The Real Reason Timothy Geithner is afraid of Elizabeth Warren

John Talbot – Huffington Post

Snip - The banks have made no secret as to where they will find this increase in cash flow. They intend to soak their small retail customers, their consumer and small business borrowers, their credit card holders and their small depositors with increased costs and fees and are continuing many of the bad mortgage practices that led to the crisis (ARM's, option pay deals, zero down payments, second mortgages, teaser rates, etc)

As reported on HuffPost last week, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has expressed opposition to the possible nomination of Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, according to a source with knowledge of Geithner's views.

One can assume that Geithner, being very close to the nation's biggest banks, is concerned that Warren, if chosen, will exercise her new policing and enforcement powers to restrict those abusive practices at our commercial banks that have been harmful to consumers and depositors.

Certainly, Warren is not the commercial banking industry's first pick to serve in this new role. And unlike other legislation in which an industry's lobbying effort would naturally slow or cease once the legislation is passed, the new financial reform bill is continuing to attract enormous lobbying action from the banks. The reason is simple. The bill has been written to put a great deal of power as to how strongly it is implemented in the hands of its regulators, some of which remain to be chosen. The bank lobby will work incredibly hard to see that Warren, the person most responsible for initiating and fighting for the idea of a consumer financial protection group, is denied the opportunity to head it. More...

It’s Not a Democracy Unless we Call It Our Own – 6 Ways to Make it Happen

Let the ideas percolate up from a thousand localities!

Jim Hightower

On the Fourth of July, we celebrated Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, Madison and all the other great men who created our democracy, right?

Not exactly. The Founders did create the framework for a democratic republic, but they didn't create much democracy. Indeed, in America's first presidential election, only 4 percent of the people were even eligible to vote.

The Founders created the possibility for democracy, but it took the struggle (often bloody and always hard) of ordinary people over the years to create the substance. In some decades, we've made advances; in others, we've fallen back - including in the past three decades, when the power of America's workaday majority has steadily been usurped by corporate elites. So now, We the People must put America back on its historic path toward economic and political democracy.

"Fine," you might say, "but how? I'm just one person. What can I do?"

1) Start by considering what's reasonable for you. Few of us can be full-time activists, and the list of issues and problems is intimidating, long and complex. So just take one bite, choosing an issue that interests you most, then start contributing what you can (time, skills, contacts, money, enthusiasm, etc.) to making progress. No contribution is too small. If you can only devote half a day a week, or an hour a day or even minutes a day - it all adds up. As a young Oregon woman said of her half-day-a-week volunteer door-knocking in a legislative race: "I was only drop in the bucket, but I was one drop. And without all of us, the bucket would not have filled up."

2) Inform yourself. A little effort can quickly connect you to accessible, usable information and insights on any given topic, allowing you to gain a "citizen's level" of expertise so you can talk to others about it. Read progressive periodicals, tune in to progressive broadcasts, get information from public-interest groups, and plug into good websites and blogs.

Don't know how to go online? Nearly all public libraries not only have computers, but also librarians and volunteers who'll assist you in finding the info you want and teach you how to use the machines.

Or find a youngster (maybe your grandchildren or someone at church) who'll help you. Yes, you can do this!

3) Democracy belongs to those who show up. Join with others. Everyone feels better when they're part of a group, a movement, a community (whether real or virtual). In your own town or neighborhood, many others are either already working together or willing to help form a group - seek them out, maybe at bookstores, book clubs, coffee shops, events, churches, blogs, Websites and other meeting places.

4) A community is more than a collection of issues and endless meetings. Combine the serious with the social, and remember the Yugoslavian proverb, "You can fight the gods and still have fun!" So discuss your issues and strategies at potluck suppers (bring the kids, have some music, pour a little wine), throw an annual festival of politics, create weekly sessions of beer-mug democracy at local taverns, set aside one day a week for Big Talk (rather than small talk) at the coffeeshop, etc.

5) Become the media. Create a local newsletter, blog, bulletin board (on the wall or online), Internet radio broadcast, etc. Just as importantly, enlist high-school or community college speech and journalism teachers to help you learn how to do radio and TV interviews and how to get local media to cover your issues. Also, get them to train you and others in pubic speaking, so you can have your own speakers' bureau to address clubs, churches, schools, etc.

