Save the Nations’ Newspapers – OP-ED

Like everything else in this economy, the newspaper industry is on the brink of demise. The reasons according to the publishers are the competition from various sources ranging from the Information Superhighway to electronic gizmos producing data with the touch of a button.

The survival of the newspaper industry is paramount in a democracy. It is appropriate to pledge unequivocal support to print press as someone having grown up knowing the world events and current affairs through newspapers. Personally, the newspaper was a window to the outside world and enabled a better understanding of issues unfolding at home and elsewhere. The newspapers offer knowledge, awareness and critical thinking on different topics.

One might argue why subscribe to a newspaper when the same information is accessible on-line free of charge? Although, it is a valid argument, it still does not match the convenience of a newspaper in hand while traveling or commuting to work on public transport and reading in a relaxed manner at home without Google search and browsing Yahoo/AOL articles. Further, the conventional source relieves common stress caused by prolonged use of computers. It is a healthy diversion in a manner books remain popular over audio and video versions.

Some national as well as local newspapers’ editorials, columns and articles are praiseworthy on many issues concerning life. The investigative and independent journalists deserve special recognition for their contribution to humanity due to risks involved in the exposure of subjects that may or may not be challenged in legal terms and otherwise. Similarly, there are reporters providing vital information from war zones and remote corners of the world by endangering their lives. These veteran newsmakers cannot be isolated in this context.

However, it is essential to bring certain issues to the publishers’ attention that could rescue the dying industry. The lack of objectivity in few columns and news articles is one of them. In an era of idolization of political figures, some journalists traveling with public entities tend to edge over the professional ethics and present conflicting content of the same article from other mass media such as television particularly cable news network, international channels and the potent internet. Unfortunately, the authors of such articles fail to recognize the fact that any information from them is verifiable through other sources for authenticity and to an extent affect their credibility if proven false. When they represent a reputable news organization, the conspicuous flaw reveals the devil in the detail magnified on comparison with live images on-line and television. The general public prefer facts not fiction in a newspaper article related to public figures , government affairs and corporate activities.

Another factor behind the decline of the newspaper industry is the ideology driven concept not barring political affiliations and the pandering to the authorities in government and business rather than a neutral position in the presentation of facts to confirm fair and balanced reporting. The educated and technologically savvy mass justifiably turned off by the extreme views and polarization in the newspaper industry. If the internet sources blamed as the major threat to the print press, perhaps it is time for newspaper publishers to exercise the freedom of press and responsible journalism like their on-line competitors and dedicate service to people more than any others in a democracy.

Whenever the press and television newsmedia regardless of the status as mainstream or not assumes the role of personal talking points to the authorities in power, democracy is in jeopardy forcing majority population to seek alternative sources for reliable information. It defeats the purpose of free press in a democracy that prioritizes politics over people, when the primary focus should be accuracy, transparency and accountabilty in public matter.

As stated earlier in numerous blogposts on this website www.padminiarhant.com industries and government ultimately depend on the main street, as they are the consumers and voters with real power in a functioning democracy.

On that note, a sincere request to all citizens across the nation to salvage the local and favorite newspaper through subscription since the survival of newspaper industry means restoration of voice in a democracy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Bailout Débācle

By Padmini Arhant

The past two weeks dominated with AIG and oligarchs debating over the controversial $165 million and now increased to $218 million bonuses to executives instrumental in driving the insurance giant to the brink of collapse along with the financial markets of the world.

As usual, Washington vs. Wall Street dispute contributed to media frenzy and aptly reflected in the roller coaster performance of the stock market. The interesting factor in the blame game is those pointing fingers at others fail to acknowledge that remaining fingers are pointing towards them as they are equal partners in this charade.

By now, well-educated American taxpayers upon the quest to secure their future convinced that both Wall Street and Washington have serious credibility issues in wealth management and nation governance.

The back and forth allegations in the political crossfire reveals the true sense of Washington politics and Wall Street free market systemic corporate management failure. Again, the beneficiaries in this deal are the legislators responsible for the bailout approval and the corporations rewarded with taxpayer’s funds for unprecedented incompetence in modern economic times.

They are the beneficiaries because the legislators secured their emoluments by rushing the operating budget $410 billion omnibus bill ladened with pork projects to the tune of $8 billion to curb ‘government shut down’ rather than passing the required operating budget and isolating the earmarks spending for individual scrutiny through separate legislation.

The Corporate executives in due diligence spared no opportunities to collect remuneration, bonuses retrospectively and in the foreseeable future to maintain their status among the top 10% wealthiest hierarchy.

Let’s not forget in the Darwinian "Survival of the fittest contest" the weak, fragile and frail average taxpayer doesn’t stand a chance against the ferocious Corporate executives (compared to sharks) and Capitol Hill crusaders.

Events unfolding in the entire scenario deserves attention from every citizen involuntarily pledged to carry the burden of national debt currently projected at $9.3 trillion i.e. $1 trillion budget deficits every year for a decade, 2010-2019.

It is worth examining the role of legislators, corporations and lobbyists in securing taxpayer bailouts more prevalent in the past year 2008 and continuation of it in 2009. Prior to the diagnostic procedure, it is essential to shed light on the alliances forged by the key cabinet members and Wall Street merchants.

According to http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/paul-s23.shtml – Thank you.

Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)

Who is Henry Paulson?

By Tom Eley, 23 September 2008

Henry Paulson rose through the ranks of Goldman Sachs, becoming a partner in 1982, co-head of investment banking in 1990, chief operating officer in 1994. In 1998, he forced out his co-chairman Jon Corzine “in what amounted to a coup,” according to New York Times economics correspondent Floyd Norris, and took over the post of CEO.

Goldman Sachs is perhaps the single best-connected Wall Street firm. Its executives routinely go in and out of top government posts. Corzine went on to become US senator from New Jersey and is now the state’s governor. Corzine’s predecessor, Stephen Friedman, served in the Bush administration as assistant to the president for economic policy and as chairman of the National Economic Council (NEC). Friedman’s predecessor as Goldman Sachs CEO, Robert Rubin, served as chairman of the NEC and later treasury secretary under Bill Clinton.

Agence France Press, in a 2006 article on Paulson’s appointment, “Has Goldman Sachs Taken Over the Bush Administration?” noted that, in addition to Paulson, “[t]he president’s chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Jeffery Reuben, are Goldman alumni.”

Prior to being selected as treasury secretary, Paulson was a major individual campaign contributor to Republican candidates, giving over $336,000 of his own money between 1998 and 2006.

Since taking office, Paulson has overseen the destruction of three of Goldman Sachs’ rivals. In March,

Paulson helped arrange the fire sale of Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase. Then, a little more than a week ago, he allowed Lehman Brothers to collapse, while simultaneously organizing the absorption of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America. This left only Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as major investment banks, both of which were converted on Sunday into bank holding companies, a move that effectively ended the existence of the investment bank as a distinct economic form.

