From Krugman

Last week the House passed a bill setting rules for pay packages at a wide range of financial institutions… Unfortunately, the House measure is opposed by the Obama administration, which still seems to operate on the principle that what’s good for Wall Street is good for America.

Very sad.

Very sad stupid.

Small edit…

News item in headlines on democracynow: Wall St. is gaming FRB on its announced purchases of securities, by selling them to the FRB at higher prices. No dollar amount attached.

I’m sticking with sad, because of all the hardship his disastrous policies will bring.

But, but… Obama says what’s good for Wall Street is good for America!

Heh. It used to be that whatever was good for General Motors was good for America… That worked out real well.

Having worked on Wall St. for nearly 30 years, when I heard that story I was surprised I hadn’t thought of it myself. It’s so obvious a way to make profits.

“Shorter GOP: it’s working, kill it!”

watch out for Social Security, it’s being used too often for safety as illustration of good socialist medical care from your government in action.

I’m not really clear on what’s being done (I’m an economic doofus) but it sounds sleazy at best and illegal at worst…?

This is significant, because now the thefts are occurring in broad dayligtht, because the perps know there will be no consequences.

The headline didn’t have much information, so I’m not sure exactly how Wall St. did it. But it must be easy to game the system if the FRB announces its purchases in advance, and not necessarily illegal.

“You’re supposed to respect the police.”

In which Article do we find that?

Hang on… if no one is punished or even charged, wouldn’t that make this de facto legal?

Why are there no AGs who can bring suit against these activities? Why MUST we wait for SEC or other regulators?

So many of these “things” wreak of conspiracy and RICO and fraud, bribery, insider trading, failure to disclose and so forth? Where is the enforcement apparatus?

In voir dire in federal court once, I got called for a police brutality case. I responded that I thought police were routinely and gratuitously brutal. Somehow I didn’t get on that jury.

Respect is fine. We should respect police, they the citizens. Respect is often earned and can easily be lost by poor behavior.

I tend to think that police have a chip on their shoulder and have done so many egregious things they have largely lost my respect as a group.

A typical traffic stop is a perfect example where cops treat you like a potential armed terrorist. That’s just crazy.

We should check if bluejeansntshirt is lurking. *g*

Quel surprise! *g*

Have you never had a good experience with police? I certainly have….was in a bad wreck, they got me EMS/emergency room, even with all my stuff; clearly ran a red light; a warning. etc.

who the hell picked the guests for Washington Journal today? Yeah, we all needt some old white guy from the National journal lecturing us about how “white people are hurt by racism, too…”

and of course, a republican senator from Nebraska is the go-to guy on what america needs for health care reform.

Mornin’, BT, pups

Leave Swiss Banks Alone

From NYT.

Another take on the same story from Financial Times

A former official of the US Treasury and the Fed said the situation had reached the point that “everyone games them. Their transparency hurts them. Everyone picks their pocket.”

I’ve had very few experiences with police, thank goodness.

Not to offend, does that make your opinion uninformed? Not saying police are perfect, but your earlier opinion seems over-broad.

Oh, I’ve put out of my mind the one really bad experience (won’t go into details) when the policy officer responded in a very respectable well trained way. However, I thought at the time that if the same thing had occurred in a trailer park to a black woman, rather than to a white woman in an expensive house, his treatment might not have been the same. I’m very alert to the fact that I get positively profiled.

In that situation you were obviously a victim and they were wearing their rescue the public for emergency hat. Usually they are wearing their catch the crook hat and see everyone as a possible miscreant.

Well, I do a lot of reading. Don’t have to experience everything personally in order to know about it, do you? Guess that would exclude most of us from talking about war.

If you been a victim of false arrest and then spent the night in the tombs with real criminals and treated as one you would not think of the police the same way.

Most of my experiences with police were not positive. And even it were only 20% and it’s more like 75% bad, that would be outrageous to think that 1 in 5 interactions there is abuse of police power.

Somehow, the quartering of British troops in colonists’ homes came to mind.

Irony in Boston.

Does that rise to routine and gratuitous brutality? Still seems like a broad brush to me..that was my point. Let alone, a good way not to be picked for the jury ;))

Yes, I overstated the case to avoid getting on the jury.

A few high school friends ended up as police officers in the local city force.

Bulked up on steroids for personal encounters.

Off to read. I’ve been blessed with several good books in a row. Now into Three Cups of Tea, a favorite here, and for good reason.

Say hello to Angela for me.

Will be talking to my vet (he’s been off for a week) this week but it looks like we’re losing the battle with Gigi.

Off to swim in the great capitalist cesspool.

Be good to yourselves, and all other living things.

Namaste

Re: that video with the harpy Malkin, did you get a load of the expression on Cynthia Tucker’s face while Malkin spoke? Priceless!

SD, I am so sorry…things had been looking up with the wt. gain, I thought. Facing a decline or a decision is really hard. My best.

Angela says hi and thanks. Please take it easy and let us know what you learn. ;(

The Real Problem with the Senate – Small State Bias.

That’s not a problem; it’s a feature. And one which the Democratic strategists in their “get the big states to minimize campaign costs” non-50-state strategy conceded to the conservative Republicans.

If progressives support the progressives in the small states, it is possible to turn this around. But this requires a 50-state strategy, including not writing off Utah, Idaho, the Dakotas, or the Deep South.

And then there’s the Inland Empire of California, Texas (outside of Austin and the Valley), Georgia, and North Florida to consider. Folks write off those too. So maybe to fix the problem in the Senate, we need a 435-Congressional District strategy. Every voter must be given the opportunity to decide between the current folks and a progressive candidate. What we lack is the will, the candidate bench, and the ability to finance 435 progressive primary races.