Events like the Jihadi shootings in Paris, the anti-Muslim demos and movements in Europe (and corresponding prejudice here among white reactionaries), are one sign of the instability that's becoming endemic in global civilization.
Another is the fall in oil prices, created by the fracking boom here and the intentional continuation of production as usual in Saudi Arabia. Bankruptcies in Venezuela, Russia and Iran, could visit us, through bank failures caused by collapse of the trillions of dollars in fracking derivatives held by US banks. We could revisit 2008, but with oil derivatives instead of mortgage derivatives as the cause. And the new Republican Congress has just made it possible for the big banks to seize depositors' money if they're in danger of collapse!
Obvious, who funded their campaigns, isn't it?
There is no such thing as class war, except as waged by the terrorists--and that's not class; it's culture, religion, race hatred, anything but what generated it: the exploitation of the whole world by a tiny, rapacious elite.
It isn't the usual suspects of rightwing conspiracy theorists; it's the corporate class, worldwide, that has captured democracy and autocracy alike: from the US to China. Some of the elite are US bank leaders, some are CEO's of huge corporations; some are speculators riding the tide of triumphant capitalism. With few exceptions, they appear to be in 'the game' to carry off as much wealth as they can, by almost any means. Think how powerful you feel, when you make as much in an hour as an ordinary worker makes in a decade. It doesn't seem to occur to them that they are killing the goose who lays golden eggs. What will sustain an economy when there are only the wealthy and the desperate?
But, hey, there's no Marie Antoinette around here!
Are the lives of the rich and famous an open book? Celeb followers are entertained by the show biz stars: rich enough, but hardly the billionaires behind their private mansion walls: celebs are mere servants of the Rich, but intentionally not so Famous.
I've often asked the question: what will the billionaires do, when everyone else is driven to give up, or cannot survive traumatic climate change? Will they retreat to underground bunkers?
Apparently, someone is building a bunker world in Kansas; it will include everything, including a pet park, and you only need about $3 million to buy into it, not that you'd want to live in it, unless the apocalypse is imminent. After all, who would want to live in Kansas, if you can live in San Francisco, or New York, or…?
In the dark ages, when I was in graduate school, I read a piece about the possible lifestyle of the world's managers: they would live in any "beautiful place in the world," from which they could manage multi-billion dollar corporations--to exploit people all over the world. That future seems more likely daily, unless some among the politically aware can persuade the unaware and Fox-crazed to resist being ripped off by the filthy rich.
Showing posts with label banking fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label banking fraud. Show all posts
Friday, January 9, 2015
Monday, December 5, 2011
Job Destroyers II
In a previous post, I wrote that CEO's and takeover specialists like Mitt Romney are the very opposite of job creators: they are job destroyers when they lay off workers, "downsize," pit American workers against foreign workers and "offshore" jobs.
The banks are job destroyers, too, as is the Pentagon.
The banks provide capital to enable CEO's to offshore, for example, and loot industries through the kinds of scams that brought about the derivatives collapse. That particular scam, precipitated by the sub-prime implosion, dried up the booming construction sector, killing many more jobs. Banks also finance the corporate takeovers that cause companies to shed thousands of jobs. They promote these job-killing programs, because they can make handsome profits from them.
The Pentagon is also a job destroyer. That may sound strange, because politicians, especially those with defense industries or military bases within their districts, instantly complain that area jobs will be lost when anyone proposes cuts to defense programs.
The economic principle here is 'opportunity cost.' Numerous studies have found that defense jobs require twice as much capital per worker as non-defense jobs; they are capital intensive. They also don't produce things that enrich the nation; they produce instruments for destruction, mostly for use elsewhere. Incidentally, the move to legalize indefinite detention or assassination of American citizens in the US might mean that the destruction we finance could be our own.
In any case, it costs twice as much to employ a defense worker, or a soldier, as it does to employ a non-defense factory worker and three times as much as employing a teacher or healthcare worker. In some cases, the opportunity cost is much higher: a soldier in Afghanistan costs $1 million a year; it's probable that same million could employ ten teachers. The non-monetary cost is even greater: teachers educate the next generation, soldiers kill people abroad, or terrorize them, or, at best, help foreigners maintain security in their own countries. Meanwhile, children at home are crammed into larger and larger classes, getting less and less of the attention and help they need.
What benefits do we get for sending our military all over the world? Oil is probably cheaper here because of it, but think of what it costs us to accomplish that: three quarters of a trillion dollars a year. Walmart gets its goods mostly from China, where we don't have military influence, but perhaps imported goods would be costlier if there were no global American military presence.
Considering the effect cheap imports have had on our economy and our jobs, I rest my case: the military destroys millions of jobs.
Who benefits? The military brass and the owners of defense industries: the latter are our contemporary Roman Senators, described by the OWS as "the 1%."
Republicans call them "job creators!"
The banks are job destroyers, too, as is the Pentagon.
The banks provide capital to enable CEO's to offshore, for example, and loot industries through the kinds of scams that brought about the derivatives collapse. That particular scam, precipitated by the sub-prime implosion, dried up the booming construction sector, killing many more jobs. Banks also finance the corporate takeovers that cause companies to shed thousands of jobs. They promote these job-killing programs, because they can make handsome profits from them.
The Pentagon is also a job destroyer. That may sound strange, because politicians, especially those with defense industries or military bases within their districts, instantly complain that area jobs will be lost when anyone proposes cuts to defense programs.
The economic principle here is 'opportunity cost.' Numerous studies have found that defense jobs require twice as much capital per worker as non-defense jobs; they are capital intensive. They also don't produce things that enrich the nation; they produce instruments for destruction, mostly for use elsewhere. Incidentally, the move to legalize indefinite detention or assassination of American citizens in the US might mean that the destruction we finance could be our own.