In the months leading up to his proposed $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, Paulson had already used his office to dole out hundreds of billions of dollars. After his July 2008 proposal for $70 billion to resolve the insolvency of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac failed, Paulson organized the government takeover of the two mortgage-lending giants for an immediate $200 billion price tag, while making the government potentially liable for hundreds of billions more in bad debt. He then organized a federal purchase of an 80 percent stake in the giant insurer American International Group (AIG) at a cost of $85 billion.

These bailouts have been designed to prevent a chain reaction collapse of the world economy, but more importantly, they aimed to insulate and even reward the wealthy shareholders, like Paulson, primarily responsible for the financial collapse.

Paulson bears a considerable amount of personal responsibility for the crisis.

Paulson, according to a celebratory 2006 Business Week article entitled “Mr. Risk Goes to Washington,” was “one of the key architects of a more daring Wall Street, where securities firms are taking greater and greater chances in their pursuit of profits.” Under Paulson’s watch, that meant “taking on more debt: $100 billion in long-term debt in 2005, compared with about $20 billion in 1999. It means placing big bets on all sorts of exotic derivatives and other securities.”

According to the International Herald Tribune, Paulson “was one of the first Wall Street leaders to recognize how drastically investment banks could enhance their profitability by betting with their own capital instead of acting as mere intermediaries.” Paulson “stubbornly assert[ed] Goldman’s right to invest in, advise on and finance deals, regardless of potential conflicts.”

Paulson then handsomely benefited from the speculative boom. This wealth was based on financial manipulation and did nothing to create real value in the economy. On the contrary, the extraordinary enrichment of individuals like Paulson was the corollary to the dismantling of the real economy, the bankrupting of the government, and the impoverishment of masses the world over.

Paulson was compensated to the tune of $30 million in 2004 and took home $37 million in 2005. In his career at Goldman Sachs he built up a personal net worth of over $700 million, according to estimates.
—————————————————————————————————————–
Washington and Wall Street Analysis:

By Padmini Arhant

The beginning of the chain link usually found on the campaign trail, when corporations fund election campaigns through donation loopholes despite contribution limits by electoral commission and reign in on the successful candidate for the entire term.

After all, in the contemporary world focused on “What’s in it for me” deals, there is no free lunch with the exception of debt-consumed public yearning for believable change and better future offer available resources in terms of time, energy and money during the electoral process and beyond.

Who gets preference by the elected officials in the so-called democracy?

Indeed the Corporations due to the inter-dependency of sweetheart deals and brokering that take place throughout the election campaign. The deafening noise in the Capitol Hill about identifying the guilty party and pursuing disastrous course of action such as 90% tax on AIG bonuses after having approved without any stipulations predictably backfired at the victims none other than the average American taxpayers, presumably the majority shareholder at 80% of the multinational conglomerate.

In a bizarre development, more appropriately deterioration of the bailout fiasco, the headlines, news across the nation reverberate…
—————————————————————————————————–
AIG sues its biggest shareholder – us

By David S. Hilzenrath, Washington Post – March 21, 2009. Thank you.

As AIG takes billions of dollars from the federal government to stay afloat, it is suing the government for millions more.

The big insurer is trying to recover $306.1 million of taxes, interest and penalties from the Internal Revenue Service. Among other things, AIG is contesting an IRS determination last year that the company improperly claimed $61.9 million of tax credits associated with complex international transactions.

AIG has also asked a court to make the government reimburse it for money spent suing the government.

Given that the government owns 79.9 percent of AIG and has been using taxpayer money to fill a seemingly bottomless hole at the company, the lawsuit might seem like a case of biting the hand that feeds it. But an

AIG spokesman said the company has an obligation to press its case.

AIG believes it overpaid the IRS, and it “has a duty to its shareholders, including the government and other shareholders, to insure that it pays the proper amount of taxes,” spokesman Mark Herr said by e-mail.
Washington tax lawyer Martin Lobel agreed with that assessment.

‘If in fact they honestly believe that they’re entitled to a refund of those taxes, it would be a breach of their fiduciary duty not to” sue, Lobel said.

“On the other hand, the sense of entitlement from AIG is awesome,” Lobel said.

Because the dispute pits the government against a company that has essentially become a ward of the government, the only clear winners are likely to be lawyers, legal experts said. The legal expenses could consume millions of dollars, they said.

Lawyers at the firm Sutherland Asbill & Brenan, which is representing AIG, did not respond to an interview request.

For partners of similar stature to those representing AIG, fees can run $700 to $900 an hour, said Dan Binstock, managing director of BCG Attorney Search, a legal recruiter.

AIG’s dispute with the IRS focuses on taxes for 1997 and dates at least as far back as March 2008.”
———————————————————————————————————————

L.A. congresswoman defends actions

Husband Linked to Bank that got AID

By Richard Simon – Los Angeles Times – March 14, 2009 – Thank you.

Excerpts from the article:

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, on Friday defended her efforts to help minority-owned banks – including one with ties to her husband – scoffing at the notion that she, a liberal Democrat, could influence George W. Bush’s presidential administration in deciding what financial institutions would receive bailout funds.

Waters, a senior member of the congressional committee that, oversees banking, has come under scrutiny because OneUnited Bank, on which her husband Sidney Williams had been a board member and stockholder, received $12 million in bailout funds. The money was provided in December, three months after Waters helped arrange a meeting between officials from the bank and other minority-owned institutions and Treasury representatives.

“I followed up on the association’s request by asking Treasury Secretary (Henry) Paulson to schedule such a meeting, as did other members of Congress,” she said.

She said she did not attend the meeting. She released letters by the National Bankers Association requesting the meeting and following up on it – signed by the group’s incoming Chairman Robert Patrick Cooper an officer with OneUnited.

Waters said the decision to provide bailout funds to OneUnited was “based on the merits of the bank’s request, not based on anything said at the September meeting and not based on political influence.”

She said that she has fully disclosed her husband’s ties to the bank. Williams served on the bank board until early last year and held at least $500,000 in investments in the bank in 2007, the most recent year for which public financial disclosure statements are available.

Waters could not be reached for an interview Friday. OneUnited Chief Executive Kevin Cohee said Friday he didn’t have time to speak with a reporter.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said she found Waters’ behavior “inappropriate and certainly has the appearance of impropriety, even if it doesn’t rise to the level of an actual conflict-of-interest under House rules.”

Sloan said Waters’ comments that the meeting focused on the general problems of minority-owned banks “don’t seem credible” in light of statements from Treasury officials that the session became a discussion of one bank’s troubles. “At a minimum, Treasury officials should have been apprised of her interest in the bank before the meeting took place.”

Waters’ efforts, she said, raise a question: “How many members of Congress are having meetings with the Treasury Department pleading for funds for certain banks?”

