Home » The Watercooler for 11/03/09 9:00 AM
The Watercooler for 11/03/09 9:00 AM
DFA's home for a free form, open-ended discussion of what matters most to committed progressive activists.
Watercooler resets everyday at 1am, 9am and 5pm. Past threads can be found in the Watercooler Archive
And thanks to all of the other strong and intelligent woman who blog here and work to improve our democracy in this wonderful United States of America.
Good Luck to the Democrats and cheers for Lindab.
Never in the history of the world has there been a Democratic Republic with over 300 million people that has survived. It takes heart, brains, effort, and integrity. Yes we can!
Have a fine morning, folks.
Ugh boring operational training BS until 1pm today, then freedom for awhile.
Don't have time to post about it now but there is talk of a national policy (law?) regarding promotional issues - what docs and other healthcare professionals can earn or get from drug companies and other related healthcare entities. Something must be out there on Google if anyone is interested.
Later!
Toss up ~ The disgusting Rush Limbaugh or the uber creepy Doug Hoffman (candidate for NY-23). You decide. It's a toss up for me. Courtesy of Josh Marshall:
THE REAL DOUG HOFFMAN?
Rush Limbaugh outdid himself yesterday with a really sleazy dig at GOP nominee Dede Scozzafava, saying she was "guilty of widespread bestiality. She has screwed every RINO in the country." I know. I feel dirty even repeating it.
Doug Hoffman got asked whether he denounced it or had any comment. He declined, said no comment.
--Josh Marshall
- Careful, Pat....you're up against some serious intellectual firepower there;)
By cChal on Nov 3, 2009 11:52 AM ESTJust clarifying since Phil felt the need to *weigh in* on the previous thread.
Mike's comment had nothing to do with the corrections underway within the British banking system. He said:
London has officially dethroned New York as the world's top financial center, according to an index released this month by the Geneva-based World Economic Forum.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Could it be that second rate x-colonial power so many here like to denigrate? -----
I simply provided the link (which he left out) which placed the headline in proper context. I also corrected his false assertion that "so many here denigrate Great Britain". I've never seen this happen here. However, Mike's constant denigration of the US is a matter of record.
If Mike wishes to toss pepper in the eyes of his fellow bloggers then he should expect to get some tossed right back at him.
- I enjoy the spirit with which Mike pokes fun. Maybe not a Will Rogers but the impulse is there.
By Phil Specht on Nov 3, 2009 1:33 PM ESTBritain is busting up the big banks and it is a good model to follow.
Moving on: "Britain is busting up the big banks and it is a good model to follow."---
I agree though it is tangential to the issue raised by Mike in yesterday's 5pm thread.
But in reality,
London, as recently as two years ago, was a laissez-faire paradise.
Banks and other financial firms could get by with even thinner capital
cushions than their American counterparts. Rather than dole out
punishments, regulators opted for negotiation—friendly dialogues over
tea.
This made London seem like a threat to New York’s reign as financial
capital of the world. Egged on by the business and Wall Street lobbies,
American politicians worried that New York was losing out, partly
because of the oversight imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Now, however, the British capital is mired in as great a crisis as New
York’s—and things are about to get worse, making a mockery of the
insecurity complex regarding Britain that hit U.S. business leaders
just months ago. Given that both countries are dealing with the same
credit crisis, this should make us wonder why the two regulatory
regimes, so different in structure, have each failed.
British bank stocks have plummeted in the wake of last year’s rescue
attempt and subsequent failure of Northern Rock, a midsize bank whose
customers were seen on the evening news lining up to withdraw their
money. Britain’s surviving banks are scrambling to raise capital, with
some having less success than others. The deflation of the British
housing bubble has only just begun.
{...}but Britain seems further down the path of examining the faults and weaknesses in its financial regulatory structure.
http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/wall-street/2008/08/13/Problems-in-British-Banking-System/
Because of even less regulation then we have, London was surpassing NYC as banking nurvania.
