaluate that innocent people will face very big consequences if you make a decision.”
11/22/12
Episode 370
In this episode, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert ask, “Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of the global financial system?” and find an answer: “The shadow banking system knows!” The shadow banking system has grown to $67 trillion, and has the power to cloud men's minds so they cannot see the fraud. In the second half of the show, Max Keiser talks to Jan Skoyles of the Real Asset Company about clients wanting to park their gold in Singapore, and about what is happening in the gold market in China.
11/9/12
Via:Fire Dog Lake news desk
| http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/11/08/boehner-opens-grand-bargain-negotiations-by-proposing-the-romney-plan/ By: David Dayen Thursday November 8, 2012 6:26 am |
I touched on this yesterday, but let’s take a closer look at John Boehner’s opening offer
on revenue, designed to avoid the fiscal slope (it’s not a cliff). I
think it will become familiar to you if you look at the exact language.
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, it’s the Mitt Romney platform. The one defeated at the polls. Boehner’s opening bid is just the Romney tax plan, made even more ludicrous by the notion that you can increase revenue with it. Romney was widely mocked during the election for trying to make a large rate cut revenue-neutral; here Boehner wants to add to the fantasy world. He also alludes to the idea that lowering tax rates will increase economic growth and therefore tax receipts. This is precisely the claim that was debunked by the Congressional Research Service study of 65 years of tax rates, which Republicans found so dissonant and offensive, they got the study torpedoed.
Boehner’s lower-the-rates, broaden-the-base gambit has already been rejected by the likes of Chuck Schumer. He’s already blown up the tax reform con. And he got backed up by the Democratic leadership in the Senate. So if it comes back, we know exactly where it came from – the White House.
Apparently the President was busy calling leaders of Congress yesterday:
It’s like campaign 2012 never happened.
So Boehner is calling for an across the board rate cut, paid for by (and actually with a revenue gain from) closing loopholes and deductions. All the while, he wants to “reform” entitlements to reduce the cost to government.For the purposes of forging a bipartisan agreement that begins to solve the problem, we’re willing to accept new revenue under the right conditions. What matters is where the increase revenue comes from and what type of reform comes with it. Does the increased revenue come from government taking a larger share of what the American people earn through higher taxe rates? Or does it come as a byproduct of growing our economy, energized by a simpler, cleaner, fairer tax code, with fewer loopholes and lower rates for all? And at the same time we’re reforming the tax code, are we supporting growth by taking concrete steps to put our country’s entitlement programs on a sounder financial footing or are we just going to continue to duck the matter of entitlements, thus the root of the problem?
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, it’s the Mitt Romney platform. The one defeated at the polls. Boehner’s opening bid is just the Romney tax plan, made even more ludicrous by the notion that you can increase revenue with it. Romney was widely mocked during the election for trying to make a large rate cut revenue-neutral; here Boehner wants to add to the fantasy world. He also alludes to the idea that lowering tax rates will increase economic growth and therefore tax receipts. This is precisely the claim that was debunked by the Congressional Research Service study of 65 years of tax rates, which Republicans found so dissonant and offensive, they got the study torpedoed.
Boehner’s lower-the-rates, broaden-the-base gambit has already been rejected by the likes of Chuck Schumer. He’s already blown up the tax reform con. And he got backed up by the Democratic leadership in the Senate. So if it comes back, we know exactly where it came from – the White House.
Apparently the President was busy calling leaders of Congress yesterday:
Boehner said yesterday that “We’re closer than many think to the critical mass needed legislatively to get tax reform done.” Which I suppose he has to say. But he’s offering nothing more than the Romney tax plan, PLUS cuts to Social Security and Medicare! And he wants a $100 billion in spending cuts, replacing the sequester, by the end of the year, as a show of good faith in getting to a deal.In phone calls made overnight and this morning from Chicago, Obama said much the same thing to Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). He said he believed that the American people sent a message that leaders in both parties need to put aside their partisan interests and work with common purpose to put the interests of the American people and the American economy first.
It’s like campaign 2012 never happened.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







