Obama Looking to Seize Private Firms

[SUPDOG]

He is a marxist bastard. End of story.




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658/

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.


Just like I told you.

[Nevada_Ballin]

He is a marxist bastard. End of story.




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658/

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.


Just like I told you.


Question for you - what would happen if we had let AIG fail?

.

[theanalogkid]

It would have went into bankruptcy court, and the taxpayer would not be left on the hook for anything. We might have been on the road to recovery by now instead of spending trillions of dollars. The only thing Keynesian based economics is good for is to keep those in power, in power.

Do you think it's right to limit executive compensation even though there are many and maybe even the majority of executives who steer their company in the right direction?

Do you think it's wise to allow a tax-cheat like Geithner to have more power, and also give more power to the Federal Reserve. (It does say 2/3rds of the board have to go along with his plan) The man isn't honest with himself, yet we're suppose to make him the most powerful treasury secretary in history? There is no transparency in the Federal Reserve. They can't be audited, they do not have answer Congress' questions. Isn't Obama all about transparency, then why isn't he trying to open up the Fed? It would seem to me to be a logical move, seeing how the Fed is largely responsible for setting off the chain reaction which led us to this mess in the first place.

Do you think it's wise to have the Federal government continue to borrow money in unthinkable amounts? What happens when China says no? What happens when the savers rate gets the point where not even the irrational investor would keep their money in a savings account? What happens when the banks finally decide to take some risks and create hyperinflation through the multiplier effect that lending has? What then? Do you think it's okay that US citizens are on the hook for $59 trillion because of entitlement programs like SS, and Medicare? http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-28-federal-budget_N.htm

Are bad business not allowed to fail in this country, because of potential lost jobs? So they can reap the rewards, but none of the risks? So if a company is doing badly the government can swoop in, and bloat them up buy increasing the work force in the company. As we know the government employees too many people more often than not, and that is why there are a large number of layoffs whenever the government privatizes anything.

Is it really wise to give the executive branch more power? People used say Bush was King Bush, pretty soon it will be King Obama.

[sanantonio]

It would have went into bankruptcy court, and the taxpayer would not be left on the hook for anything. We might have been on the road to recovery by now instead of spending trillions of dollars. The only thing Keynesian based economics is good for is to keep those in power, in power.

Do you think it's right to limit executive compensation even though there are many and maybe even the majority of executives who steer their company in the right direction?

Do you think it's wise to allow a tax-cheat like Geithner to have more power, and also give more power to the Federal Reserve. (It does say 2/3rds of the board have to go along with his plan) The man isn't honest with himself, yet we're suppose to make him the most powerful treasury secretary in history? There is no transparancy in the Federal Reserve. They can't be audited, they do not have answer Congress' questions. Isn't Obama all about transparency, then why isn't he trying to open up the Fed? It would seem to me to be a logical move, seeing how the Fed is largely responsible for setting off the chain reaction which led us to this mess in the first place.

Do you think it's wise to have the Federal government continue to borrow money in unthinkable amounts? What happens when China says no? What happens when the savers rate gets the point where not even the irrational investor would keep their money in a savings account? What happens when the banks finally decide to take some risks and create hyperinflation through the multiplier effect that lending has? What then?

Are bad business not allowed to fail in this country, because of potential lost jobs? So they can reap the rewards, but none of the risks? So if a company is doing badly the government can swoop in, and bloat them up buy increasing the work force in the company. As we know the government employees too many people more often than not, and that is why there are a large number of layoffs whenever the government privatizes anything.

Is it really wise to give the executive branch more power? People used say Bush was King Bush, pretty soon it will be King Obama.

What he said!!

Also I almost agree with Sup so at this point I will go find a very tall building and leap off :p.

[Nevada_Ballin]

It would have went into bankruptcy court, and the taxpayer would not be left on the hook for anything. We might have been on the road to recovery by now instead of spending trillions of dollars.

Do you really think that's all that would have happened? What about the ramifications to the rest of the financial system (which would affect the taxpayer) if they were allowed to go under?

.

[sanantonio]

Do you really think that's all that would have happened? What about the ramifications to the rest of the financial system (which would affect the taxpayer) if they were allowed to go under?

