Saturday, February 21, 2009

BS Watch

Did you get an email like this:

"WOW !!! President Obama reported to the nation this week that there is not one earmark or pork funding in the so-called economic stimulus bill. Pick your state and town and see who is pulling the wool over who."


The web site in the email is StimulusWatch.org. You can also find projects by state or territory.

First, I don't deny the stimulus bill contained earmarks.

But StimulusWatch.org is not a list of earmarks in the stimulus bill. The website is a list of "proposed 'shovel-ready'" projects in cities and states. Anyone can submit a project to the list. The state specific list includes "projects the mayors of this state submitted in the 2008 U.S. Conference of Mayors report."

But let me ask, would you prefer the government spend near a trillion dollars without a shopping list?

Only a Republi-con would want that.

Friday, February 20, 2009

No Class Today at NoBullU on WEBY

Usually on Fridays you can listen to me, the voice of wisdom and reason in a wilderness of partisan rhetoric -- no political insanity, no conservative hypocrisy, no liberal foolishness -- just straight talk, straight at you, and that’s no bull!!

But I can't make it today so Ken will substitute. Until the next show, post a comment or two.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Problem, Causes and Professor NoBull's Solution for the Economic Mess

UPDATE: Watch PBS, Frontline, Inside the Meltdown and/or CBS, 60 Minutes, World of Trouble.

What a mess!

The Problem


The problem is two-fold: Main Street and Wall Street.

On Main Street, people are out of work or worried about losing their jobs (government workers excluded) and their assets, including homes and stocks, are losing value.

On Wall Street, it turns out that a substantial part of the financial sector was a fraud so parties can't trust one another. More problematic, the value of assets, particularly collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), are indeterminable. Most credit default swaps (CDSs) are worthless.

(Previously I described CDOs or CDSs? Imagine taking paper debt like mortgages, subprime mortgages, car loans, credit cards loans, and pretty much anything you can imagine. Now combine and mix the paper in a blender, spiking it with worthless rhetorical hyperbole that derivatives are the new paradigm of investments. Then pour the mixture in a pyramid of champagne glasses, to represent the varying levels of return (and risk), with the higher the glass, the lower the risk return and risk. That represents the CDOs. Now as you sell the mess, insure against the risk of the CDOs decreasing in value with CDSs. Presto, $1 trillion of bad loans is transmuted into $62 trillion in faux wealth. An alchemist would be proud.

Since that time, estimates are that there are close to $600 trillion in outstanding CDSs. Whether it is $60 trillion or $600 trillion, the government doesn't have enough money or credit to save zombie banks like Paulson's Goldman Sachs.)

At the center of it all is the declining value of houses. If housing is fixed, many other problems will resolve themselves.


The Cause

The cause is/was greed in an environment of deregulation and oversight failures leading to 'irrational exuberance' and outright fraud. There is plenty of blame to share, the only debatable point is how to apportion the blame.

For more details, read or watch the following:

The New York Times, The Reckoning series,

Washington Post, The Crash: What Went Wrong?

Village Voice, What Cooked the World's Economy,

Barry Ritholtz, The Big Picture, Bailout Nation,

CNBC, House of Cards, Global Economic Collapse, and

Time, 25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis,

Personally, I think the Republi-con party's reckless faith in markets and war against the middle class are the fundamental causes of the economic crisis. To repeat a previous post:

"Read The New York Times, Six Errors on the Path to the Financial Crisis. According the writer, the six errors, in chronologically order, omitting mistakes that became clear only in hindsight, and limiting to those where prominent voices advocated a different course at the time, were:

"WILD DERIVATIVES In 1998, when Brooksley E. Born, then chairwoman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, sought to extend its regulatory reach into the derivatives world, top officials of the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission squelched the idea. While her specific plan may not have been ideal, does anyone doubt that the financial turmoil would have been less severe if derivatives trading had acquired a zookeeper a decade ago?

SKY-HIGH LEVERAGE The second error came in 2004, when the S.E.C. let securities firms raise their leverage sharply. Before then, leverage of 12 to 1 was typical; afterward, it shot up to more like 33 to 1. What were the S.E.C. and the heads of the firms thinking? Remember, under 33-to-1 leverage, a mere 3 percent decline in asset values wipes out a company. Had leverage stayed at 12 to 1, these firms wouldn’t have grown as big or been as fragile.

