Fannie and Freddie symptoms of larger problem

[snaed27]

I thought the constitution gives the people the right to overthrow a corrupt goverment ...is it time ?

[leoduser]

In my opinion, all Bush needs to do is start printing US money that does not say Federal Reserve on it. This would take the fed out of the picture and strengthen an actual US dollar.

[immanent]

our economic problems are a result of stagnation of wages?

Horse before the cart? This guy sounds like the people that say high gas prices and food prices are driving inflation.

On the contrary, it is printing too many dollars that causes inflation, high prices, mal-investment, and economic bubbles.

[immanent]

Jay Paul / Real News

Interviewing disillusioned and misinformed so-called economists like Mr Blackwell here, is disappointing. AFL-CIO economist? About as worthwhile to me as interviewing Henry Paulson himself.

Bad propaganda to counter bad propaganda. Sheesh...

[3dbeing]

Holy Crap, was that an Economist saying like it is ON CAMERA!?!...hell has officially frozen over!

[PersonalJesus348]

Socialism for the rich and Capitalism for the poor. That sums it up perfectly.

[softearth]

Google "Peter Schiff" for the truth!

[pongman]

Let capitalism decide whether a corporation should survive. If this is suppose to be a free capitalistic society then let the market prevail. Big oil should pay a capital gains tax just like every person in this country. I find it detestable that if I win the lottery tomorrow I have to pay almost 50 percent of my earnings yet Big Oil gets away without having to pay a dime on their profits. Equal justice under the law for EVERYONE!

[josh22922]

that can never happen. this is America you commie. lol :)

[pongman]

You're right equal justice can't happen in America. The constitution is a lie.

[mcalien24]

i dont think its a "lie." It certainly was when it was written.

"all men are created equal"

yea, except for blacks, indians and women.

I believe the constitution is the truth...we make it a lie when we dont live up to it.

[pongman]

Well, if we or the government don't live up to the constitution and don't enforce the laws then the constitution isn't worth the paper its written on.

[mcalien24]

its not the constitutions fault. its we the people who are responsible...and thus we are not worthy of it.

the constitution has intrinsic value regardless of what we do. It is us...the people who have elected a government which does not preserve our value as free and autonomous agents. the constitution remains perfect while we decay.

[3dbeing]

I don't think corporations should have rights at all under the law, corporations have stocks, humans have rights.

[pongman]

Ya know, A while back ago about two years ago I sent a letter to the NY Times and asked them to go on a fishing expedition with a briefcase filled with hundreds of thousands of dollars and to see if they could catch a congressman, judge, senator or president of vice-president. You know with the hidden cameras etc. They never got back to me so I'm assuming that the press doesn't give a damn either. If you ask me everyone in the government is on the take and the country has already been sold.

[3dbeing]

HERE HERE!

Nothing quite as easily manipulated as a slave state that believes they are free. A cart, a donkey and a carrot come to mind. America being the cart, The American Dream the carrot, and I'll give you 3 guesses who the donkey is and who is lazily enjoying the ride.

[3dbeing]

Ohh yeah and above the picture the press's story reads, "The American Dream Is Still Alive"

[SkinSinFilms]

These two banks are owned mostly by foreign/Asian investors from what I've heard. So basically we are gonna pay the social price for bailing out a corporation which is supposed to live and die by the rules of the free market. Seems Freedom is good when the 'Capitalists' are reaping the rewards and when they loose they scream for 'socialism' and demand their own form of welfare. By the rule of the market place Fannie and Freadie should perish in flames. Is that not correct?

[medulalumosa]

You are correct. You're speaking absolute truth!!

[Transitiving]

yes and RealNews doesn't get that not letting this happen is a big mistake. It is spreading the damage all over the economy so its les notable but will be more destructive in the long run

[SkinSinFilms]

I think everyone is in denial and too concerned with 'isms' If the people are suffering and not in a position to live a quality life, does it matter what you call it? If the people are prospering and able to live a quality live, does it matter what you call it. focus on the causes, conditions and solutions and stop playing your silly word games and jerking yourself off over socialism vs. capitalism vs. marxixm. Most people harbor inveterate definitions of these terms anyways.

[josh22922]

well said.

[magirecords2004]

Bush had fooled ya'll pretty good.

Bye bye Babylon.

[LadyDamorea1]

Nationalization of one of the largest banking institutions in the US....more control for the powers that be and less for the people.

[keithrockerboblewis]

I lost my job late last year. Still unemployed. Soon, I will lose my house.

[crock703]

I'm sorry. Good luck.

[TimberGeek]

Let's see, the speed of information technology has made small independent business networks the profitable model while big monolithic corporations strangle with internal inefficiency and the suggestion is transfer this large megalithic entity into the even larger less efficient and corrupt entity that is the federal government. Ultimately it would be better for the people to let them fail. Imagine the amount of money suddenly free to enter the market place when peoples home loans disappear.

[MentalReserve]

That guy is wrong prices are not rising, the dollar is falling

[djathens2]

It's a little bit of both, due to demand for fuel by China and India. But yes, most politicians you hear don't speak about the dollar falling as a cause.

[sonderbak]

Corporatism is what the rest of the world calls Fascism!

[lastnymleft]

Communism is socialized profits, socialized losses.

Socialism is socialized profits, privatized losses.

Capitalism is privatized profits, privatized losses.

Corporatism is privatized profits, socialized losses.

Capitalism is better than socialism, or communism, but Corporatism is worst of all

He is wrong to call for "putting a floor under house prices", to "stop people from losing their homes". It's government interference in the market that created this problem! Malinvestment must be purged.

[stratvic]

Well said.