.

Nevada the bottom line is that we the taxpayer are going to get it regardless.

Better to let them fail now get the suffering over with and let the correction (bankruptcy) take place as opposed to several years of throwing good money after bad as the dollar goes Ka-blewey!! It would be akin to a mini depression and yes there would be pain but nothing compared to whats coming and brother it's starting to look like a sunami.

Because all this bail-out money has to be accounted for you just can't keep pulling it out of thin air somebody is going to have to pay the piper.

[TheSphinx 2.0]

Nevada the bottom line is that we the taxpayer are going to get it regardless.

Better to let them fail now get the suffering over with and let the correction (bankruptcy) take place as opposed to several years of throwing good money after bad as the dollar goes Ka-blewey!! It would be akin to a mini depression and yes there would be pain but nothing compared to whats coming and brother it's starting to look like a sunami.

Because all this bail-out money has to be accounted for you just can't keep pulling it out of thin air somebody is going to have to pay the piper.

The problem is most Americans don't get the concept of currency...and the government knows it. People don't get what printing $5t means. They don't understand how it screws them. They see it as free. So if its free money why should we question what is going on. The debt, the deficit mean nothing to most people so who cares if it is going up. If you don't understand what currency actually is and what making currency out of thin air actually does how can you stand up to the politicians when they do things like make money out of thin air.

At this point the only thing that matters is whether or not the economy improves. Obama will be able to do whatever he wants if the economy is improving. All the drama behind Clinton what do we all remember...Lewinski. All the shots at Bush what do we remember...Iraq. All the shots at Obama won't matter in 2 years...all that will matter is the state of the American Economy.

Let's all hope that we are doing much better...

-TS

[TheRealist]

It is now my opinion that the Fed will keep doing this (printing money) until they have to battle inflation. Currently, I think we're in a deflationary climate, so the Fed believes it can spur growth by increasing the money supply and then they can deal with inflation later. I would not put this strategy past Bernanke...he's got some pretty deep papers on dealing with inflation.

Sphinx,

What is a better hedge against inflation and the fall of the dollar (i feel it's coming, especially now with the ECB not printing off anymore money like us)? Should I be buying up commodities or should I hedge with other currencies?

[resnor]

Do you really think that's all that would have happened? What about the ramifications to the rest of the financial system (which would affect the taxpayer) if they were allowed to go under?

.

What about the ramifications of spending trillions of dollars in a meaningless attempt to avoid the inevitable?

[Nevada_Ballin]

Nevada the bottom line is that we the taxpayer are going to get it regardless.

Better to let them fail now get the suffering over with and let the correction (bankruptcy) take place as opposed to several years of throwing good money after bad as the dollar goes Ka-blewey!! It would be akin to a mini depression and yes there would be pain but nothing compared to whats coming and brother it's starting to look like a sunami.

Because all this bail-out money has to be accounted for you just can't keep pulling it out of thin air somebody is going to have to pay the piper.

Every economic expert on the planet has agreed that if AIG was allowed to fail, the entire financial system as we know it would totally collapse. How is that a better alternative?

.

[Gotti]

The problem is most Americans don't get the concept of currency...and the government knows it. People don't get what printing $5t means. They don't understand how it screws them. They see it as free. So if its free money why should we question what is going on. The debt, the deficit mean nothing to most people so who cares if it is going up. If you don't understand what currency actually is and what making currency out of thin air actually does how can you stand up to the politicians when they do things like make money out of thin air.

At this point the only thing that matters is whether or not the economy improves. Obama will be able to do whatever he wants if the economy is improving. All the drama behind Clinton what do we all remember...Lewinski. All the shots at Bush what do we remember...Iraq. All the shots at Obama won't matter in 2 years...all that will matter is the state of the American Economy.

Let's all hope that we are doing much better...

-TS
Do you have any suggestions on reading up on this?

[sanantonio]

Every economic expert on the planet has agreed that if AIG was allowed to fail, the entire financial system as we know it would totally collapse. How is that a better alternative?

.

No not my economic experts. Currently we are only treating the symptom not the cause. Plus it would be no different then the depression which should be allowed to happen.