A SUBPRIME SURGE The next error came in stages, from 2004 to 2007, as subprime lending grew from a small corner of the mortgage market into a large, dangerous one. Lending standards fell disgracefully, and dubious transactions became common. Why wasn’t this insanity stopped? There are two answers, and each holds a lesson. One is that bank regulators were asleep at the switch. Entranced by laissez faire-y tales, they ignored warnings from those like Edward M. Gramlich, then a Fed governor, who saw the problem brewing years before the fall. The other answer is that many of the worst subprime mortgages originated outside the banking system, beyond the reach of any federal regulator. That regulatory hole needs to be plugged.

FIDDLING ON FORECLOSURES The government’s continuing failure to do anything large and serious to limit foreclosures is tragic. The broad contours of the foreclosure tsunami were clear more than a year ago — and people like Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Sheila C. Bair, chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, were sounding alarms. Yet the Treasury and Congress fiddled while homes burned. Why? Free-market ideology, denial and an unwillingness to commit taxpayer funds all played roles. Sadly, the problem should now be much smaller than it is.

LETTING LEHMAN GO The next whopper came in September, when Lehman Brothers, unlike Bear Stearns before it, was allowed to fail. Perhaps it was a case of misjudgment by officials who deemed Lehman neither too big nor too entangled — with other financial institutions — to fail. Or perhaps they wanted to make an offering to the moral-hazard gods. Regardless, everything fell apart after Lehman. People in the market often say they can make money under any set of rules, as long as they know what they are. Coming just six months after Bear’s rescue, the Lehman decision tossed the presumed rule book out the window. If Bear was too big to fail, how could Lehman, at twice its size, not be? If Bear was too entangled to fail, why was Lehman not? After Lehman went over the cliff, no financial institution seemed safe. So lending froze, and the economy sank like a stone. It was a colossal error, and many people said so at the time.

TARP’S DETOUR The final major error is mismanagement of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the $700 billion bailout fund. As I wrote here last month, decisions of Henry M. Paulson Jr., the former Treasury secretary, about using the TARP’s first $350 billion were an inconsistent mess. Instead of pursuing the TARP’s intended purposes, he used most of the funds to inject capital into banks — which he did poorly."

Note that with the exception of the first error, they all occurred under Bush. Senior "Clinton administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers, joined by the Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan, and Arthur Levitt Jr., the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, issued a report that instead recommended legislation exempting many kinds of derivatives from federal oversight." Republi-con Senator Phil Gramm was only too happy to help pass, in the Republi-con-controlled Senate and House, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which deregulated credit default swaps, the real cause of this economic collapse.

And a historical not-so footnote, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act included the so-called "Enron loophole," which exempts most over-the-counter energy trades and trading on electronic energy commodity markets. The "loophole" was drafted by lobbyists for Enron working with Gramm to create a deregulated atmosphere for their new experiment, "Enron On-line." You might also recall that Gramm's wife, Wendy Lee Gramm, was on the board of directors of Enron when it collapsed.

So remember this as you listen to the newly self-righteous Republi-cons praise the false gods of less taxes and less government, they are largely responsible for the mess, they have no, zero, zilch, nadda credibility with me, and I haven't heard a better idea from them yet. Have you?"

The cause was certainly not Carter and the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977. Only a Republi-con would tell you otherwise.


The Solution

Who knows, a Japanese proverb states: "An inch ahead is darkness." Pretty prophetic for this situation.

The solution certainly is not a repeat of Hoover's initial response to the Great Depression.

But history does offer some guidance, Roosevelt's New Deal, the S & L Crisis in the late 1980s,

(Historical footnote: Neil Bush, son of then Vice President of the United States George H. W. Bush, was Director of the Silverado Savings and Loan, which collapsed in 1988, costing taxpayers $1.3 billion.)

Japan's banking crisis and subsequent 'lost decade,' and Sweden's banking crisis.

