Too late to rescue U.S. economy?

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
Now that I you know the market bottoms on the summer solitice and rebounds through the spring equinox of 2009, any averaging is a non-starter. The action is in derivatives. I'm going to sell everything that I own right now and buy 12 month call options.

Now let's see, if I start with say, $200.00...
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Destroying Glass-Steagall restrictions
One of Greenspan’s first acts as Chairman of the Fed was to call for repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, something which his old friends at J.P.Morgan and Citibank had ardently campaigned for. 5
Glass-Steagall, officially the Banking Act of 1933, introduced the separation of commercial banking from Wall Street investment banking and insurance. Glass-Steagall originally was intended to curb three major problems that led to the severity of the 1930’s wave of bank failures and depression:
Banks were investing their own assets in securities with consequent risk to commercial and savings depositors in event of a stock crash. Unsound loans were made by the banks in order to artificially prop up the price of select securities or the financial position of companies in which a bank had invested its own assets. A bank's financial interest in the ownership, pricing, or distribution of securities inevitably tempted bank officials to press their banking customers into investing in securities which the bank itself was under pressure to sell. It was a colossal conflict of interest and invitation to fraud and abuse.
Banks that offered investment banking services and mutual funds were subject to conflicts of interest and other abuses, thereby resulting in harm to their customers, including borrowers, depositors, and correspondent banks. Similarly, today, with no more Glass-Steagall restraints, banks offering securitized mortgage obligations and similar products via wholly owned Special Purpose Vehicles they create to get the risk “off the bank books,” are complicit in what likely will go down in history as the greatest financial swindle of all times—the sub-prime securitization fraud.
In his history of the Great Crash, economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted, “Congress was concerned that commercial banks in general and member banks of the Federal Reserve System in particular had both aggravated and been damaged by stock market decline partly because of their direct and indirect involvement in the trading and ownership of speculative securities.
“The legislative history of the Glass-Steagall Act,” Galbraith continued, “shows that Congress also had in mind and repeatedly focused on the more subtle hazards that arise when a commercial bank goes beyond the business of acting as fiduciary or managing agent and enters the investment banking business either directly or by establishing an affiliate to hold and sell particular investments.” Galbraith noted that “During 1929 one investment house, Goldman, Sachs & Company, organized and sold nearly a billion dollars' worth of securities in three interconnected investment trusts--Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation; Shenandoah Corporation; and Blue Ridge Corporation. All eventually depreciated virtually to nothing.”
…strategies unimaginable a decade ago…’
The New York Times described the new financial world created by repeal of Glass-Steagall in a June 2007 profile of Goldman Sachs, just weeks prior to the eruption of the sub-prime crisis: “While Wall Street still mints money advising companies on mergers and taking them public, real money - staggering money - is made trading and investing capital through a global array of mind-bending products and strategies unimaginable a decade ago.” They were referring to the securitization revolution.
The Times quoted Goldman Sachs chairman Lloyd Blankfein on the new financial securitization, hedge fund and derivatives world: “We've come full circle, because this is exactly what the Rothschilds or J. P. Morgan, the banker were doing in their heyday. What caused an aberration was the Glass-Steagall Act.”9
Blankfein as most of Wall Street bankers and financial insiders saw the New Deal as an aberration, openly calling for return to the days J. P. Morgan and other tycoons of the ‘Gilded Age’ of abuses in the 1920’s. Glass-Steagall, Blankfein’s "aberration" was finally eliminated because of Bill Clinton. Goldman Sachs was a prime contributor to the Clinton campaign and even sent Clinton its chairman Robert Rubin in 1993, first as “economic czar” then in 1995 as Treasury Secretary. Today, another former Goldman Sachs chairman, Henry Paulson is again US Treasury Secretary under Republican Bush. Money power knows no party.
Robert Kuttner, co-founder of the Economic Policy Institute, testified before US Congressman Barney Frank's Committee on Banking and Financial Services in October 2007, evoking the specter of the Great Depression:
“Since repeal of Glass Steagall in 1999, after more than a decade of de facto inroads, super-banks have been able to re-enact the same kinds of structural conflicts of interest that were endemic in the 1920s - lending to speculators, packaging and securitizing credits and then selling them off, wholesale or retail, and extracting fees at every step along the way. And, much of this paper is even more opaque to bank examiners than its counterparts were in the 1920s. Much of it isn't paper at all, and the whole process is supercharged by computers and automated formulas.” 10
Greenspan held Fed rates to those historic lows, lows not seen for that length of time since the Great Depression, until June 30, 2004, when he began the first of what were to be fourteen successive rate increases before he left office in 2006. He took Fed funds rates from the low of 1% up to 4.5% in nineteen months. In the process, he killed the bubble that was laying the real estate golden egg.
In speech after speech the Fed chairman made clear that his ultra-easy money regime after January 2001 had as prime focus the encouragement of investing in home mortgage debt. The sub-prime phenomenon—something only possible in the era of asset securitization and Glass-Steagall repeal, combined with unregulated OTC derivatives trades—was the predictable result of deliberate Greenspan policy. The close scrutiny of the historical record makes that abundantly clear.