“Treasury has said they’re going to list the lobbying contacts,” Sloan said.”
———————————————————————————————————————
Voice of the Electorate:

San Jose Mercury News – Readers’ Letters – March 18, 2009

Obama’s earmarks stance disappoints

I am disappointed that President Barack Obama backed off his campaign pledge to eliminate earmarks. The process subverts democratic government by avoiding votes on specific issues. It encourages our representatives to compete to spend more—if they fail to “bring home the bacon,” they may be seen as ineffective and not be re-elected. The further we move from specific votes for specific programs, the less inclined people are to support the government and the more inclined to resist taxes.

We must promote responsible stewardship. While many of the projects are meritorious, that hardly means they should be funded. Tax dollars are a scarce resource and every expenditure should be carefully scrutinized. Obama was right on this issue during the campaign; he is sliding off track now.

Christopher K. Payne

Stanford
———————————————————————————————————————

Ethical Lapse

By Padmini Arhant

The sparring political factions, the far left and the far right along with the centrists is in a strange dilemma today as they witness their reflection in the image of the accused parties in the most expensive soap opera entertainment.

As more Washington and Wall Street scandals are exposed, the more disingenuous the legislators appear to be in their pledge to turn the nation around.

An average citizen struggling to make ends meet asked the following questions –

“Why should I vote for anyone in the next election when I see politics as usual prevailing over the promised inevitable change?

Can the elected officials with public housing, guaranteed regular and several other sources of income, supreme health care, and free transportation relate to the suffering population dealing with job loss, foreclosure and other miseries?”

Unfortunately, the Washington atmosphere is secluded as elitist not making connection with the plight of the populist. The deepening of the recession combined with the multi-trillion dollar national debt forecast is a matter of great concern for the vast majority of population in precarious economic conditions due to job insecurity and declining prospects all around.

The American electorate enthusiastically elected the new administration with the hope to experience the “change” they deserve and the recent events are adversarial to the optimism built during the campaign.

Campaign promises involved Accountability, Transparency and changing Washington by eliminating corruption, cronyism and conventionalism. The passing of the $787 billion stimulus bill and subsequently the $410 billion omnibus spending bill loaded with earmarks confirms the status quo in Washington.

The pet projects, however meritorious they might be, cannot be more important than supplementing K-12 educational funding by retaining qualified teaching professionals and providing after school sports activities for students from lower income families and scores of other important social services for the constituents in California and other states.

It is obvious throughout the legislative process from the authorization of illegal invasion of Iraq war to Wall Street bailouts that lawmakers as representatives of the electorate in a democracy no longer consider it important to peruse the budget and other legislative bills because of the voluminous content. Hence, hastily resort to wasteful spending at taxpayers’ expense.

With the national debt projection in multi-trillion dollars, the wasteful spending in billions doesn’t seem to matter to the sponsors of the pet projects. Apparently, $8 billion added to the national debt for projects experimenting swine odor, road to nowhere, monuments ‘supposedly creating jobs’ when the industries are crumbling apart clearly signifies misplaced priorities by the legislators expected to be in touch with reality of their respective constituency.

The people are hurting and their mere existence is challenged by the hour while Washington and Wall Street continue to engage the nation in burgeoning financial crisis through legal and constitutional confrontations of the bailout débācle.

Perhaps it is time for the victims and the lame duck, the average taxpayers to rise to the occasion and execute power in the mid-term election to restore democratic values, ethical and moral standards desperately lacking in the corporate and political system.

It is best to eradicate the narcissistic culture that permeates the surroundings like weeds destroying the grassland and fertile grounds.

Evidently change is necessary and necessity is the mother of invention.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

We need to fix our economy

President Obama and his administration are trying to address this serious economic crisis at home.

It takes the entire nation to get involved in the rescue operation.

Let us come together and do everything possible to revive the economy.

Please standby for some important guidelines and suggestions for economic recovery on www.padminiarhant.com.

Also, focus on resolving California’s budget crisis will be presented on the website shortly.

Meanwhile, please follow through the request from President Obama’s administration to create awareness and collective effort required to survive the crisis.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

———————————————————————————–

Last year, America lost 2.6 million jobs. This week, some of our biggest companies announced plans to cut tens of thousands more.

The economic crisis is deepening, but President Obama and members of Congress have proposed a recovery plan that will put more than 3 million Americans back to work.

You can learn more about how the plan will help your community by organizing an Economic Recovery House Meeting.

Join thousands of people across the country who are coming together to watch a special video about the recovery plan. Invite your friends and neighbors to watch the video with you and have a conversation about your community’s economic situation.

The economic crisis can seem overwhelming and complex, but you can help the people you know connect the recovery plan to their lives and learn more about why it’s so important.

Sign up to host an Economic Recovery House Meeting the weekend of Friday, February 6th.

The President’s plan passed the House of Representatives on Wednesday. But if it’s going to move forward, we need to avoid the usual partisan games.

That’s why supporters are opening their homes to talk with neighbors and friends about how the plan will work — and what it means for their community.

The video will outline the basics of the plan and how it will impact working families. It will also include answers to questions from folks across the country. Invite your friends and family to watch the video, discuss the plan, and help build support for it.

Don’t worry if you’ve never hosted a house meeting before — we’ll make sure you have everything you need to make it a success.

Take the first step right now by signing up to host an Economic Recovery House Meeting:

http://my.barackobama.com/recoveryhost

Time and again, you’ve demonstrated your commitment to change. Now you can help America move in an important new direction.

Please forward this email to your friends and family, and encourage them to get involved as well.

Thank you for your hard work,

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America

Radio Show Update

Schedule Update:

January 24, 2009, Air time – 8.00 – 10.00 P.M(PST)

Category: Current Events

Topic: Wall Street Bailout

Discussion:

What should financial institutions do with taxpayers’ bailout?

Why haven’t the financial institutions invested funds to stimulate economy?

What is public demand from them and the legislators?

——————————————————————————————————————-

January 25, 2009,  Air Time 2.00 – 4.00P.M (PST) – (5.00 – 7.00P.M EST)

Topic: Free Palestine

Discussion:

1. How can we help to expedite independent state for Palestinians free of Israeli blockade, occupation and aggression?

2. What should the new administration do to be a trustworthy partner and unbiased peace broker in the Middle East conflict?

3. How can we help Israeli population elect a moderate government in early February favoring peace and diplomacy over military action for their national security and sovereignty?

——————————————————————————————————————

January 30, 2009, 120 minutes 2.00P.M – 4.00P.M – Cancelled due to restrictions on segments at frequent intervals.

Category: Current Events

Topic: Economy and Health Care – Please refer to blog post on www.padminiarhant.com for details and I invite you to post comments.

What should the new administration do for you and the economy?

How do we fix the Health Care system?

———————————————————————————-

Podcast live : http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Padmini-A

Guest Call-in-number: (646) 727 -3778

I invite you all to participate in the public forum and share your concerns, ideas and knowledge.

Your comments and thoughts are welcome in the political discourse.

Let us keep democracy alive and help our new President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in rebuilding our nation.

Your participation is a huge encouragement and always appreciated – Thank you again.

