This is very interesting. As the Newtster rightfully points out, if this were a bail-out proposed by a democrat the republicans would be up in arms.

These forums are divided pretty clearly, regular readers can pretty much guess what they will hear from Poster A or Poster B except when it comes to this bail-out issue. There's more common ground. Perhaps because the line is redrawn in money matters because we all know it's about the haves and the have nots. Perhaps also because it's a damned mess and with nearly eight years of Bush it's hard to deny his administration is part of the problem.

Anyway, please read this and let me know how you all feel.

Before D.C. Gets Our Money, It Owes Us Some Answers [Newt Gingrich]

Watching Washington rush to throw taxpayer money at Wall Street has been sobering and a little frightening.

We are being told Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has a plan which will shift $700 billion in obligations from private companies to the taxpayer.

We are being warned that this $700 billion bailout is the only answer to a crisis.

We are being reassured that we can trust Secretary Paulson "because he knows what he is doing".

Congress had better ask a lot of questions before it shifts this much burden to the taxpayer and shifts this much power to a Washington bureaucracy.

Imagine that the political balance of power in Washington were different.

If this were a Democratic administration the Republicans in the House and Senate would be demanding answers and would be organizing for a “no” vote.

If a Democratic administration were proposing this plan, Republicans would realize that having Connecticut Democratic senator Chris Dodd (the largest recipient of political funds from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) as chairman of the Banking Committee guarantees that the Obama-Reid-Pelosi-Paulson plan that will emerge will be much worse as legislation than it started out as the Paulson proposal.

If this were a Democratic proposal, Republicans would remember that the Democrats wrote a grotesque housing bailout bill this summer that paid off their left-wing allies with taxpayer money, which despite its price tag of $300 billion has apparently failed as of last week, and could expect even more damage in this bill.

But because this gigantic power shift to Washington and this avalanche of taxpayer money is being proposed by a Republican administration, the normal conservative voices have been silent or confused.

It’s time to end the silence and clear up the confusion.

Congress has an obligation to protect the taxpayer.

Congress has an obligation to limit the executive branch to the rule of law.

Congress has an obligation to perform oversight.

Congress was designed by the Founding Fathers to move slowly, precisely to avoid the sudden panic of a one-week solution that becomes a 20-year mess.

There are four major questions that have to be answered before Congress adopts a new $700 billion burden for the American taxpayer. On each of these questions, I believe Congress’s answer will be “no” if it slows down long enough to examine the facts.

Question One: Is the current financial crisis the only crisis affecting the economy?

Answer: There are actually multiple crises hurting the economy.

There is an immediate crisis of liquidity on Wall Street.

There is a longer time crisis of a bad energy policy transferring $700 billion a year to foreign countries (so foreign sovereign capital funds are now using our energy payments to buy our companies).

There is a longer term crisis of Sarbanes-Oxley (the last "crisis"-inspired congressional disaster) crippling entrepreneurial start ups, driving public companies private, driving smart business people off public boards, and driving offerings from New York to London.

There is a long term crisis of a high corporate tax rate driving business out of the United States.

No solution to the immediate liquidity crisis should further cripple the American economy for the long run. Instead, the liquidity solution should be designed to strengthen the economy for competition in the world market.


Question Two: Is a big bureaucracy solution the only answer?

Answer: There is a non-bureaucratic solution that would stop the liquidity crisis almost overnight and do it using private capital rather than taxpayer money.

Four reform steps will have capital flowing with no government bureaucracy and no taxpayer burden.

First, suspend the mark-to-market rule which is insanely driving companies to unnecessary bankruptcy. If short selling can be suspended on 799 stocks (an arbitrary number and a warning of the rule by bureaucrats which is coming under the Paulson plan), the mark-to-market rule can be suspended for six months and then replaced with a more accurate three year rolling average mark-to-market.

Second, repeal Sarbanes-Oxley. It failed with Freddy Mac. It failed with Fannie Mae. It failed with Bear Stearns. It failed with Lehman Brothers. It failed with AIG. It is crippling our entrepreneurial economy. I spent three days this week in Silicon Valley. Everyone agreed Sarbanes-Oxley was crippling the economy. One firm told me they would bring more than 20 companies public in the next year if the law was repealed. Its Sarbanes-Oxley’s $3 million per startup annual accounting fee that is keeping these companies private.