Notes
1 Woodward, Bob, Maestro: Alan Greenspan's Fed and the American Economic Boom, Nov 2000. Woodward’s book is an example of the charmed treatment Greenspan was accorded by the major media. Woodward’s boss at the Washington Post, Catharine Meyer Graham, daughter of the legendary Wall Street investment banker Andre Meyer, was an intimate Greenspan friend. The book can be seen as a calculated part of the Greenspan myth-creation by the influential circles of the financial establishm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7876

IT AIN'T OVER BY A LONG SHOT. I heard George Soros say today that dollar hegemony was dead. If that's the case we will see global war, because the military machine is all that's left.


D
 

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
Dark Beaver, "I heard George Soros say today that dollar hegemony was dead. If that's the case we will see global war, because the military machine is all that's left."

You are the only one calling for global war. You are the only one who takes the position that additional military conflict will help the dollar or strike down the Euro. Soros will tomorrow say that dollar hegemony has been over for years.
 

Toro

Senate Member
May 24, 2005
5,468
109
63
Florida, Hurricane Central
Dark Beaver, "I heard George Soros say today that dollar hegemony was dead. If that's the case we will see global war, because the military machine is all that's left."

You are the only one calling for global war. You are the only one who takes the position that additional military conflict will help the dollar or strike down the Euro. Soros will tomorrow say that dollar hegemony has been over for years.

Soros is wrong.