Look forward to the session.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Radio Show Schedule

I will be doing a live radio show for 120 minutes from 2.00P.M to 4.00P.M. (PST) on the following days:

January 23, 2009 Friday from 2.00 – 4.00 P.M (PST) to accommodate listeners from all time zones.

Category: Current Events

Topic: Corporate Bailout

Discussion:

What should financial institutions do with the taxpayers’ bailout?

Why have they not utilized those funds to stimulate economy?

What is public demand from them and the legislators?

———————————————————————

January 30, 2009, 120 minutes 2.00P.M – 4.00P.M

Category: Current Events

Topic: Economy and Health Care

What should the new administration do for you and the economy?

How do we fix the Health Care system?

———————————————————————————-

Podcast live : http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Padmini-A

Guest Call-in-number: (646) 727 -3778

I invite you all to participate in the public forum and share your concerns, ideas and knowledge.

Your comments and thoughts are welcome in the political discourse.

Let us keep democracy alive and help our new President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in rebuilding our nation.

Look forward to the session.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. My apologies for not being able to schedule a convenient time on January 21, 2009. I am aiming to provide as much time as possible through whatever avenues available in getting us back on our feet.

Your participation is a huge encouragement and always appreciated – Thank you again.

Banks Bailout – Accountability

It’s been a quarter since the banks bailout. The purpose of the bailout was to stimulate the economy by relieving the financial markets from liquidity crisis.

At least, that was the explanation offered by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve at the time of request.

They demanded that Congress approve the bailout to a tune of $700 billion as an emergency measure to avert the collapse of the financial market.

There were few stipulations to the approval of the bailout. The general expectation was to revive the housing market with a moratorium on foreclosures and overhauling of the existing loan programs to assist homeowners with affordable payments and ease the decline of the housing prices nationwide.

The other alternative to the housing market crisis was to utilize the bailout drawdown towards restructuring of the mortgage backed securities by allowing default homeowners dealing with foreclosures to refinance at the existing lowest market rate for a fixed period of two years, substituting the amount in the new economic stimulus package by President-elect Obama.

Despite financial bailout by taxpayers, the economic situation is deteriorating with the current unemployment soaring to 7.2 percent exceeding the Depression era. The criticism entirely directed towards government intervention in the revival process.

However, it is worth remembering that lack of oversight and accountability led the financial institutions to a dire state in the free market economy. The corporate executives as the beneficiaries have been responsible for the dysfunctional financial system even though none of them held accountable thus far.

The current administration assured taxpayers that financial bailout targets liquidity in the credit market, housing market decline particularly foreclosures, buy-back mortgage securities held as major liabilities on the banks’ financial reports and ease their burden to facilitate lending to homeowners and small businesses.

If the strategy followed through, it could have reduced the heat on the economy and set the pace for recovery.

In the absence of commitment by the banks, it would be appropriate for taxpayers to demand that the financial institutions release the funds towards lending and contribute to the economic stimulation as agreed to by them.

Failure to adhere to the agreement will result in the blockade of the remaining $350 billion that would be appropriated towards economic stimulus proposal by President-elect Obama.

In addition, the taxpayers’ also reserve the right to demand that the beneficiaries of the bailout return the earlier withdrawal currently hoarded for their undisclosed agenda with interest higher than the market rate.

It is time for checks and balances on the drawdown of $350 billion to various financial institutions.

Checks and Balances:

Have the objectives been achieved?

Is there an oversight committee on the financial bailout as agreed to the taxpayers?

Did the banks provide details of the secured amount to the taxpayers or the oversight committee?

Please be sure to read the articles presented below as they confirm the reality.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

————————————————————————————————————

First and foremost, the beneficiaries of the bailout are:

As per http://moneynews.newsmax.com/streettalk/bailout_half_gone/2008/11/12/150364.html

Street Talk – Thank you.

Who Got Bailout Money So Far?

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 9:09 AM

"The Treasury Department’s $700 billion bailout plan, also known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), is one of the main U.S. tools to address the financial crisis.

The Treasury Department on October 14 set aside $250 billion of the program to buy senior preferred shares and warrants in banks, thrifts and other financial institutions.

Half that money was allocated to nine big banks, the Treasury Department has said.

Another $38 billion has since been earmarked for regional or small banks, according to statements from individual banks.

On Monday, the department announced its single-biggest TARP investment — $40 billion in American International Group — which the government said would not come from the $250 billion bank capital program.

———————————————-
The TARP has so far committed the following funding:

AIG $40 billion

JPMorgan $25 billion

Citigroup $25 billion

Wells Fargo $25 billion

Bank of America $15 billion

Merrill Lynch $10 billion

Goldman Sachs $10 billion

Morgan Stanley $10 billion

PNC Financial Services $7.7 billion

Bank of New York Mellon $3 billion

State Street Corp $2 billion

Capital One Financial $3.55 billion

Fifth Third Bancorp $3.45 billion

Regions Financial $3.5 billion

SunTrust Banks $3.5 billion

BB&T Corp $3.1 billion

KeyCorp $2.5 billion

Comerica $2.25 billion

Marshall & Ilsley Corp $1.7 billion

Northern Trust Corp $1.5 billion

Huntington Bancshares $1.4 billion

Zions Bancorp $1.4 billion

First Horizon National $866 million

City National Corp $395 million

Valley National Bancorp $330 million

UCBH Holdings Inc $298 million

Umpqua Holdings Corp $214 million

Washington Federal $200 million

First Niagara Financial $186 million

HF Financial Corp $25 million

Bank of Commerce $17 million

TOTAL: $203.08 billion

—————————————-
INSURANCE COMPANIES

In addition to the TARP program’s $40 billion capital injection into AIG, the Federal Reserve is providing the company with up to $112.5 billion in separate loans and funds for asset purchases.
Aid to the huge insurance company came after counterparties and rating downgrades forced AIG to post large amounts of collateral for its credit derivatives positions.
Some other insurers are interested in cash infusions, but must own a thrift or bank in order to qualify under the terms of Treasury’s current capital injection program.

—————————————————————————–
BANKS, LENDERS

The TARP program set a November 14 deadline for smaller banks to apply for capital injection funds remaining in the pool of $250 billion. The deadline will be extended for non-publicly traded banks.

The government’s preferred shares will pay dividends of 5 percent annually for the first five years and 9 percent after that until the institution repurchases them. Participating banks must comply with Treasury restrictions on executive compensation, which limit tax deductibility of senior executive pay to $500,000.

They require bonuses to be "clawed back" if earnings statements or gains are later proven to be materially inaccurate and prohibit "golden parachute" payments to senior executives.”

—————————————————————–

The following article has the response for all of the above issues:

December 23, 2008.

Economy in Crisis: By Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press, Washington – Thank you

Banks mum on bailout spending – They Refuse to provide Accounting

Elizabeth Warren, the congressional watchdog, appointed by Democrats—

“It takes a lot of nerve for banks not to give answers, she says.”