In a previous post in early October I suggested:

The 1929 depression offers a valuable lesson. A recent article in Time, Are Paulson and Bernanke Running Out of Options? states that:

"After the 1929 collapse, which at its worst left a quarter of the workforce jobless, the U.S. instituted safeguards to ensure liquidity, confidence and trust in the U.S. financial system. There were four pillars: insuring the bank deposits of everyday Americans, allowing access to government funds in case of a panic, providing a regime for the orderly failure of badly run companies and limiting how much credit could be leveraged off a particular asset."

The government should do the same now, defend depository institutions and provide a regime for the orderly failure of badly run non-depository financial institutions and insurance companies. In the process the government and the public will have to make some tough choices and learn to live within a budget.

In addition to that I would set short and long term objectives:

In the short-term:

In the long term:
  • Regulatory, organizational, and tax reform as I have described in the past as GRAC,
  • Reduce/cut all government salaries, assistance payments, etc. by 10% of the first $100,000/year and 50% thereafter,
  • Reduce all retirement and disability payments by 30%.
  • A $1/gallon gas tax,
  • An Incompetence Tax, and
  • Ban the Democratic and Republican parties from future office.

OK, the last measure might require a Constitutional amendment, but I can dream can't I.

This is a work in progress., your suggestions are welcome.

Deadly Republi-Con Ideology

Q: How are the Republi-con party and Peanut Corporation of America the same?
A: They are both bankrupt and deadly, and neither will accept responsibility for its actions.

Have a little peanut butter with that Republi-con deregulation ideology:




And remember it was the Republi-con party that got us into this mess:

Not So Funny Humor About the Stimulus

From the Internet:

"Sometime this year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format:

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. No, they are borrowing it from China. Your children are expected to repay the Chinese.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn’t that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:

If you spend that money at Wal-Mart, all the money will go to China.
If you spend it on gasoline it will go to Hugo Chavez, the Arabs and Al Queda
If you purchase a computer it will go to Taiwan.
If you purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala (unless you buy organic).
If you buy a car it will go to Japan and Korea.
If you purchase prescription drugs it will go to India
If you purchase heroin it will go to the Taliban in Afghanistan
If you give it to a charitable cause, it will go to Nigeria.

And none of it will help the American economy. We need to keep that money here in America. You can keep the money in America by spending it at yard sales, going to a baseball game, or spend it on prostitutes, beer (domestic only), or tattoos, since those are the only businesses still in the US."

This would be funny if it wasn't true.

Friday, February 13, 2009

Class Today at NoBullU on WEBY

Listen to the voice of wisdom and reason in a wilderness of partisan rhetoric -- No political insanity, no conservative hypocrisy, no liberal foolishness -- Just straight talk, straight at you, and that’s no bull!!

NoBullU will be on air Friday from 4:05 to 6 p.m. at 1330 AM WEBY and on line, courtesy of Cyber Smart Computers.

Topics:

Local and state: TBD, and

Nation and international: Who is to blame for the economic mess, the proposed stimulus plan, and Valentine's Day, is it a day for love or commerce.

And call in to tell me your story of long lost love.

But I'll discuss anything. (Disclaimer: the host reserves the right to end any discussion and hang up on you.)

So tune-in, call-in, but only if you can handle the truth!

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Neo-Roosevelters Unite

Time to unite against the Neo-Hoovers. Read about Herbert Hoover and his initial response to the Great Depression.

Then read The New York Times, Escaping the Bust Bowl.

To be discussed during class at NoBullU tomorrow.

Til then.

Examples of Republi-Con Statesmanship

So many examples of Republi-con statesmanship, so little time. Here are a few:

Republi-con patriotism:



Republi-con bipartisanship:



Republi-con frugality:



Republi-con playfulness:



Republi-con principles:



With countrymen like Republi-cons, who needs enemies.

Humor Test for Valentine's Day

Who needs roses or candy this Valentine's Day, show her how much you love her with this gag:





Of course, before you play this trick on your loved one, you might want to know that the name of the video is: Why husbands die first.

If you live, come back and tell us how she liked it.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Republi-Con Hypocrisy on Federal Deficits and Debt

REPOSTED: First posted in January. Reposted in response to Joe's op-ed in the Pensacola New Journal, Can't keep spending money we don't have.