In any case, it costs twice as much to employ a defense worker, or a soldier, as it does to employ a non-defense factory worker and three times as much as employing a teacher or healthcare worker. In some cases, the opportunity cost is much higher: a soldier in Afghanistan costs $1 million a year; it's probable that same million could employ ten teachers. The non-monetary cost is even greater: teachers educate the next generation, soldiers kill people abroad, or terrorize them, or, at best, help foreigners maintain security in their own countries. Meanwhile, children at home are crammed into larger and larger classes, getting less and less of the attention and help they need.
What benefits do we get for sending our military all over the world? Oil is probably cheaper here because of it, but think of what it costs us to accomplish that: three quarters of a trillion dollars a year. Walmart gets its goods mostly from China, where we don't have military influence, but perhaps imported goods would be costlier if there were no global American military presence.
Considering the effect cheap imports have had on our economy and our jobs, I rest my case: the military destroys millions of jobs.
Who benefits? The military brass and the owners of defense industries: the latter are our contemporary Roman Senators, described by the OWS as "the 1%."
Republicans call them "job creators!"
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Rip-off Artists
The King of Kings is on the run, but it doesn't really matter. Qaddafi started out with apparent promise, ruling for the common man, so he claimed. But really, he just ended up ripping people off in novel ways, while attempting to control their lives.
What does matter is that the Wall Street banks are not on the run, and they are also ripping off the common man in novel ways. Now, paralleling the obstructionist extortion of the GOP in Congress, the banks are "negotiating" with the states' Attorneys General, who are also being pushed by the Arbitrator-in-chief, for a quick, painless settlement (for the banks).
The primary issue is the robo-signing scandal, in which millions of mortgage defaults were falsified, but the other questionable, probably illegal, practices of the banks are also in question.
Some State Attorneys General, Eric Schneiderman of NY chief among them, insist that there must be thorough investigations of the fraud, before any settlement can be reached.
But the banks, those same huge banks that drove us into the "Great Recession," the same banks that are now falling all over themselves with mega bonuses, are offering a paltry $50 billion or so. to help defaulting homeowners keep their homes in some circumstances, or help them move to an apartment in others. But the banks did over $750 billion in damages to homeowners, and are worth trillions.
What are they asking in exchange for that $50 billion? Immunity. In other words, this whole "negotiation" on what really amounts to massive banking fraud, is like the plea deal that prosecutors strike with some felons, in order to convict other felons. Except, in this case, they're all buying immunity, and for that they're willing to pay $50 billion.
If they can't get Schneiderman and four or five other state Attorneys General, to sign on, however, then they'll offer less, not even $50 billion. Administration officials are urging the AG's to sign on: their model seems to be, everybody rich and powerful should be protected, but those whom the R and P have exploited, can't be helped, except with rhetoric, or that measly $50 billion. House underwater and you've lost a job because of the banking debacle, well, too bad. There's only that tiny fund to go around for all of you.
Schneiderman has just been kicked off the AGs' committee negotiating with the banks, because he's not willing to give them immunity; he wants to investigate them, and is doing so. The New York Times applauded him, but it's likely that, with three or five exceptions, a settlement will be reached soon; it will not hold the banks responsible, will not investigate and will not permit any party to the agreement to investigate the banks further.
It looks like Schneiderman will try to hold our contemporary Roman Senators accountable; his chances aren't great, given his opponents' resources. But that's the 21st century, more and more like the 5th.
What does matter is that the Wall Street banks are not on the run, and they are also ripping off the common man in novel ways. Now, paralleling the obstructionist extortion of the GOP in Congress, the banks are "negotiating" with the states' Attorneys General, who are also being pushed by the Arbitrator-in-chief, for a quick, painless settlement (for the banks).
The primary issue is the robo-signing scandal, in which millions of mortgage defaults were falsified, but the other questionable, probably illegal, practices of the banks are also in question.
Some State Attorneys General, Eric Schneiderman of NY chief among them, insist that there must be thorough investigations of the fraud, before any settlement can be reached.
But the banks, those same huge banks that drove us into the "Great Recession," the same banks that are now falling all over themselves with mega bonuses, are offering a paltry $50 billion or so. to help defaulting homeowners keep their homes in some circumstances, or help them move to an apartment in others. But the banks did over $750 billion in damages to homeowners, and are worth trillions.
What are they asking in exchange for that $50 billion? Immunity. In other words, this whole "negotiation" on what really amounts to massive banking fraud, is like the plea deal that prosecutors strike with some felons, in order to convict other felons. Except, in this case, they're all buying immunity, and for that they're willing to pay $50 billion.
If they can't get Schneiderman and four or five other state Attorneys General, to sign on, however, then they'll offer less, not even $50 billion. Administration officials are urging the AG's to sign on: their model seems to be, everybody rich and powerful should be protected, but those whom the R and P have exploited, can't be helped, except with rhetoric, or that measly $50 billion. House underwater and you've lost a job because of the banking debacle, well, too bad. There's only that tiny fund to go around for all of you.
Schneiderman has just been kicked off the AGs' committee negotiating with the banks, because he's not willing to give them immunity; he wants to investigate them, and is doing so. The New York Times applauded him, but it's likely that, with three or five exceptions, a settlement will be reached soon; it will not hold the banks responsible, will not investigate and will not permit any party to the agreement to investigate the banks further.
It looks like Schneiderman will try to hold our contemporary Roman Senators accountable; his chances aren't great, given his opponents' resources. But that's the 21st century, more and more like the 5th.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)