How do those so called experts see this playing out? Because my experts say it's going to happen anyway and that it's going to be 10 to 20 times worse. There is no happy alternative my friend only better sooner then later.

[SUPDOG]

What he said!!

Also I almost agree with Sup so at this point I will go find a very tall building and leap off :p.

So, you finally grasp the wisdom that I have departed to you these last couple of years and now you want to jump off a building? :eek:

Its okay, I know the transition from the darkness to the light can be a bit bumpy.

Before you jump, make sure you PM me, I'll keep leading you yo. ;)

:p

[Gtrght77]

I think I am more scared of Padre Pee Pants then Socialism. :p

[sanantonio]

So, you finally grasp the wisdom that I have departed to you these last couple of years and now you want to jump off a building? :eek:

Its okay, I know the transition from the darkness to the light can be a bit bumpy.

Before you jump, make sure you PM me, I'll keep leading you yo. ;)

:p

Don't go patting yourself on the back there to soon my brother we're not joined at the hip just yet politically. :p Besides I was base jumping metaphoricaly speaking ;).

[Nevada_Ballin]

No not my economic experts. Currently we are only treating the symptom not the cause. Plus it would be no different then the depression which should be allowed to happen.



Interesting you've brought up the Depression. I've been peeking back at that and isolating some of the identical scenarios from that as well as what the government did that worked and didn't work. Below is a "timeline", look at what happened when the government did nothing until 1932 - read carefully, it's interesting:

1929
Herbert Hoover becomes President. Hoover is a staunch individualist but not as committed to laissez-faire ideology as Coolidge.

More than half of all Americans are living below a minimum subsistence level.
Annual per-capita income is $750; for farm people, it is only $273.

Backlog of business inventories grows three times larger than the year before. Public consumption markedly down.

Freight carloads and manufacturing fall.

Automobile sales decline by a third in the nine months before the crash.
Construction down $2 billion since 1926.

Recession begins in August, two months before the stock market crash.

During this two month period, production will decline at an annual rate of 20 percent, wholesale prices at 7.5 percent, and personal income at 5 percent.

Stock market crash begins October 24. Investors call October 29 "Black Tuesday." Losses for the month will total $16 billion, an astronomical sum in those days.

Congress passes Agricultural Marketing Act to support farmers until they can get back on their feet.

1930
By February, the Federal Reserve has cut the prime interest rate from 6 to 4 percent. Expands the money supply with a major purchase of U.S. securities. However, for the next year and a half, the Fed will add very little money to the shrinking economy. (At no time will it actually pull money out of the system.) Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon announces that the Fed will stand by as the market works itself out: "Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate real estate… values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wreck from less-competent people."

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff passes on June 17. With imports forming only 6 percent of the GNP, the 40 percent tariffs work out to an effective tax of only 2.4 percent per citizen. Even this is compensated for by the fact that American businesses are no longer investing in Europe, but keeping their money stateside. The consensus of modern economists is that the tariff made only a minor contribution to the Great Depression in the U.S., but a major one in Europe.

The first bank panic occurs later this year; a public run on banks results in a wave of bankruptcies. Bank failures and deposit losses are responsible for the contracting money supply.

Supreme Court rules that the monopoly U.S. Steel does not violate anti-trust laws as long as competition exists, no matter how negligible.

Democrats gain in Congressional elections, but still do not have a majority.

The GNP falls 9.4 percent from the year before. The unemployment rate climbs from 3.2 to 8.7 percent.

1931
No major legislation is passed addressing the Depression.

A second banking panic occurs in the spring.

The GNP falls another 8.5 percent; unemployment rises to 15.9 percent.

1932
This and the next year are the worst years of the Great Depression. For 1932, GNP falls a record 13.4 percent; unemployment rises to 23.6 percent.

Industrial stocks have lost 80 percent of their value since 1930.

10,000 banks have failed since 1929, or 40 percent of the 1929 total.

About $2 billion in deposits have been lost since 1929.

Money supply has contracted 31 percent since 1929.

GNP has also fallen 31 percent since 1929.

Over 13 million Americans have lost their jobs since 1929.