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. In this case it is an animated editorial cartoon. See Washington Post, What Was That About Burdening Kids?

On the day Bush took office, the National Debt stood at $5,727.776.738,304.64. That's about $5.7 trillion dollars if you take away $27+ billion. Now, as Bush prepares to leave office the national debt is over $10 trillion. Here is a nice graph showing the national debt as a percent of gross domestic product:



















And Republi-cons would have you believe that they are the fiscal conservatives!!

UPDATE: At the risk of offending drunken sailors:


Tuesday, February 10, 2009

There's a Naive-ocrat Born Every Minute

"There's a sucker born every minute" is a phrase often credited to P.T. Barnum, an American showman. It is generally taken to mean that there are (and always will be) a lot of gullible people in the world. And these suckers must all be Democrats.

John McCain calls the stimulus bill is 'generational theft.' But remember that in October he voted for a bank bailout, calling it a "rescue effort not just for Wall Street but for Main Street," which was used to pay dividends to shareholders and bonuses to employees.

Such hypocrisy.

It is clear that the Republi-cons, who are largely responsible for the economic mess (beginning about the sixth paragraph), want the Naive-ocrats to take the blame for the stimulus bill. The Republi-cons see it as a win-win, and Obama is stupid enough to play along. Even if the stimulus bill works, Republi-cons will claim it was coincidence and say that the government should stay out of the markets.

The Naive-ocrats should demand that Republi-cons accept responsibility for the mess they created, and vote against the current bill. Then wait until the Republi-cons agree to cooperate.

When economic circumstances deteriorate more, the Republi-cons will concede. Then craft a sensible stimulus package.

What is sensible? Coming soon, the NoBullU economic stimulus proposal.

UPDATE: See this animated editorial cartoon, : Washington Post, McCain's Theft.

The Republi-Con Cult



Couldn't have said it better myself with a thousand words.

Monday, February 9, 2009

The Republi-Con Jihad Against America

Constructive criticism is great. Goodness knows the stimulus bill is a mess.

But the Republi-cons want America to fail. Rusty said it.



And the Republi-con's role model for their 'insurgency,' the Taliban.

As the Dallas Morning News said in an article titled Sessions' call for GOP 'insurgency' draws fire: "Dallas Rep. Pete Sessions, the leader of the GOP's House campaign arm, compared the party to the terrorist-supporting Afghan group in an interview with the Hotline, a Washington political newsletter. He was trying to describe the Republicans' strategy for the 2010 midterm elections."

In the interview, Sessions said:


"Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban, and that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes."


It seems that the Republi-cons are determined to destroy the country, whether they run Washington or not.

Republi-Cons Find Religion Regarding Fiscal Discipline

Forgetting what they said in the past, Republi-cons debate the stimulus bill:



Isn't it refreshing to see such fiscal discipline now that the Republi-cons are the minority party. Makes one wonder why any God-fearing conservative would want to put them in charge again.

Republi-Con Hypocrisy Regarding Accountability for Possible Future Terrorist Attacks

Ignoring his own responsibility, Cheney lets everyone know that Obama will be responsible if there's another terrorist attack:



Fear, anger, and hatred, the Republi-con Party's best hope for America's future.

Saturday, February 7, 2009

Will Obama Be a Great Republican President, Time for the NoBull Party

I always said that Bush was a great Democratic president, in the sense that he was a great president for the Democratic party.

It turns out that Obama may be a great president for the Republican party, as evidenced by his administrations first two weeks in office. First the Daschle debacle, as described in The New York Times, Republicans Seize on Nominees’ Tax Problems:

"[T]he succession of Obama nominees who failed to pay all of their taxes handed the Republicans a simple, powerful and possibly enduring argumentin future tax debates. “It is easy for the other side to advocate for higher taxes,” Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House Republican whip, told a party retreat last weekend, “because you know what? They don’t pay them.”That’s become a common refrain in conservative circles in recent days:

Senator Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican, on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday: “I can see now why liberals don’t mind if the tax rate goes up, because they’re not going to pay it anyway.”