Think you could borrow money from a bank without saying what you were going to do with it?

Well, apparently when banks borrow from you they don’t feel the same need to say how the money is spent.

After receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation’s largest banks say they can’t track exactly how they’re spending it. Some won’t even talk about it.

“We’re choosing not to disclose that,” said Kevin Heine, spokesman for Bank of New York Melon, which received about $3 billion.

Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMORGAN Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money, said that while some of the money was lent, some was not, and the bank has not given any accounting of exactly how the money is being used.

“We have not disclosed that to the public. We’re declining to,” Kelly said.

The Associated Press contacted 21 banks that received at least $1billion in government money and asked four questions:

How much has been spent?

What was it spent on?

How much is being held in savings? And,

What ‘s the plan for the rest?

None of the banks provided specific answers.

“We ‘re not providing dollar-in, dollar-out tracking,” said Barry Koling, a spokesman for Atlanta, Ga.-based SunTrust Banks, which got $3.5billion in taxpayer dollars.

Some banks said they simply didn’t know where the money was going.

“We manage our capital in its aggregate,” said Regions Financial spokesman Tim Deighton, who said the Birmingham, Ala.- based company is not tracking how it is spending the $3.5billion it received as part of the financial bailout.

The answers highlight the secrecy surrounding the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which earmarked $700 billion – about the size of the Netherlands’ economy – to help rescue the financial industry.

The Treasury Department has been using the money to buy stock in U.S. banks, hoping that the sudden inflow of cash will get banks to start lending money.

There has been no accounting of how banks spend that money.

Lawmakers summoned bank executives to Capitol Hill last month i.e. November 2008, and implored them to lend the money – not to hoard it or spend it on corporate bonuses or junkets or to buy other banks.

But there is no process in place to make sure that’s happening, and there are no consequences for banks that don’t comply.

“It is entirely appropriate for the American people to know how their taxpayer dollars are being spent in private industry,” said Elizabeth Warren, the top congressional watchdog overseeing the financial bailout.

But, at least for now, there’s no way for taxpayers to find that out.

Pressured by the Bush administration to approve the money quickly, Congress attached nearly no strings to the $700 billion bailout in October, 2008.

And the Treasury Department, which doles out the money, never asked banks how it would be spent.

“Those are legitimate questions that should have been asked on Day One,” said Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., a House Financial Services Committee member who opposed the bailout as it was rushed through Congress.

“Where is the money going to go to?

How is it going to be spent?

When are we going to get a record on it?”

Nearly every bank the AP questioned – including Citibank and Bank of America, two of the largest recipients of bailout money —– responded with generic public relations statements explaining that the money was being used to strengthen balance sheets and continue making loans to ease the credit crisis.

A few banks described company-specific programs, such as JPMorgan Chase’s plan to lend $5 billion to nonprofit and health care companies next year.

Richard Becker, senior vice president of Wisconsin-based Marshall & Ilsley, said the $1.75 billion in bailout money allowed the bank to temporarily stop foreclosing on homes.

But no bank provided even the most basic accounting for the federal money.

Some said the money couldn’t be tracked.

Bob Denham, a spokesman for North Carolina-based BB&T, said the bailout money “doesn’t have its own bucket.”

But he said taxpayer money wasn’t used in the bank’s recent purchase of a Florida insurance company.

Asked how he could be sure, since the money wasn’t being tracked, Denham said the bank would have made that deal regardless.

Others, such as Morgan Stanley spokeswoman Carissa Ramirez, offered to discuss the matter with reporters on condition of anonymity.

When the AP refused, Ramirez sent an e-mail saying:

“We are going to decline to comment on your story.”

Most banks wouldn’t say why they were keeping the details secret.

“We’re not sharing any other details. We’re just not at this time,” said Wendy Walker, a spokeswoman for Dallas-based Comerica, which received $2.25 billion from the government.

Lawmakers say they want to tighten restrictions on the remaining, yet-to-be-released $350 billion block of bailout money before more cash is handed out.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said the department is trying to step up its monitoring of bank spending.

Warren, the congressional watchdog, appointed by Democrats, said her oversight panel will try to force the banks to say where they’ve spent the money.

“It would take a lot of nerve not to give answers,” she said.

But Warren said she’s surprised she even has to ask.

“If the appropriate restrictions were put on the money to begin with, if the appropriate transparency was in place, then we wouldn’t be in a position where you’re trying to call every recipient and get the basic information that should already be in public documents,” she said.
——————————————————————————————

Auto Rescue Plan – $17.4 Billion

The White House decision to honor and acknowledge the plight of American workforce is praiseworthy.

During tough economic times, important decisions made to protect national interest is the best action for a nation dealing with crisis in all fronts.

Failure to avert the collapse of the huge manufacturing sector would have led to dire consequences with ripple effect on national and subsequently global markets.

For all those concerned about the erosion of free market system,

They must realize that the free market system with no oversight or regulations was heading towards a free fall denting the economic infrastructure with respect to financial and manufacturing sector.

The revival of sluggish economy is dependent on stabilizing the commercial sector providing millions of jobs that are in steady decline due to mismanagement, lack of accountability and corporate greed in many instances.

Therefore, the recent governmental intervention is necessary to restore investor and consumer confidence at all levels which in turn would contribute to the anticipated economic stimulus.

However, it is disappointing to note that the White House has unfairly targeted the United Auto workers (UAW) union with disproportionate demands such as,

Ref: Various news reports…

1.“The UAW union asked to rework contracts to make wages and work rules comparable with those at nonunion plants in the United States owned by foreign automakers by December 31, 2009.

2. The UAW asked to accept stock rather than cash for the billions of dollars of pension and retiree health care liabilities shifted from the companies to the union.”

The success and failure of any organization lies with management of capital and resources available to the head of the company responsible for the entire workforce.

Stock performance is dependent on the viability of the company based on executive decisions leading productivity to profitability.

Hence, shifting the entire burden of liabilities to labor rather than management reflects cohesion with the corporate executives primarily responsible for the precipitous losses suffered by the manufacturing sector.

With the loan granted to GM and Chrysler, it is imperative for not only these two automakers but also the entire auto industry to move towards energy efficient preferably environment friendly automobiles to free the nation from energy dependence and environmental hazards.

Overall, the rescue plan is the step in the right direction to protect nearly a million jobs in the auto industry.

Such action to salvage the American workforce will pay off through consumer spending, an essential catalyst for economic recovery.

As for the bailout precedence, it is noteworthy that the grim reality of accelerating unemployment and liquidity freeze in the credit market prompted similar action.

Finally, it is incumbent on the financial institutions to respond to the urgency of the economic revival by reinstating responsible lending practices to businesses with sound management focused on profitable ventures.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Time for Action on Auto Rescue Plan

Once again, partisan politics prevails over national interest in the backdrop of the economic crisis due to skyrocketing foreclosures, credit crunch and now,

Record unemployment at 6.7%, expected to rise further from the lack of action by the legislators, leaving the fate of the million workers in our nation hanging in balance.