Third, match our competitors in China and Singapore by going to a zero capital gains tax. Private capital will flood into Wall Street with zero capital gains and it will come at no cost to the taxpayer. Even if you believe in a static analytical model in which lower capital gains taxes mean lower revenues for the Treasury, a zero capital gains tax costs much less than the Paulson plan. And if you believe in a historic model (as I do), a zero capital gains tax would lead to a dramatic increase in federal revenue through a larger, more competitive and more prosperous economy.

Fourth, immediately pass an “all of the above” energy plan designed to bring home $500 billion of the $700 billion a year we are sending overseas. With that much energy income the American economy would boom and government revenues would grow.


Question Three: Will the Paulson plan be implemented with transparency and oversight?

Answer: Implementation of the Paulson plan is going to be a mess. It is going to be a great opportunity for lobbyists and lawyers to make a lot of money. Who are the financial magicians Paulson is going to hire? Are they from Wall Street? If they’re from Wall Street, aren't they the very people we are saving? And doesn’t that mean that we’re using the taxpayers’ money to hire people to save their friends with even more taxpayer money? Won't this inevitably lead to crony capitalism? Who is going to do oversight? How much transparency is there going to be? We still haven't seen the report which led to bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is "secret". Is our $700 billion going to be spent in "secret" too? In practical terms, will a bill be written in public so people can analyze it? Or will it be written in a closed room by the very people who have been collecting money from the institutions they are now going to use our money to bail out?

Question Four: In two months we will have an election and then there will be a new administration. Is this plan something we want to trust to a post-Paulson Treasury?

Answer: We don’t know who will inherit this plan.

The balance of power on election day will shift to either McCain or Obama. Who will they pick for Treasury Secretary? What will their allies want done? We are about to give the next administration a level of detailed control over big companies on a scale even FDR did not exercise during the Great Depression. Is this really wise?

For these reasons I hope Congress will slow down and have an open debate.

And in the course of that debate, I hope someone will introduce an economic recovery act that makes America a better place to grow jobs. I hope the details will be made public before the vote.

For more details on my action plan for getting the American economy back on track and building long-term economic prosperity, you can read this message recorded yesterday to American Solutions members.

This is a very important week for the integrity of the Congress.

This is a very important week for the future of America.

If Washington wants our money, then it owes us some answers.

nothing changes if laws remain intact as they are.

Oversight must come with laws that have teeth in them, as it is consequences that constrain manipulation of law. remember, those that break the laws are those same perpetrators that laws are designed to constrain from practicing breaches of moral, ethical and anti-social behavior.

Newt is right, there are wiser plans of action.

No one has listened to him for years. He was the "mean man" in Congress, remember?

BUt nothing moves America like tragedy, catastrophy and attacks on our way of life.
Just when America was getting used to the way things work.LOL the happy middle ground between bi polar extremes...hhmmmm.


Now the crisis in financial markets is too complicated for America to comprehend, huh?

Think about the reality of the situation.

NO one wants to work for their own abundance, but rather employ the law of diminishing returns to investment. Making idle profits while we go about our day. Disdain for sweat equity, the embrace of laizze faire capitalism that shares the fruit of endeavor with unaccoutable ownership and voting with our wallets when these values fall short of expectation.

Stock prices are one thing, but ownership shares risk and reward. Only the most astute can foresee aversions to reward and escape imminent risk to value. That is why we have professionals investing in capital markets while the plumber fixes the faucet.

What we do not have is a check and balance to dividend declarations.

What we do not have is a universal rule of law determining the criteria for declaring dividends.

What we do not have is any consequences for losses suffered by owners of faceless corporate sttructures, and are left with inadequate and vague guidances for corporate behavior.


This whole mess would not exist if owners were accountable for losses in reciprocation to the reward of dividend participation in the fruits of the labors of the public corporations.

SImply put, if the business loses money, a quarterly audit determines the amount needed from shareholders to bolster liquidity and solvency of the public corportion with threat of lawsuit to collect said recapitalization for safe business conduct.

If the business makes money, quarterly dividends are paid to shareholders on the basis of the excess in store not required for lquidity and solvency of the business.

This would limit the reward to those that stand behind the risks.


Same principle should apply to taxation for the maintenace of our government.

If you pay no taxes, then you receive no benefit from the government...no entitlements, personal or corporate.

This country will not suck it up and play fair until this "consequence and reward principle" is a reciprocal one.

I think Newt is a rat bastard. A hypocrite of the highest order. Still even a broken clock gets the time right twice a day.