 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The “Brutal World”
How did Western Civilization get a monopoly on “moral conscience” when it has no morality?
By Paul Craig Roberts
“The first use of nuclear weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction.” Five Western military leaders.
23/01/08 "ICH" -- -- I read the statement three times trying to figure out the typo. Then it hit me, the West has now out-Owellled Orwell: The West must nuke other countries in order to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction! In Westernspeak, the West nuking other countries does not qualify as the use of weapons of mass destruction.
The astounding statement comes from a paper prepared for a Nato summit in April by five top military leaders--an American, a German, a Dutchman, a Frenchman, and a Brit. It can be found here: [ http://www.guardian.co.uk/nato/story/0,,2244782,00.html ]
The paper, prepared by men regarded as distinguished leaders and not as escapees from insane asylums, argues that “the West’s values and way of life are under threat, but the West is struggling to summon the will to defend them.” The leaders find that the UN is in the way of the West’s will, as is the European Union which is obstructing NATO and “NATO’s credibility is at stake in Afghanistan.”
And that’s a serious matter. If NATO loses its credibility in Afghanistan, Western civilization will collapse just like the Soviet Union. The West just doesn’t realize how weak it is. To strengthen itself, it needs to drop more and larger bombs.
The German military leader blames the Merkel government for contributing to the West’s inability to defend its values by standing in the way of a revival of German militarism. How can Germany be “a reliable partner” for America, he asks, if the German government insists on “special rules” limiting the combat use of its forces in Afghanistan?
Ron Asmus, head of the German Marshall Fund and a former US State Department official, welcomed the paper as “a wake-up call.” Asmus means a call to wake-up to the threats from the brutal world, not to the lunacy of Western leaders.
Who, what is threatening the West’s values and way of life? Political fanaticism, religious fundamentalism, and the imminent spread of nuclear weapons, answer the five asylum escapees.
By political fanaticism, do they mean the neoconservatives who believe that the future of humanity depends on the US establishing its hegemony over the world? By religious fundamentalism, do they mean “rapture evangelicals” agitating for armageddon or Christian and Israeli Zionists demanding a nuclear attack on Iran? By spread of nuclear weapons, do they mean Israel’s undeclared and illegal possession of several hundred nuclear weapons?
No. The paranoid military leaders see all the fanaticism, religious and otherwise, and all the threats to humanity as residing outside Western civilization (Israel is inside). The “increasingly brutal world,” of which the leaders warn, is “over there.” Only Muslims are fanatics. All us white guys are rational and sane.
There is nothing brutal about the US/Nato bombing of Serbia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, or the Israeli bombing of Lebanon, or the Israeli ethnic cleansing of the West Bank, or the genocide Israel hopes to commit against Palestinians in Gaza.
All of this, as well as America’s bombing of Somalia, America’s torture dungeons, show trials of “detainees,” and overthrow of elected governments and installation of puppet rulers, is the West’s necessary response to keep the brutal world at bay.
Brutal things happen in the “brutal world” and are entirely the fault of those in the brutal world. None of this would happen if the inhabitants of the brutal world would just do as they are told. How can the civilized world with its monopoly on morality allow people in the brutal world to behave independently? I mean, really! God forbid, they might attack some innocent country.
The “brutal world” consists of those immoral fanatics who object to being marginalized by the West and who reply to mass bombings from the air and to the death and destruction inflicted on them through myriad ways by strapping on a suicide bomb.
Unable to impose its will on countries it has invaded with conventional arms, the West’s military leaders are now prepared to force compliance with the moral world’s will by threatening to nuke those who resist. You see, since the West has the monopoly on m
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19142.htm
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
So your logic is, you are only going to listen to people you already want to believe in?

Im really curious if you read your own words and notice how brainwashed that makes you? If George tells you to drink the Kool-aid and join him on a magic space ship hiding behind a comet, don't.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
So your logic is, you are only going to listen to people you already want to believe in?

Im really curious if you read your own words and notice how brainwashed that makes you? If George tells you to drink the Kool-aid and join him on a magic space ship hiding behind a comet, don't.

Do you even have any idea where the derisive term "kool-aid" comes from? I believe in facts Zzarchov, facts that indicate a severe economic downturn facts that point to the systemic corruption of the exact nature that prevailed just before the great depression facts that indicate the much vaunted "market freedom" was in fact a totally fraudulent conspiracy perpetrated by the champions of capitalism, men and women who regularly graced the covers of our most popular magazines who themselves are corrupt. You're so brainwashed that you think I am, that's an amazing admission right from your own lips that you clearly fail to appreciate.
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
55
Oshawa
I'll take corrupt capitalists over the likes of Uncle Joe, Lil Kim, Castro and other socialist undemocratic dictators who think poverty,oppression and murder is acceptable.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Wow, you really can't hear yourself darkbeaver.

I mean, follow your logic... you claim I'm so brainwashed I think you are? And you can't see, from a logical level, the flaws in that kind of arguement?