The extreme demands by the legislators voting against the rescue plan to,

The United Auto Workers (UAW) union to agree to steep wage cuts to bring their pay equivalent to the Japanese auto industry is preposterous and poses the legitimate question to them in return.

Have these legislators made similar demands to the CEO’s of the auto industry prior to urging UAW to agree to such double standards?

Further, the following question from a wise representative of democracy to the so-called lawmakers otherwise the boulders contributing to the roadblock or failure of any important legislation is praiseworthy.

Even though the question is in context with the California State of affairs, it is still relevant as the Californian legislators particularly the Republican Party representatives have sworn to mimic their federal counterparts in escalating the economic recession.

Ref: Mercury news, December 12, 2008 – Thank you.

"What sacrifices are our leaders making?

Considering the latest estimates of the financial crisis facing California, I think we should all be asking our elected officials what sacrifices they plan to make during these hard times.

We the taxpayers are bracing for increases in taxes and fees, decreases in services, huge layoffs of public and private sector employees.

I have yet to hear anything about cuts being considered to the compensation, pension plans, health care, car allowances, per diem, etc., that our representatives enjoy.

The fact is that these so-called leaders are at the helm of this shipwreck.

Ultimately, it is their responsibility to run this state in a fiscally responsible manner.

They have failed miserably.

We should demand that any plan to bridge this budget gap start with cuts to those who failed us. "

Ken Kramasz

——————————————————————

The demand is fair and justified.

More grinding facts on the consequences of bailout failure:

—————————————————————-

Article: Suppliers see their demise if Big 3 become insolvent

By Bill Vlasic and Leslie Wayne, New York Times.

Ref: Mercury News, December 12, 2008 – Thank you.

The excerpt from the article deserves attention.

“The hypotheticals about the domino effect of the companies’ troubles through the vast network of auto supplier firms – which employ more than twice as many workers as the carmakers – are becoming real.

Top of Pyramid

The Big Three, and their foreign competitors, are what most people think make up the entire auto industry.
But the car manufacturers are just the top of the pyramid.

While GM, Ford and Chrysler employ 239,000 people in the United States, the country’s 3,000 or so auto suppliers have more than 600,000 workers.

Most of the suppliers are not highly waged; they have no big pensions,…

Washington has a myopic view of the auto industry.

They just think of the Big Three and don’t think of us,” i.e. the suppliers.

————————————————————-

Challenge the Opponents:

What strategy or proposal the White House and the opposing legislators have in mind about the economy?

So far, they have been highly successful with their dogmatic policies that have led the economy towards recession.

With the lack of action in this matter, the collapse of other industries is imminent worsening the situation comparable to a black hole.

Aren’t they satisfied with the calamities they have brought upon this nation, that they are further determined to see through the peril before their much-awaited departure from the White House?

All these legislators including Senate Democrats in opposition to saving jobs and helping families through this rescue plan ought to think wisely, as they might be inadvertently putting themselves on notice in 2010.

For some, it might happen even sooner as there is a process called recall in a democratic system.

The people of the United States have learned a harsh lesson through Bush administration.

Conventional wisdom dictates that when something is of no value, it is best to discard and replace it with one of use that serves the purpose.

In the case of the incumbent administration, the notion might be what harm any inaction might do now as the term is nearing end.

History will do its part with judgment on the performance of any administration regardless of the cosmetic presentation by the representatives of the outgoing administration.

Notwithstanding the impending justice to be delivered for crime against humanity specifically violation of constitution thus far by oligarchy and their members.

In addition, the repercussions of the failures of any administration or individuals representing a political party cannot be ignored, especially if they are encouraging their clan (as it appears to be the norm in contemporary politics including democracy ) to retain Power further down the road.

No matter, how one circumvents the situation leading to the downfall of the once prosperous economy, the fact remains that willful negligence or malevolent policy to settle scores with opponents will result in their own ouster from the positions as legislators.

The elimination of the namesake lawmakers aka troublemakers will be the result of illogical conduct and abuse of power against the people and nation they falsely pledge to serve at all times and diligently during crisis.

Options for the White House to salvage the demise of the political party they represent in the coming elections is to act in the best interests of the people who are the electorate with the ability to entrust Power through electoral process.

Up until recently, the serious backlash suffered by the Republican Party represented by the incumbent administration in 2006 and 2008 is ominous that those who fail to deliver their commitments to democracy will share similar outcome reaching the point of no return to power.

——————————————————————–

Action Required:

It is incumbent on the Treasury department and the White House to come forward and immediately release the unused $15 billion from the $350 billion financial bailout draw down currently held in cash to rescue the autoworkers and millions of jobs at stake.

Failing to avert the inevitable collapse of the industries providing food and livelihood for the electorate with power to elect officials to serve the public will be detrimental to the success and approval of the final bailout $350 billion defending the finance industry.

The authorization of the $15 billion from the current $350 billion is imperative barring any mandatory demand for wage cuts and benefits to the workers and UAW.

Any conditions to the rescue plan will apply to the CEO’s of the industry from cashing in bonuses and extravagant remuneration including kickbacks and shady Washington deals with the lobbyists by the legislators elected to protect national interest rather than self-interest.

Urgency of this auto rescue measure will prove the effectiveness of democracy in action.

Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Treasury department along with the White House to act promptly by releasing the cash held $15billion from the previously approved taxpayers’ $350 billion for the financial bailout and save the American workforce as well as the economy.

Procrastination rather than action in this matter will lead to the unrequested irrelevance and perhaps the end of a major political party in the coming elections by making way for the emergence of new political faction in the near future.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. The suggested plan of action also applies to the California legislators, currently engaged in threatening democracy and progress in all fronts of the legislation.

Rescue Plan – Big 3 Auto Makers

Accountability:

The Federal Reserve and the Treasury department secured a $700 billion jackpot for the finance industry bailout.

Major beneficiaries –

The financial institutions comprising investment banks for bad decisions in the subprime mortgage debacle with a prominent mismanagement by Hedge Fund managers.

The insurance industry for navigating unchartered waters in search of profit from risky ventures with no guaranteed returns.

During the financial sector bailout bankrolled by the taxpayers, there were supposed to be preconditions to the bailout of the financial institutions.

Other than oversight and warranted regulations, they were,

The immediate recovery plan for the housing market – predominantly the stopgap measures on foreclosures.

Latest news articles and reports confirm otherwise.

That the foreclosures have been record high subsequent to the financial bailout.

As for other issues…

Treasury role in easing the burden on financial institutions with liabilities in the form of bad loans and securities were the reasons presented to secure the huge sum of $700 billion at that time.

Whatever has happened to accountability?

Where is the oversight?

Why foreclosures are soaring nationwide despite taxpayers’ investment in the financial sector to cure symptoms of this nature in the housing market that has contributed to the current economic recession?