Roger Hedgecock, a California radio talk show host, on “Lou Dobbs Tonight” on CNN: “It came down to a situation where the American public realized the Democrats who always want to raise taxes on people didn’t want to particularly pay the taxes on people.”

Sean Hannity on his Fox News Channel talk show: “I guess the reason Democrats want to raise taxes, use class warfare, attack corporations is because they take everyone else’s money and redistribute it. But they themselves don’t pay taxes, so there’s no reason for them to worry about tax increases, right?”"

Now a messy stimulus bill for an economic mess, which has empowered the Republi-cons (who as I say again are largely at fault for this mess), as described in The New York Times, The Gang System:

"Barack Obama is a potentially transformational figure. In political style and intellectual outlook, he is unlike anything that has come before. On matters of policy substance, however, he’s been pretty conventional. The policies he offered during the campaign matched those of just about every other Democrat.


So an important question for the Obama presidency is this: Will his transformational style eventually lead to transformational policies, or will his conventional policies eventually force him to shelve his transformational style?


In the first major episode of his administration, the stimulus package, the conventional policies so far have won. The Obama administration sent a series of stimulus principles to Capitol Hill and allowed the Old Bulls in the House and Senate to write legislation. They produced sprawling bills that gathered dozens of traditional liberal ideas. The resulting bills would have been no different if Nancy Pelosi had been elected president, or Harry Reid, or any other conventional Democrat.


The substance of the legislation set up the polarized debate that followed. Liberal interest groups were happy. Conservative Republicans were united in opposition. But something interesting happened this week. The momentum of the debate was set by moderates. Conservative protests wouldn’t have amounted to much without nagging moderate unease."

I think the two major parties have pretty much shown us the limits of form and fluff, and after Iraq and the economy, the lack of substance.

I think it is time for the NoBull Party. Want to join me?

Incompetence Tax

Great idea from The New York Times, Please Raise My Taxes

"This week, President Obama proposed imposing a $500,000 compensation cap on companies seeking a bailout. It’s a terrible idea. We all want the taxpayers’ money returned, and capping compensation at bailout recipients will just make it that much harder for those boards to hire and hold on to the executives who can lead their companies to compete and thrive.


Perhaps a starting place for “tax, not shame” would be creating a top federal marginal tax rate of 50 percent on all income above $1 million per year. Some will tell you that would reduce the incentive to earn but I don’t see that as likely. Besides, half of a giant compensation package is still pretty huge, and most of our motivation is the sheer challenge of the job anyway.


Instead of trying to shame companies and executives, the president should take advantage of our success by using our outsized earnings to pay for the needs of our nation."


Which gave me the idea for the incompetent tax. When the government needs a lot of money to bailout an industry, tax the executives in that industry to pay for the bailout, and provide for a retroactive application of the tax.

In other words, you break it, you buy it (or fix it in this case).

P.S. Sometimes a little humor helps make a point:

Friday, February 6, 2009

NoBullU Battle Cry

This is an urgent battle cry for all NoBullU readers and listeners:

Repeat after me: The stimulus package should be timely, targeted, and temporary. Instead, it is a sprawling, undisciplined smorgasbord of pent-up partisan fantasies, therefore I will not support it.

Instead I urge my Congressman or Senator, and to support the Fix Housing First Act, as revised by McConnell and Alexander to provide new and refinanced mortgages for 4%. (The original Fix Housing First Act does not include this revision.)

Repeat if necessary, then contact that worthless Congressman or Senator, and tell him/her.

This would stimulate consumer spending.

P.S. The banks should also be nationalized.

P.P.S. Tax cuts are not the answer for this economic mess. In fact, Congress should pass my proposed tax increase, the Incompetence Tax, as part of the stimulus bill.

For Republi-cons who think differently, consider this:

Republi-cons got us into this mess:



Different problems require different solutions:



This sums it up well:



Although if it helps, think of the proposal to provide new and refinanced mortgages for 4% as a tax cut.

P.P.P.S. Finally, for those who think we should do nothing, it could get a lot worse. Think Iceland.

Class Today at NoBullU on WEBY

Listen to the voice of wisdom and reason in a wilderness of partisan rhetoric -- No political insanity, no conservative hypocrisy, no liberal foolishness -- Just straight talk, straight at you, and that’s no bull!!