I really am starting to wonder if you do need medical help, as If you do I really don't want to pick a fight with someone who does need help and who isn't of sound mind and body.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Really?! Ask Alan Greenspan what he though of Clinton compared to both Bush's and Reagan keeping in mind Greenspan in a libertarian.

Oh I do agree Clinton makes a better steward than Bush. But in the end, their net impact on the economy is fairly minimal on their own.

They are presidents not dictators (political conspiracies aside) and could not do anything without the support of the houses.

Even with their interference, the private citizens of their nations and their competitors worldwide have more influence.

I have no doubt that If their places in history were reversed that the 90's under GW would not have been AS prosperous as they were, but they still would have been prosperous.

Likewise, today under Clinton would still be a recession, though perhaps for less of one.



Don't blame the captain of the ship for capsizing. The crew, the ship and the massive storm had far more to do for it, the captain just gets all the blame(or glory)
 

dancing-loon

House Member
Oct 8, 2007
2,739
36
48
Destroying Glass-Steagall restrictions
One of Greenspan’s first acts as Chairman of the Fed was to call for repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, something which his old friends at J.P.Morgan and Citibank had ardently campaigned for. 5
Glass-Steagall, officially the Banking Act of 1933, introduced the separation of commercial banking from Wall Street investment banking and insurance. Glass-Steagall originally was intended to curb three major problems that led to the severity of the 1930’s wave of bank failures and depression:
Banks were investing their own assets in securities with consequent risk to commercial and savings depositors in event of a stock crash. Unsound loans were made by the banks in order to artificially prop up the price of select securities or the financial position of companies in which a bank had invested its own assets. A bank's financial interest in the ownership, pricing, or distribution of securities inevitably tempted bank officials to press their banking customers into investing in securities which the bank itself was under pressure to sell. It was a colossal conflict of interest and invitation to fraud and abuse.
Banks that offered investment banking services and mutual funds were subject to conflicts of interest and other abuses, thereby resulting in harm to their customers, including borrowers, depositors, and correspondent banks. Similarly, today, with no more Glass-Steagall restraints, banks offering securitized mortgage obligations and similar products via wholly owned Special Purpose Vehicles they create to get the risk “off the bank books,” are complicit in what likely will go down in history as the greatest financial swindle of all times—the sub-prime securitization fraud.
In his history of the Great Crash, economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted, “Congress was concerned that commercial banks in general and member banks of the Federal Reserve System in particular had both aggravated and been damaged by stock market decline partly because of their direct and indirect involvement in the trading and ownership of speculative securities.
“The legislative history of the Glass-Steagall Act,” Galbraith continued, “shows that Congress also had in mind and repeatedly focused on the more subtle hazards that arise when a commercial bank goes beyond the business of acting as fiduciary or managing agent and enters the investment banking business either directly or by establishing an affiliate to hold and sell particular investments.” Galbraith noted that “During 1929 one investment house, Goldman, Sachs & Company, organized and sold nearly a billion dollars' worth of securities in three interconnected investment trusts--Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation; Shenandoah Corporation; and Blue Ridge Corporation. All eventually depreciated virtually to nothing.”
…strategies unimaginable a decade ago…’
The New York Times described the new financial world created by repeal of Glass-Steagall in a June 2007 profile of Goldman Sachs, just weeks prior to the eruption of the sub-prime crisis: “While Wall Street still mints money advising companies on mergers and taking them public, real money - staggering money - is made trading and investing capital through a global array of mind-bending products and strategies unimaginable a decade ago.” They were referring to the securitization revolution.
The Times quoted Goldman Sachs chairman Lloyd Blankfein on the new financial securitization, hedge fund and derivatives world: “We've come full circle, because this is exactly what the Rothschilds or J. P. Morgan, the banker were doing in their heyday. What caused an aberration was the Glass-Steagall Act.”9
Blankfein as most of Wall Street bankers and financial insiders saw the New Deal as an aberration, openly calling for return to the days J. P. Morgan and other tycoons of the ‘Gilded Age’ of abuses in the 1920’s. Glass-Steagall, Blankfein’s "aberration" was finally eliminated because of Bill Clinton. Goldman Sachs was a prime contributor to the Clinton campaign and even sent Clinton its chairman Robert Rubin in 1993, first as “economic czar” then in 1995 as Treasury Secretary. Today, another former Goldman Sachs chairman, Henry Paulson is again US Treasury Secretary under Republican Bush. Money power knows no party.
Robert Kuttner, co-founder of the Economic Policy Institute, testified before US Congressman Barney Frank's Committee on Banking and Financial Services in October 2007, evoking the specter of the Great Depression:
“Since repeal of Glass Steagall in 1999, after more than a decade of de facto inroads, super-banks have been able to re-enact the same kinds of structural conflicts of interest that were endemic in the 1920s - lending to speculators, packaging and securitizing credits and then selling them off, wholesale or retail, and extracting fees at every step along the way. And, much of this paper is even more opaque to bank examiners than its counterparts were in the 1920s. Much of it isn't paper at all, and the whole process is supercharged by computers and automated formulas.” 10
Greenspan held Fed rates to those historic lows, lows not seen for that length of time since the Great Depression, until June 30, 2004, when he began the first of what were to be fourteen successive rate increases before he left office in 2006. He took Fed funds rates from the low of 1% up to 4.5% in nineteen months. In the process, he killed the bubble that was laying the real estate golden egg.
In speech after speech the Fed chairman made clear that his ultra-easy money regime after January 2001 had as prime focus the encouragement of investing in home mortgage debt. The sub-prime phenomenon—something only possible in the era of asset securitization and Glass-Steagall repeal, combined with unregulated OTC derivatives trades—was the predictable result of deliberate Greenspan policy. The close scrutiny of the historical record makes that abundantly clear.