6) Hold your own "what to do" sessions in your community. Don't wait for national progressive groups, which haven't figured out a cohesive strategy for focusing on people's anger about the meekness of Washington's Democratic leaders. Instead, have your own discussions about what should be done nationally - if anything - and start zapping those ideas to other communities, heads of national groups, progressive media outlets and so forth. Let the ideas percolate up from a thousand localities!

That's what democracy is. Some assembly required.

Jim Randel

10 Financial Bromides I never want to hear again.

One good thing (perhaps the only good thing) coming out of the current financial meltdown is that I no longer have to listen to the self-serving hype of financial "advisors" claiming to know what is best for me ... such as:

1. "There is no better investment a person can make than buying a house."

A particular favorite of real estate agents and the National Association of Realtors.

2. "A diversified stock portfolio is the best investment strategy there is."

Even before the meltdown, my S&P index fund was about where it was ten years prior.

3. "Annuities are a great investment because they protect your downside."

Only if you die.

4. "Fannie Mae ... great stock ... has the implicit backing of the U.S. Government."

Oops.

5. "Mortgage securities rated AAA - can't make a better investment than that."

Downgraded to junk status shortly thereafter.

6. "A mortgage broker can help you find the best mortgage available."

The higher the interest rate you pay, the more the mortgage broker makes.

7. "Cash or cash equivalents are dumb - you lose to inflation."

The only investment I have that has not lost value.

8. "A laddered portfolio of municipal bonds is your safest approach."

Except when municipalities claim they need a bailout to survive.

9. "Buy great American companies like GE and you can't go wrong."

And so I bought GE at $50/share.

10. "What are you going to do ... put your money under a mattress?"

Not a bad strategy right now.

Jim Randel is the author of The Skinny on the Housing Crisis (Clover Leaf 2008) and Confessions of a Real Estate Entrepreneur .

Besides putting forth a new $4.9 billion package of tax hikes, Senate Democrats plan to pursue other tax changes, including a requirement that online retailers such as Amazon report its California sales to state tax authorities each month.

Democratic budget aides recommend that the Senate approve a more stringent version of Assembly Bill 2078, which requires online retailers to notify California customers that they owe use tax on their purchases.

The bill was watered down in Assembly committee, but Senate aides suggest that lawmakers pursue an earlier version that required online retailers to give the names, addresses and purchase details of transactions to California authorities each month. The Senate budget committee estimates the state could generate at least $100 million annually.

Californians are already required to file use tax on their Internet purchases, but few currently do and the state has trouble enforcing the law. The state collects about $10 million annually from residents who pay this tax on their income tax forms.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has opposed attempts to increase tax collection on internet purchases in the past. But Democrats say that collecting more taxes on online purchases would even the playing field for brick-and-mortar stores in California, which collect sales taxes at the point of purchase.

A Senate budget subcommittee is scheduled to review the Internet tax idea today. The same panel will consider recommendations to suspend the professional licenses of delinquent taxpayers, as well as require banks to share information on those individuals.

Posted by Kevin Yamamura

Read more:

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capitolalertlatest/2010/05/democrats-seek.html#ixzz0owo1rkwe

Why is the Fed so opposed to an audit and what does it have to hide ?

John Talbot Salon.com

Commercial banks, by law, have to hold a certain percentage of their deposits as cash at the Federal Reserve. From January 1959 until August 2008, the total of these reserves held by the commercial banks at the Fed grew from $11.1 billion to $46.2 billion. At no time during this almost 50-year period did the total bank reserves held at the Fed exceed the minimum required by law by more than $2 billion.

But since August 2008, these bank reserves held at the Fed have exploded to more than $1.2 trillion (as of March 2010), even though only $65.6 billion was required to be deposited by law.

This increase in excess reserves resulted directly from the Fed's policy of dramatically increasing the quantity (and lowering the quality threshold) of assets it bought in the marketplace. During the past 20 months, the Fed has tripled the size of its balance sheet by acquiring more than $1.5 trillion of new assets, more than $1 trillion of which are mortgage-backed securities.

What is going on here? Why would commercial banks hold $1 trillion more than they legally had to in reserves at the Fed, earning only 0.25 percent interest per year, and why would the Fed buy more than $1 trillion of mortgage securities of undisclosed quality in the marketplace?More...