Capital growth investments have dropped from $16.2 billion to 1/3 of one billion since 1929.

Farm prices have fallen 53 percent since 1929.

International trade has fallen by two-thirds since 1929.

The Fed makes its first major expansion of the money supply since February 1930.

Congress creates the Reconstruction Finance Corporation.

Congress passes the Federal Home Loan Bank Act and the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932.

Top tax rate is raised from 25 to 63 percent.

Popular opinion considers Hoover's measures too little too late. Franklin Roosevelt easily defeats Hoover in the fall election. Democrats win control of Congress.

At his Democratic presidential nomination, Roosevelt says: "I pledge you, I pledge myself, to a new deal for the American people."

1933
Roosevelt inaugurated; begins "First 100 Days" of intensive legislative activity.

A third banking panic occurs in March. Roosevelt declares a Bank Holiday; closes financial institutions to stop a run on banks.

Alarmed by Roosevelt's plan to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, a group of millionaire businessmen, led by the Du Pont and J.P. Morgan empires, plans to overthrow Roosevelt with a military coup and install a fascist government. The businessmen try to recruit General Smedley Butler, promising him an army of 500,000, unlimited financial backing and generous media spin control. The plot is foiled when Butler reports it to Congress.

Congress authorizes creation of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Farm Credit Administration, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the National Recovery Administration, the Public Works Administration and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Congress passes the Emergency Banking Bill, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, the Farm Credit Act, the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Truth-in-Securities Act.

U.S. goes off the gold standard.

Roosevelt does much to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, but is obsessed with a balanced budget. He later rejects Keynes' advice to begin heavy deficit spending.

The free fall of the GNP is significantly slowed; it dips only 2.1 percent this year. Unemployment rises slightly, to 24.9 percent.

1934
Congress authorizes creation of the Federal Communications Commission, the National Mediation Board and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Congress passes the Securities and Exchange Act and the Trade Agreement Act.

The economy turns around: GNP rises 7.7 percent, and unemployment falls to 21.7 percent. A long road to recovery begins.

Sweden becomes the first nation to recover fully from the Great Depression. It has followed a policy of Keynesian deficit spending.

1935
The Supreme Court declares the National Recovery Administration to be unconstitutional.

Congress authorizes creation of the Works Progress Administration, the National Labor Relations Board and the Rural Electrification Administration.

Congress passes the Banking Act of 1935, the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Social Security Act.

Economic recovery continues: the GNP grows another 8.1 percent, and unemployment falls to 20.1 percent.

1936
The Supreme Court declares part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act to be unconstitutional.

In response, Congress passes the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act.

Top tax rate raised to 79 percent.

Economic recovery continues: GNP grows a record 14.1 percent; unemployment falls to 16.9 percent.

Germany becomes the second nation to recover fully from the Great Depression, through heavy deficit spending in preparation for war.

1937
The Supreme Court declares the National Labor Relations Board to be unconstitutional.

Roosevelt seeks to enlarge and therefore liberalize the Supreme Court. This attempt not only fails, but outrages the public.

Economists attribute economic growth so far to heavy government spending that is somewhat deficit. Roosevelt, however, fears an unbalanced budget and cuts spending for 1937. That summer, the nation plunges into another recession. Despite this, the yearly GNP rises 5.0 percent, and unemployment falls to 14.3 percent.

1938
Congress passes the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 and the Fair Labor Standards Act.

No major New Deal legislation is passed after this date, due to Roosevelt's weakened political power.

The year-long recession makes itself felt: the GNP falls 4.5 percent, and unemployment rises to 19.0 percent.

Britain becomes the third nation to recover as it begins deficit spending in preparation for war.

1939
GNP rises 7.9 percent; unemployment falls to 17.2 percent.

The United States will begin emerging from the Depression as it borrows and spends $1 billion to build its armed forces. From 1939 to 1941, when the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor, U.S. manufacturing will have shot up a phenomenal 50 percent.

The Depression is ending worldwide as nations prepare for the coming hostilities.

World War II starts with Hitler's invasion of Poland.