NoBullU will be on air Friday from 4:05 to 6 p.m. at 1330 AM WEBY and on line, courtesy of Cyber Smart Computers.

Topics:

Local and state: Prosecute Sansom, and

Nation and international: The economic mess left by the Republi-cons and the proposed stimulus plan (Dr. Dennis F. Paulaha, Ph.D., is scheduled to be a guest to discuss the status of the bailout effort, his original plan to Remortgage America, and Senate Republican leader McConnell's latest proposal, the 'Fix Housing First Act') .

But I'll discuss anything. (Disclaimer: the host reserves the right to end any discussion and hang up on you.)

So tune-in, call-in, but only if you can handle the truth!

Told Ya So, Remortgage America

UPDATE : On Friday's show Dr. Dennis F. Paulaha, Ph.D., is scheduled to be a guest to discuss the status of the bailout effort, his original plan to Remortgage America, and Senate Republican leader McConnell's latest proposal, the 'Fix Housing First Act.' Tune-in.
UPDATE II: The idea is catching on. Listen or read NPR, Housing Fix? Republicans Push For 4 Percent Loans

So contact your Congressman or Senator, and tell him/her to support the Fix Housing First Act, as revised by McConnell and Alexander to provide new and refinanced mortgages for 4%. (The original Fix Housing First Act does not include this revision.)

Do it now, before Congress wastes more of your tax dollars on the Wall Street Ponzi scheme.

Just do it, NOW.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, is proposing cheap, government-backed mortgages to stimulate the economy. "Under the 'Fix Housing First Act' -- an amendment spearheaded by both McConnell and Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee -- new and refinanced mortgages would be available to homeowners for 4 to 4.5 percent. "

Say, didn't we discuss that idea - six weeks ago! That's right, I blogged about it on December 12, 2008, and called Mike (who substituted for me that Friday) to discuss the idea on air. I think I called again the next Monday. I had Dennis F. Paulaha, Ph.D., who was a spokesperson for the idea to remortgage America as a guest for the better part of the program the following Friday, December 19, 2008.

The Remortgage America proposal was a little different, the original plan was for the government to offer every U.S. citizen a 30-year mortgage at a 1½% fixed rate of interest. But the idea was the same, lower mortgage payments.

The reason it was and is a great idea: the plan is simple and fair, nearly everyone who owns or want to buy a house benefits. (Some people are beyond help.)

But Paulaha's best argument: "It is better than what Washington politicians are doing now." Couldn't argue with that and still can't.

Can anybody explain why this plan is worse than the current effort that is pissing money down that rathole called Wall Street.

"Companies that have gotten bailouts continue to make a mockery of taxpayers.

Until it came to light Tuesday, Wells Fargo, which received $25 billion in federal funds, was blithely planning a series of “employee recognition outings” to Las Vegas luxury hotels this month.


As ABC reported, Bank of America took its $45 billion in bailout funds and sponsored a five-day carnival outside the Super Bowl stadium, and Morgan Stanley took its $10 billion in bailout money and held a three-day conference at the Breakers in Palm Beach. (Morgan Stanley had also still planned to send top employees to Monte Carlo and the Bahamas, events just canceled.)


The New York Post revealed that Sandy Weill, former chief executive of Citigroup, took a company jet to fly his family for a Christmas holiday to a $12,000-a-night luxury resort in San José del Cabo, Mexico. No matter that the company just got a $50 billion federal bailout and laid off 53,000 worldwide.


The interior of the 18-seat jet, as described by The Post, is posh, with a full bar, fine-wine selection, $13,000 carpets, Baccarat crystal glasses, Cristofle sterling silver flatware and — my personal favorite — pillows made from Hermès scarves."

I agree with Paula: for "the first time in the entire 'recovery' debate, American politicians are talking about lowering mortgage rates and fixing the economy by putting people first."

Contact your Congressman or Senator, and tell him/her to support the Fix Housing First Act, as revised by McConnell and Alexander to provide new and refinanced mortgages for 4 to 4.5%. (The original Fix Housing First Act does not include this revision.)


P.S. Somebody should pay me for this, I prefer gold until further notice.