America knows what time it, twice a day, huh?

You know what...

I really don't care if Newt is right or wrong...

I want them dudes that work for US the people to do what is right for a change.

See it ain't Newt or any other person in their circles that they need to listen to.

It is US... People like you and me.

And they need to listen to us real quick and with both ears.

Cause I ACTUALLY believe in COUNTRY FIRST. I want my grandkids to have liberty. I want your grankdchildren to have liberty.

I agree.

I would rather America be reduced to third world status than continue in these delusions that we can dictate to the world how things work in our present model that is broken.

Will the world quietly let the US settle down and be a happy place of peace and contentment for people pursuing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and conduct our daily affairs according to our Constitution declaring "we the people " and governing ourselves according to "of for and by the people" ?

nope.


we gave that up when we pushed globalism and open and free market participation beyond our borders looking for that boon of a bonanza that would manifest the dream of reaping rewards of consumer spending by a willing world ready and able to embrace servitude to Henry Ford's model of "the law of diminishing returns" and the monopolistic largesse of "economy of scale".

The windfall we have reaped is the whirlwind.

It's over.

I want a lot of things too.


Chief among them is to live among men that speak the truth willingly.


Have you seen this utopia anywhere? I haven't.



oh well..................

We won't become 3rd world status...

You see, if we allow the market to stablize itself..

The rest of the world will also stablize.

It is all a house of cards.

If it caused a world wide colapse the truth of our strength would show.

I would put US up against the rest of the world when it comes to dig in, root hog or die.

We can, given a level playing field... out produce, out play and out smart any other country out there.

and you all know it.

Wouldee aren't you the same person who questioned my use of the word we when referring to the American people?

Now you come up with "America knows what time it, twice a day, huh?wink laugh" in response to my saying "I think Newt is a rat bastard. A hypocrite of the highest order. Still even a broken clock gets the time right twice a day."

Another poke at me where you not so subtly attempt to question my patriotism. A favorite tactic of the far right that by the way people are all aware of.

You really are a piece of work.

It bothered me for a second that you twisted, again, what I said but upon further reflection I am glad you posted. It reveals quite abit about your personality and thought processes. I am beginning to understand you much better.

Again, I have to say this to another poster, don't put words in my mouth.

The oil sheiks in the middle east and China would disagree with you.

If we negate the value of their holdings of US Dollars and printed new currency not tendering the old any legality, then maybe we could plow through the clods and sow seed again, but not in their fields, my friend.

WE WILL HAVE TO DO SO SELF SUFFICIENTLY AND DEFEND OUR ACTIONS TO THE LAST MAN STANDING NOT HAVING SPILLED HIS BLOOD AND FALLING TO SLEEP INA COLLECTIVE DIRT NAP.

OOPS. SORRY. HIT THE CAPLOCK KEY.

WW3 anyone?

You see, as all publicly traded corporations continue to move ownership to foreign investors, those foereign investors increasingly dictate the actions of the Boards of Directors that implement whose interests the corporations will serve.

declared dividends to foreign investors take more and more Dollars offshore to reivnvest back into stocks for growth and wealth generation.

That principle has always been the carrot for investment.

Those that have the capital make money and dictate how they expect that mney to be made with expectations attached.

tELL THEM THAT USURY LAWS MATTER.

they will do this......




TILT

whoa


you got that all wrong.

it is not a slap at you at all.

I actually agree with you.


check that out.


now read it without filters.

here is the insight needed to understand my point regarding Newt.


he is right and change is needed, but his plan is more of the same, even though wisdom is needed for a change.

His ideas for remedy are incorrrect, but his call to remedy is correct, and no onwe has been listening to that.

Then look at what I ahve to say about how corporations are the responsibility of the shareholders alone to fly straight and right and true and you will see that such a principle is defiant of Newt Gingrich's proposals and revealing of how short sided his own ideas are, even though he recognizes, and has for many years, that system is broken and failure prone.



This country's first line of defence originally was those that had something to lose and they alone were the first ones to pick up arms and spill their blood first in defence of this nation.

They aso were the only ones that voted, too.

That is all bye bye now.

No one is accountable anymore.

everyone, mostly those with nothing at stake are robbing the store and looting the public trust and treasury.

me...me...me.....me first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


the free lunch program is over.


know what I mean?


Accountability or no reward. pure and simple.


not going to happen in this system.


nope.