The fundamental economic underpinning that needs change is to eliminate Freddie and Fannie. They should never have been established and have evolved through political pandering from a small well intentioned error to become a fundamental weakness growing like a cancer. Time to cut it loose.

[MoralObserver]

RealNews: If you continue to do stories like this, I will donate. We need some real news covering what is really going on regarding the economy front and how it's the Federal Reserve's fault (and congress for letting them) for this global economic collapse.

[immanent]

This guy said he wants to NATIONALIZE a piece of the financial industry. He made no point about the federal reserve's manipulation of interest rates and the printing of money causing inflation.

This guy is no economist as far as I'm concerned, although you could have guessed his solutions by who writes his paycheck.

Seeing this rhetoric on Real News makes me cringe.

MORE AUSTRIAN ECONOMISTS, PAUL JAY & REAL NEWS

[calvinjones]

less caps immanent, it makes you look crazy...calls for austrian school economics dont help.

[immanent]

I use caps sparingly, trust me. Maybe once a month to make a particularly important point. Maybe it'll catch Paul Jay's attention or something, who knows.

Why don't calls for Austrian economists help? If they interviewed some, Real News viewers would definitely be more informed as to why the economy is in the shape that is it, and where it is going.

[calvinjones]

Austrian school economics is the intellectual predecessor of the chicargo school which brought the world neo-liberalism. I`m reading a book about the destruction of bolivia by neo-liberal policies at the moment, most developoment or environmental groups have extensive critiques of these policies and the power they gift corporations at the expense of the poor.

[immanent]

Austrian school economists would denounce such concepts as the World Bank and IMF, that proclaim to be about laissez-faire, deregulation, and free markets, but do another thing. What are most free trade agreements, afterall, than thousands of pages of regulation at the behest of large, multi-national corporations?

Austrian school economics has no place for central banks either. Calling the policies of world financial institutions "neo-liberal" seems as accurate as calling NAFTA "free trade."

[calvinjones]

Check out the "Chicargo School of Economics" page on Wikipedia.

[calvinjones]

"Chicago School theories lay behind many of the policies of the World Bank and other Washington-based financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and U.S. Treasury Department,[1] which embraced free market solutions as the recipe for the reform of economically wrecked countries, as was expressed in the Washington consensus. Under its influence, from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, large portions of the state-owned companies in many Third World countries were privatized.[2]"

[immanent]

The fallacy is that you call those institutions and the means by which they claim to achieve a purpose "neo-liberal." Take the example of NAFTA being a misrepresentation of what free trade is supposed to be. So regulation and subsidies are suddenly recognized as free trade? Then you connect the fallacy to the Chicago School which has roots in the Austrian School, and suddenly Mises and Rothbard are the problem. Sounds almost like a strawman.

[calvinjones]

The 'fallacies' that you attribute to me are matters about which i know rather little. I`m not an economist so i wouldnt make these connections on a hunch. The wikipedia article makes these connections, saying that the IMF/World Bank are inspired by the chicargo school and that Mises et al., are its intellectual forebares.

I havent mentioned nafta once, i know less about that thatn about the IMF/WTO/World Bank.

[calvinjones]

It may be possible to seperate ideology from economics but in practice an economic theory that is great in the text books is exploited and used as an ideology...i think that is the point. Free trade policies create capital accumilation that creates extreme politcal power in the hands of the welathy which is innevitably used by them to futher there goals. Economics and democracy cannot be considered seperately. Democratic control of business as well as the narrowly defined 'political' is needed.

[immanent]

I think you're right that TRUE free trade creates capital accumulation, but I hold that it is in the hands of the people, and smart entrepreneurs, instead of in the hands of the wealthy. Democratic 'control' is still control, and is contrary to any notion of a free society.

You can't have perfect liberty and perfect egalitarianism simultaneously. Perfect liberty approaches the egalitarian goal much closer than perfect egalitarianism begets perfect liberty.

[whoisinchargehere]

"Perfect liberty approaches the egalitarian goal much closer than perfect egalitarianism begets perfect liberty." That is only true if there are 'limits' either imposed by outside forces (institutions) or internally (honor). Perfect liberty is no different than 'perfect' capitalism which will ultimately result in one owner of everything.

The question eventually becomes is it a single public owner or a single private owner.

The answer lies in finding a balance between capitalist and socialist.

[immanent]

From where do you draw the assumption that perfect capitalism will result in one owner of everything? That doesn't seem possible unless individuals are giving 100% of the fruits of their labor for nothing in return. How could there ever be one private owner of everything? And even if it were possible, the difference would be how the single owner arrived at total ownership. Private=voluntary. Public=force. Doesn't public ownership of everything mean there is no right of man in property.

[whoisinchargehere]

immanent

1)I draw that assumption from logic based on the fruits capitalism produces, which are many but mixed.

2)If you are in debt have you not given more than 100% of your labor away? You do have things in return but those things are only valuable if you can use them up or trade them.

3)Private owner = owned by few or one for their benefit. Competition is life blood of capitalism and what is ultimate result of competition? A winner. How - depends on the rules of operation and indiv choice.

[whoisinchargehere]

immanent

4)Private does not always = voluntary. It can but if something is NEEDED to survive (one might even argue being able to function in society) and it can only be received from one place is that voluntary? It is also highly self-interested. Public is operating within set limits, forced yes, but ideally accountable to the public. Other interested.

4) you may have control of property but if it can be taken do you really own it? You may live if it is decided you can use the resources.

[MoralObserver]

As long as the gooberment & the Federal Reserve (with is NOT a federal department) are handing out money, I would like them to pay off my house and all of my debit.

[SkinSinFilms]

Yeah but you're not a coeveted Asian billionaire...you're just an American citizen...you are no longer their concern.

[odin422]

im broke....can i get a couple billion?