It is apparent from the struggling and still volatile stock market that the financial sector has not met the requirements and honored the agreements with the taxpayer on all of the issues ranging from –

Reviving the housing market by temporarily freezing foreclosures and reassessment of payment plan programs with default homeowners.

Providing liquidity to commercial sectors to jumpstart the economy.

Last but not the least, transparency to the American public with their current lending practices.

——————————————————–

As per http://moneynews.newsmax.com/streettalk/bailout_half_gone/2008/11/12/150364.html

Street Talk – Thank you.

Who Got Bailout Money So Far?

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 9:09 AM

"The Treasury Department’s $700 billion bailout plan, also known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), is one of the main U.S. tools to address the financial crisis.

The Treasury Department on October 14 set aside $250 billion of the program to buy senior preferred shares and warrants in banks, thrifts and other financial institutions.

Half that money was allocated to nine big banks, the Treasury Department has said.

Another $38 billion has since been earmarked for regional or small banks, according to statements from individual banks.

On Monday, the department announced its single-biggest TARP investment — $40 billion in American International Group — which the government said would not come from the $250 billion bank capital program.

———————————————-

The TARP has so far committed the following funding:

AIG $40 billion

JPMorgan $25 billion

Citigroup $25 billion

Wells Fargo $25 billion

Bank of America $15 billion

Merrill Lynch $10 billion

Goldman Sachs $10 billion

Morgan Stanley $10 billion

PNC Financial Services $7.7 billion

Bank of New York Mellon $3 billion

State Street Corp $2 billion

Capital One Financial $3.55 billion

Fifth Third Bancorp $3.45 billion

Regions Financial $3.5 billion

SunTrust Banks $3.5 billion

BB&T Corp $3.1 billion

KeyCorp $2.5 billion

Comerica $2.25 billion

Marshall & Ilsley Corp $1.7 billion

Northern Trust Corp $1.5 billion

Huntington Bancshares $1.4 billion

Zions Bancorp $1.4 billion

First Horizon National $866 million

City National Corp $395 million

Valley National Bancorp $330 million

UCBH Holdings Inc $298 million

Umpqua Holdings Corp $214 million

Washington Federal $200 million

First Niagara Financial $186 million

HF Financial Corp $25 million

Bank of Commerce $17 million

TOTAL: $203.08 billion

—————————————-

INSURANCE COMPANIES

In addition to the TARP program’s $40 billion capital injection into AIG, the Federal Reserve is providing the company with up to $112.5 billion in separate loans and funds for asset purchases.

Aid to the huge insurance company came after counterparties and rating downgrades forced AIG to post large amounts of collateral for its credit derivatives positions.

Some other insurers are interested in cash infusions, but must own a thrift or bank in order to qualify under the terms of Treasury’s current capital injection program.

——————————————-

BANKS, LENDERS

The TARP program set a November 14 deadline for smaller banks to apply for capital injection funds remaining in the pool of $250 billion. The deadline will be extended for non-publicly traded banks.

The government’s preferred shares will pay dividends of 5 percent annually for the first five years and 9 percent after that until the institution repurchases them. Participating banks must comply with Treasury restrictions on executive compensation, which limit tax deductibility of senior executive pay to $500,000.

They require bonuses to be "clawed back" if earnings statements or gains are later proven to be materially inaccurate and prohibit "golden parachute" payments to senior executives.

—————————————–

OTHER COMPANIES
Struggling automakers General Motors Corp, Ford Motor Co and Chrysler LLC have requested tens of billions of dollars in Treasury aid under TARP. However, the Bush administration says the TARP program was designed by Congress to help the financial service sector, not the auto industry.

——————————————-

REMAINING TARP MONEY

The remaining $350 billion in TARP funding can be accessed only after the White House formally notifies Congress. U.S. House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank has said that if the initial banks participating in the program do not use the money for lending, Congress could block authorization of the final funding."

——————————————————————————–

Reality Check:

Despite the sizeable cash infusion in the financial sector to revive the stagnant economy, the results confirm the dismal performance in all quarters of the economy.

It is imperative for treasury and the Federal Reserve as the guarantors of the financial industry bail out to provide legitimate explanation to the American taxpayers in their failure to achieve the TARP purpose, prior to even contemplating to secure the remaining and final $350 billion amount.

———————————————————————–
Auto Industry – Crisis

Meanwhile, to focus on the pending national issue concerning the American workforce in the manufacturing sector of the auto industry,

It is important to shed light on the current unemployment status of our nation.

As per the recent reports…

Source: http://www.free-press-release-center.info/pr00000000000000028189_us-unemployment-rate-touches-67-halfmillion-jobs-lost-in-november-employmentcrossing-revs-up-efforts.html – Thank you.

US Unemployment Rate Touches 6.7%; Half–Million Jobs Lost in November; EmploymentCrossing Revs Up Efforts

Employers slashed 533,000 jobs in November, the most in 34 years, according to the latest US Bureau of Labor Statistics report.

Mind-boggling figures of job losses reported for the month are statistically the most since December 1974.

The unemployment rate of 6.7% was the worst rate since 1993. It’s only the fourth time in the past 58 years that payrolls have fallen by more than 500,000 in a month.

EmploymentCrossing, the leading job board in the US, agrees that the current job market has been increasingly ruthless on the employees, as widespread cuts attain a new high.

———————————————-

Analysis:

Obviously, it is a dire situation demanding immediate solutions to the burgeoning problems of the job market.

Delayed response in addressing the collapse of the major manufacturing sector will worsen the fragile economy already in recession.

There have been various good proposals from all corners and discipline presented so far for consideration by Congress.

Most proposals target similar aspects of the financial industry bailout like,

Oversight, strict regulations and accountability.

While, others include emphasis on fuel-efficient and/or hybrid cars to deal with potential energy and present environment crisis.

The Union role in the auto industry has been unfairly targeted in the outcry against protecting the manufacturing jobs.

Without Union existence and support, the outrageous trade practices by Corporate America towards the American workforce will be emboldened with an adverse effect on the middle and poor income groups.

Typically, such scenario will widen the pre-existing canyon between the haves and have-nots.

———————————————————————————-
Rescue Plan with Clear Solutions:

First and foremost, the incumbent administration’s refusal to recognize the seriousness of the auto industry problem as an impending job market crisis is no revelation.

It is appalling that the same administration instantaneously reached out to the financial industry with the notoriety for poor judgment that triggered the entire economic crises.

Yet, it holds reservations for a sector seeking assistance with a pledge to comply with all and any legislative requirements to save the manufacturing jobs.

Moreover, unlike the financial sector, in this instance the taxpayer investment is secured with tangible assets upon default by the companies.

Given the grim unemployment status, economic recession and gloomy Retail forecasts for the holiday season, the auto industry jobs must be rescued at all costs.

Strategy:

As highlighted above, the purpose behind TARP to financial industry was to facilitate liquidity in commercial lending to various other sectors of the economy.