************************************************** ******

A lot of simularities going on there (not everything of course but a LOT). But it appears spending got everyone out of it (th Grat Depression wasn't just a U.S. problem, it was global just like today's recession) - granted they were spending for war. But a world war is not needed for spending and i think this is where Obama is going with his plans, he's counting on the rebuilding of infrastrucre, energy dependence and Homeland Security efforts to secure our borders as his pedstal for deficit spending.

[resnor]

Nevada, it's pretty much accepted that the government programs did NOTHING to help the Great Depression. WWII is what got us out of it. Seriously, even liberals tell us that there wasn't ENOUGH spending. LOL. If spending was all it took, why doesn't the government just start putting people to work digging holes, and then filling them back in.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Nevada, it's pretty much accepted that the government programs did NOTHING to help the Great Depression. WWII is what got us out of it. Seriously, even liberals tell us that there wasn't ENOUGH spending. LOL. If spending was all it took, why doesn't the government just start putting people to work digging holes, and then filling them back in.

"Economists attribute economic growth so far to heavy government spending that is somewhat deficit." - in the 1937 section.

All I've been hearing the past 2 weeks are economists saying we still need to spend more now. I recognized WWII and noted that at the end where I speculated the new programs as that equal for present day. It's obvious that "war" is not the answer this time around because we're already in 2 of them. That is now an add-on to our problems, not a solution.

I think there are things to learn from here though because of the many ironies.

[R-ILLA]

Nevada, it's pretty much accepted that the government programs did NOTHING to help the Great Depression. WWII is what got us out of it. Seriously, even liberals tell us that there wasn't ENOUGH spending. LOL. If spending was all it took, why doesn't the government just start putting people to work digging holes, and then filling them back in.

Thus the Iran attack will occur shortly.

And

Oh Nooooooooos the Anti-Christ is at his antics even though he is a puppet on a string controlled by other humans.

[conviction]

NB,
Why do you support an ever-expanding giant we call the bureaucracy? Now with our inability to find suitors to buy our bonds we are pumping worthless, destructive dollars into the system. It's almost as though Obama wants the dollar to die.

[sanantonio]

NB,
Why do you support an ever-expanding giant we call the bureaucracy? Now with our inability to find suitors to buy our bonds we are pumping worthless, destructive dollars into the system. It's almost as though Obama wants the dollar to die.

You know conviction and please take this the right way, you have matured so much on this board it's almost like I've watched you grow up.

Your insight on the issues is so different and more advanced then before. I know I made some really ugly comments to and about you in the past and for that I apologize, you have become a serious debator on this forum and we are lucky to have you. I still reserve the right to disagree with you though ;).

[theanalogkid]

"Economists attribute economic growth so far to heavy government spending that is somewhat deficit." - in the 1937 section.

All I've been hearing the past 2 weeks are economists saying we still need to spend more now. I recognized WWII and noted that at the end where I speculated the new programs as that equal for present day. It's obvious that "war" is not the answer this time around because we're already in 2 of them. That is now an add-on to our problems, not a solution.

I think there are things to learn from here though because of the many ironies.

I'm sure these economists all are believes in the Keynesian farce. Keynes wasn't happen unless the government was spending large amounts of money, and was even against the gold standard, because it limited how much government could print and spend. Yes, Keynesian economics works if your aim is to stay in power (FDR was elected 4 times).

Economists attribute economic growth so far to heavy government spending that is somewhat deficit.

So what is that statement telling you. That growth happened because of government spending. It's not growth coming from private sources. Same thing happened with Reagan in the 1980s.

[Nevada_Ballin]

I'm sure these economists all are believes in the Keynesian farce. Keynes wasn't happen unless the government was spending large amounts of money, and was even against the gold standard, because it limited how much government could print and spend. Yes, Keynesian economics works if your aim is to stay in power (FDR was elected 4 times).



So what is that statement telling you. That growth happened because of government spending. It's not growth coming from private sources. Same thing happened with Reagan in the 1980s.

All i'm doing is looking at a period in the past and noting many simularities (and there are many). Then taking a look at how not only the US but other contries at the time got out of it. In just about every case, two things were prevelent - government spending and a common spending ground (war).