Notes
1 Woodward, Bob, Maestro: Alan Greenspan's Fed and the American Economic Boom, Nov 2000. Woodward’s book is an example of the charmed treatment Greenspan was accorded by the major media. Woodward’s boss at the Washington Post, Catharine Meyer Graham, daughter of the legendary Wall Street investment banker Andre Meyer, was an intimate Greenspan friend. The book can be seen as a calculated part of the Greenspan myth-creation by the influential circles of the financial establishm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7876

IT AIN'T OVER BY A LONG SHOT. I heard George Soros say today that dollar hegemony was dead. If that's the case we will see global war, because the military machine is all that's left. D​


Hello, Beaver;
here is a response to above article from out West! ;-)

"Interesting.
I do believe that the corruption amongst lending institutions in the US is what is biting them in the butts now and going forward. CIBC is the only bank of the BIG banks in Canada, that I am aware of that went completely gungho into investing billions in the subprime mortgage business in the US. (It's like they are so stupid, and greedy... you'd think that they learned from their Enron affair...but...no!)

Here in Canada, the Bank Act, is a lot more stringent with it's rules.... and the Canadian Securities Commission overseeing the mutual fund industry, ensures that financial institutions do not invest more than a certain percentage (small) into their own stock in any of their own mutual fund portfolios.

Again, this writer believes too, that the lessons of the 1920's and 30's will have to be learned by today's society ...all over again. Hey, we read the history books but we do not learn by our ancestors' example. We have to fall, and then we have to learn to pick ourselves back up again. It's normal. It's cyclical. And for those who know this, and have learned the lessons of the past, they are the ones who can take advantage of this cycle, and come out shining in the end.!"