Referencing U.S. House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank,

“if the initial banks participating in the program do not use the money for lending, Congress could block authorization of the final funding.”

The comment is fair and valid.

Due to the breach of $700 billion agreement proposal by the financial institutions,

The entire sum of $75 billion requested by all three major automakers will be approved and allocated accordingly:

1. The unused $15 billion from the previously drawn amount of $350 billion financial bailout is to be utilized in the approval of the $75 billion to protect the auto industry jobs.

2. The remaining $60 billion will be derived from the final amount of the $350 billion financial bailout package through an emergency resolution by Congress.

3. The recommendation to tap into the $25 billion energy bill to assist the automakers would derail any progress aimed at clean energy programs in the future.

Therefore, the rescue package for automakers is to be appropriated from the excessive financial bailout fund.

—————————————————————————–

Compliance by Automakers:

A. Besides the standard protocol for oversight, stringent regulations and executive competence, the manufacturing of hybrid models to satisfy the energy efficiency requirement is paramount to this deal.

B. Equally important are the recognition and improvement of labor laws, trade practices to benefit the American workforce and thereby increase productivity yielding expected profits for payoff towards the rescue plan.

C. Transparency and commitment to achieve pledged goals is vital to avert future crisis and maintain credibility with lenders.

D. In addition, exorbitant remuneration perks and bonuses to CEO’s of all three corporations will be eliminated from the package.

—————————————————-

Congressional Obligation:

It is incumbent on Congress particularly with members across the aisles to address the serious challenge in the manufacturing sector currently facing the nation by putting partisan politics aside and prioritizing the needs of the American labor.

The nation is grappling with an economy saddled with —

Multi-trillion dollar debt

Financial crisis

Deteriorating housing market

Unpredictable stock market

All of the above factors threatening the stability of every industry and the fabric of the economic infrastructure.

Any more layoffs in any industry particularly the manufacturing companies will debilitate the economic recovery plans in process.

It is time to bid farewell to party bickering, earmarks and Pork Barell spending that have resulted in Washington gridlock on all matter of national interest.

Legislators must act diligently and promptly by approving the entire amount $75 billion from the suggested source for all three companies to protect American jobs and the ailing economy.

It is time for action and not procrastination.

Finally, people in a democracy elect representatives and entrust power to solve problems and safeguard their interests so,

National interest must supersede all other interests.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Redistribution of Wealth

The latest assault weapon for Senator John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin against their opponent Senator Barack Obama is the "Socialist/Marxist/Robin Hood" tag on him.

Such rhetoric and false propaganda is to create doubts in the minds of entrepreneurs against Senator Obama.

The distortion of Senator Obama’s policy leading businesses to believe that,

"In Taxing 1% of the population in the 40% tax bracket while shifting the tax burden to the top 10% with 70% of tax exacerbates the entities from active participation in the economic growth."

The reason behind similar branding is the fair tax proposal presented by Senator Obama to alleviate the socioeconomic problems that has currently widened the canyon between rich and poor in our country.

Thus slowly but gradually eliminating the middle class in our society.

Senator Barack Obama’s tax policy is based on relieving all citizens including small and medium sized businesses earning less than or equal to gross income of $250,000 per annum from any tax hikes to offset expenditure.

This strategy creates financial liquidity among households and businesses alike that is desperately required to stimulate the ailing economy.

By exempting the average households from any tax increases, the consumer spending is generated that will benefit the Retail economy which in turn will permeate throughout the economic spectrum.

The strengthening of the Retail economy will boost the manufacturing, service industry… reaching all the way to top of the Corporate growth.

The Corporate growth means investment prospects for both private and public investors resulting in healthier and consistent stock market performance that has been highly volatile recently.

It is simple economics.

Supply and demand forces determine a free market system.

Unless, there is a demand for any particular goods or services the supply chain link cannot remain in force.

Simultaneously, the demand can be a catalyst in the process only through affordable consumer spending.

This is where the small and medium sized businesses come into play with the tax breaks from Senator Obama’s policy.

It is noteworthy that small and medium sized businesses deal with wholesale industries for raw materials and other items ultimately owned by major corporations in a market economy.

There are valid reasons to embrace the market economy worldwide.

A. Induces competition apart from enrichment of ideas

B. Competition enables choices in quality and price

C. Controls inflation or deflation

Therefore, the retail consumers benefit from the market economy that facilitates all small, medium and large players in competing with one another effectively for common good.

All of the above factors directly and indirectly influence the fiscal, monetary and economic policies in a Capital economy.

Briefly, the cash flow offered through tax relief by Senator Obama to a substantial group of taxpayers who are also the consumers trigger consumer spending and exponentially elevate the economic status among the various groups in the society.

It also eventually contributes to the wealth accumulation by the top ten percent in the society whose welfare alone is a major concern for McCain/Palin candidacy.

Ironically, the McCain/Palin candidacy in their zeal to own Capitalism as their trademark, fail to recognize the importance of fundamental growth in the lower and middle income groups vital for the survival of small businesses and retail industries, the structural components of a successful Capital economy.

Senator McCain’s tax policy to freeze tax increases across the board by asserting that the Bush administration’s permanent tax cuts to wealthy individuals and Corporations would somehow miraculously revive the economy is a fantasy beyond reason.

It is worth remembering for McCain/Palin campaign that the current Bush administration, as their supporter will depart shortly leaving the nation with multi-trillion dollar debt, on-going wars in Iraq and Afghanistan requiring constant capital injection, declining dollar and hosts of economic commitments willfully neglected in the past eight years.

The undecided/swing voters in every battleground state must realize that there are no precise solutions from McCain/Palin candidacy to resolve the humongous challenges confronting our nation in the absence of any meaningful tax policy.

Senator McCain’s policy to create new jobs as economic solutions again fails to meet the criteria of capital requirement in the present economy with severe financial liquidity crisis.

In fact, the recent economic strategy to bankroll the corrupt and failed financial institutions with the taxpayers funds, along with the economic stimulus package by the Bush administration fits the profile of the political stigma – "Socialism/Marxism" except,

Here, the beneficiaries are the financial institutions and their wealthiest CEO’s rather than the taxpayers, i.e. the average citizens.

Since, the same political party represents the Bush administration and McCain/Palin candidacy, it would be more appropriate to assign the factoid to the respective contenders.

Fact Check: In a progressive tax structure, Senator Obama’s policy to exempt the vast majority of taxpayers/consumers from tax increase would,

1. Promote economic status as highlighted above…

2. Ultimately, create a fair system of sharing the economic burden by all rather than only by the affluent ones.

Such farsighted and permanent solutions to persisting economic problems is in direct contradiction to the myth and misnomer cast by McCain/Palin doctrine against Senator Barack Obama to win the election.

Socialism, Marxism may well be the nemesis to Capitalism,

Capitalism cannot thrive without consumerism – That is the fact.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Copyright ©2008-2025 PadminiArhant.com