The "do nothing" side is also exampled in that timeline... and nothing good happened when nothing was done.

.

[theanalogkid]

All i'm doing is looking at a period in the past and noting many simularities (and there are many). Then taking a look at how not only the US but other contries at the time got out of it. In just about every case, two things were prevelent - government spending and a common spending ground (war).

The "do nothing" side is also exampled in that timeline... and nothing good happened when nothing was done.

.

There are major differences between then and now.

1) The amount of manufacturing is far less, than now. You can not produce out of a recession.

2) The amount of debt is extremely higher than before. Stimulating the economy by spending large amount of money does not work with such a large GDP - Debt ratio. Iceland failed at 850% to GDP, the US is around half that, but it's rising, you can not keep spending and think things are going to be okay.

[Gtrght77]

Thus the Iran attack will occur shortly.

And

Oh Nooooooooos the Anti-Christ is at his antics even though he is a puppet on a string controlled by other humans.

You're probably going to be right. Its always a war that ends it.

[nothasoul]

If the company took the bail out then the government has the right. They do it for banks that has defunct. If you take the money then you are not private property and the government has to over see how it is ran.

[nothasoul]

He is a marxist bastard. End of story.




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658/

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.


Just like I told you.


Those are the ones who took the bail out. The money had a whole lot of strings attached. These companies could have said no and went under but they didn't and they thought they can take our money and spend it on them selves with out having to answer for there transgression. That is not true Marxist.

[conviction]

You know conviction and please take this the right way, you have matured so much on this board it's almost like I've watched you grow up.

Your insight on the issues is so different and more advanced then before. I know I made some really ugly comments to and about you in the past and for that I apologize, you have become a serious debator on this forum and we are lucky to have you. I still reserve the right to disagree with you though ;).

Thanks man, I apologize too for comments I've made. My change from a Republican propaganda machine to an objective citizen happened because of you introducing me to Bob Barr and me just becoming more mature.

Also I'd like to let you know that I'm going into Political Science for college. One day I would love to be on a ballot for public office.

too bad my questions/comments go widely unanswered though :rolleyes:

[dsteve]

It would have went into bankruptcy court, and the taxpayer would not be left on the hook for anything. We might have been on the road to recovery by now instead of spending trillions of dollars. The only thing Keynesian based economics is good for is to keep those in power, in power.

Do you think it's right to limit executive compensation even though there are many and maybe even the majority of executives who steer their company in the right direction?

Do you think it's wise to allow a tax-cheat like Geithner to have more power, and also give more power to the Federal Reserve. (It does say 2/3rds of the board have to go along with his plan) The man isn't honest with himself, yet we're suppose to make him the most powerful treasury secretary in history? There is no transparency in the Federal Reserve. They can't be audited, they do not have answer Congress' questions. Isn't Obama all about transparency, then why isn't he trying to open up the Fed? It would seem to me to be a logical move, seeing how the Fed is largely responsible for setting off the chain reaction which led us to this mess in the first place.

Do you think it's wise to have the Federal government continue to borrow money in unthinkable amounts? What happens when China says no? What happens when the savers rate gets the point where not even the irrational investor would keep their money in a savings account? What happens when the banks finally decide to take some risks and create hyperinflation through the multiplier effect that lending has? What then? Do you think it's okay that US citizens are on the hook for $59 trillion because of entitlement programs like SS, and Medicare? http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-28-federal-budget_N.htm

Are bad business not allowed to fail in this country, because of potential lost jobs? So they can reap the rewards, but none of the risks? So if a company is doing badly the government can swoop in, and bloat them up buy increasing the work force in the company. As we know the government employees too many people more often than not, and that is why there are a large number of layoffs whenever the government privatizes anything.

Is it really wise to give the executive branch more power? People used say Bush was King Bush, pretty soon it will be King Obama.



The fed controls the government, not the other way around. It is not a government institution. Their goal is to put us in so much debt and have so much inflation that they will own everything.

[Gtrght77]

The fed controls the government, not the other way around. It is not a government institution. Their goal is to put us in so much debt and have so much inflation that they will own everything.

You have been listening to HED PEs new album huh?