Is there anything in it, you didn't know yet? Does it make sense even?:smile:
Sorry, folks, I just plunked myself in the middle of your highly interesting conversation.
:cool: d-l


 

Lester

Council Member
Sep 28, 2007
1,062
12
38
65
Ardrossan, Alberta
Most of these subprime mortgages,credit cards and car loans haven't reset to the higher interest rates yet, this is only the beginning of this crisis, wait until we get to the worst of it. this could be disasterous. There could be a lot of businesses that fail over this because they can no longer access bankloans/overdrafts which leads to layoffs which means people can't pay their mortgage - this wiil drag in defaults on prime mortgages as well -hopefully I'm wrong.
 

dancing-loon

House Member
Oct 8, 2007
2,739
36
48
Most of these subprime mortgages,credit cards and car loans haven't reset to the higher interest rates yet, this is only the beginning of this crisis, wait until we get to the worst of it. this could be disasterous. There could be a lot of businesses that fail over this because they can no longer access bankloans/overdrafts which leads to layoffs which means people can't pay their mortgage - this wiil drag in defaults on prime mortgages as well -hopefully I'm wrong.
This is what my friend has been saying to me already two years ago. The baby-boomers will be retiring in a couple of years and flood the market with big expensive houses as they downsize for their retirement. Who will be able to afford these big luxury homes?

I'm glad I don't have a mortgage!! Perhaps I could pick up a cheap house when the market gets flooded with fore-closures!

I found this website, although American, it will likely be the same for Canada.
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10534992
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
“Bernanke Rides to the Rescue”

More Cowboy Deception
by Shepherd Bliss / January 24th, 2008
“Bernanke Rides to the Rescue” assures an heroic headline in the Jan.
23 Wild West’s “San Francisco Chronicle.” Yet all the king’s men on all
the king’s horses with all their band-aids and sugar pills will not be
able to prop up the rapidly crashing US economy. “Fed Gallops to the
Rescue,” the corporate newspaper’s sub-headline continues its cowboy
deception.
The Federal Reserve cut its short-term interest rate by an
unprecedented .75% on Jan. 22. This is its largest single day slash
since the central bank started disclosing its policy moves over two
decades ago. Ben Bernanke’s cut and the Bush-Democrats alliance to give
taxpayers a $800 gift so consumers can spend the economy back to growth
will fail. Our leaders are driving the Republic to ruin—by their
over-extended war-making and by depleting our natural and human
resources. Other empires, including the Roman Empire, have gone this
route.
Where was the National Guard when it was needed after the Hurricane
Katrina hit? This will not be the last “natural disaster” provoked
partly by an increasingly chaotic global climate. If Hurricane Katrina
taught us anything, it is that we cannot depend on this government in
the face of crises. It contributes to making catastrophes by supporting
polluting, climate-changing behavior and in other disaster-making ways.
Our domestic scene is unraveling, economically and in other ways. As
people get more anxious about their futures, the media’s propaganda
machine encourages them to rush out and spend, rather than look at the
root, systemic causes of the failing economy.
A Chhttp://www.dissidentvoice.org/
 

dancing-loon

House Member
Oct 8, 2007
2,739
36
48
“Bernanke Rides to the Rescue”

More Cowboy Deception
by Shepherd Bliss / January 24th, 2008
“Bernanke Rides to the Rescue” assures an heroic headline in the Jan.
23 Wild West’s “San Francisco Chronicle.” Yet all the king’s men on all
the king’s horses with all their band-aids and sugar pills will not be
able to prop up the rapidly crashing US economy. “Fed Gallops to the
Rescue,” the corporate newspaper’s sub-headline continues its cowboy
deception.
The Federal Reserve cut its short-term interest rate by an
unprecedented .75% on Jan. 22. This is its largest single day slash
since the central bank started disclosing its policy moves over two
decades ago. Ben Bernanke’s cut and the Bush-Democrats alliance to give
taxpayers a $800 gift so consumers can spend the economy back to growth
will fail. Our leaders are driving the Republic to ruin—by their
over-extended war-making and by depleting our natural and human
resources. Other empires, including the Roman Empire, have gone this
route.
Where was the National Guard when it was needed after the Hurricane
Katrina hit? This will not be the last “natural disaster” provoked
partly by an increasingly chaotic global climate. If Hurricane Katrina
taught us anything, it is that we cannot depend on this government in
the face of crises. It contributes to making catastrophes by supporting
polluting, climate-changing behavior and in other disaster-making ways.
Our domestic scene is unraveling, economically and in other ways. As
people get more anxious about their futures, the media’s propaganda
machine encourages them to rush out and spend, rather than look at the
root, systemic causes of the failing economy.
A Chhttp://www.dissidentvoice.org/
Something irritates me a little, I can't share the statement that Katrina was solely a natural disaster. From what I remember, it became a disaster because of human error, sloppyness and negligence.

Mr. Bliss seems to want to dramatize the current economic doom-saying by pulling in natural disasters from the past and future!
 

Lester

Council Member
Sep 28, 2007
1,062
12
38
65
Ardrossan, Alberta
A thought from Lou Dobbs

NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Bush's assurances that we'll all be "just fine" if he and Congress can work out an economic stimulus package seem a little hollow this morning.
Much like Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke's assurances last May that the subprime mortgage meltdown would be contained and not affect the broader economy. And it seems Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has spent most of the past year trying to influence Chinese economic policy rather than setting the direction of U.S. economic policy.
There is no question that Bush, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will quickly come up with an economic stimulus package simply because they can no longer ignore our economic and financial crisis. That economic stimulus plan will amount to about 1 percent of our nation's gross domestic product, an estimated $150 billion.
But all of us should recognize that the stimulus package will be inadequate to drive sustainable growth in our $13 trillion economy. An emergency Fed rate cut and an economic stimulus plan are short-term responses to our complex economic problems, nothing more than bandages for a hemorrhaging economy.
Bush, Pelosi, Reid and the presidential candidates of both parties have an opportunity now, and I believe an obligation, to adjust the public policy mistakes of the past quarter-century that have led to this crisis. And only through courageous policy decisions will we be able to steer this nation's economy away from the brink of outright disaster.
We all have to acknowledge that our problems were in part brought on by the failure of our government to regulate the institutions and markets that are now in crisis. The irresponsible fiscal policies of the past decade have led to a national debt that amounts to $9 trillion. The irresponsible so-called free trade policies of Democratic and Republican administrations over the past three decades have produced a trade debt that now amounts to more than $6 trillion, and that debt is rising faster than our national debt. All of which is contributing to the plunge in the value of the U.S. dollar.
At precisely the point in our history in which this nation has become ever more dependent on foreign producers for everything from clothing to computers to technology to energy, our weakened dollar is making the price of an ever-increasing number of imported goods even more expensive.
All Americans will soon have to face a bitter and now obvious truth: Our national, political and economic leaders have squandered this nation's wealth, and the price of this profligacy is enormous, and the bill has just come due for all of us.
Bernanke endorsed the concept of a short-term economic stimulus package, but he cautioned that the money must be spent correctly: "You'd hope that [consumers] would spend it on things that are domestically produced so that the spending power doesn't go elsewhere."
Just what would you have us spend it on? The truth is that consumers spend most of their money on foreign imports, and any stimulus package probably would be stimulating foreign economies rather than our own. Imports, for example, account for 92 percent of our non-athletic footwear, 92 percent of audio video equipment, 89 percent of our luggage and 73 percent of power tools. In fact, between 1997 and 2006, only five of the 114 industries examined in a U.S. Business and Industry Council report gained market share against import competition.
And let's be honest and straightforward, as I hope our president and the candidates for president will be: This stimulus will not prevent a recession. It may ease the pain for millions of Americans, but a recession we will have. The question is how deep, how prolonged and how painful will it be. Unfortunately, we're about to find out how committed and capable our national leaders are at mitigating that pain and producing realistic policy decisions for this nation that now stands at the brink.

Here's a guy whose a realist - he sees the forest and the trees but more importanly the fast approaching fire.