There are other reasons such as being tied more closely to European banks via the EU.
It is not an accident that the AIG meltdown came out of London.
- "It is not an accident that the AIG meltdown came out of London. "
By cChal on Nov 3, 2009 3:02 PM ESTExcellent point.
Proponents of downsizing now are pushing the Obama administration to follow Britain's example again.
One of President Obama's top outside economic advisers, former Fed chairman Paul A. Volcker, has proposed a renewed separation between commercial banking and investment banking. The Glass-Steagall Act, which forced banks to choose between those businesses, was imposed during the Great Depression but largely repealed in 1999.
Other prominent financial experts want the government to limit the size of commercial banks -- for example, through penalties that would give smaller banks a competitive advantage. Investors are already offering large banks much better borrowing rates than their smaller rivals because they believe U.S. regulators won't let the big firms fail.
__________________________________________________
TARP recipients are under restrictions re. executive compensation.
__________________________________________________
In sum, the British banking system had become even riskier than our own but now they are taking proper reform measures.
It is the coupling between the banking side and the investment side without regulation.
As I said earlier, there are some good business reasons to allow banks to have both bank and investment activity.
Most commerical customers want one-stop shopping. Companies want to manage their day-to-day financial affairs, their long term planning via bond issueance, and their 401k and pension activity with one institution. This is sound business.
The problem is the door between the two sides must be carefully regulated; which was origionally proposed in Sarbanes-Oxley, but left out of the final bill.
There are lots of questons and issues about how do you regulate and even what should be regulated.
I was in the banking industry when the door was opened wide. We spent a lot of time debating what this meant and how do we not become a moral hazard. The origional IRA maximums were quite low and there wasn't as much money to be made. When IRA maximums became higher and stock market runups like the '90's occurred, there was almost overnight huge amounts of money to be invested. Most banks did not have an active or aggresive investment side until then and were not overlly skilled in the investment business. We dealth with CD's, mortgages, that kind of thing. We were not Primus or Fidelity skilled, so we hired them to run our investment sides.
The outcome was entirely predictable as the banks became more skilled at beleiving flawed risk analysis because the 401K money would never end.
In a sense, all banks with investment sides became massive ponzi schemes and had the same results.
Those that maintained their integrity and sound business practices lost money during the run-ups, but are doing far better now.
There are a lot of culprits; banker greed, illegal rating systems and of course, greedy investors who need large 401Ks to ever be able to retire because of the lack of pensions.
"The problem is the door between the two sides must be carefully regulated; which was origionally proposed in Sarbanes-Oxley, but left out of the final bill."--
Well, Glass-Steagall is the original wall between the commercial and investment banks and was established under the 1933 Securities Act but was repealed in 1999.
Paul Volcker is calling for its reinstatement now.
I don't know that just doing the above and ignoring the hazards of too big to fail is enough. In fact, more is required.
Once again, the last major overhaul were the Acts of 33 and 34 with a few more along the way, i.e., the Investment Company Act of 1941 as mutual funds proliferated, etc., but given all of the changes since 34, electronic trading, exotic financial instruments, a global market, longer trading days....new major overhaul is long overdue.
Doing many things at once
The repaeal of Glass-steagell was to have regulations to limit investment sides polluting deposit sides which were discussed but never implemented.
I don't think too big too fail is a valid argument. Limit transaction sizes and number of transactions to one entity? Have spot audits? Have transparency in what is actually going on.
Deposit sides are covered by the FDIC. Investor sides are covered by the instruments they take in. Their death should not hurt the deposit side or else they are too big to fail.
In otherwords, a large investment side stands by itself.
I guess the main thing that troubles me is just human nature. If they know that the gvmt. will bail them out if they get into trouble sooner or later they'll start taking those risks again.
Volcker explicitly challenged the very centerpiece of the administration's proposed reform program, the idea of focusing on "systemically significant institutions," which presumably would come in for additional supervision, but would be rescued if they got into trouble. Volcker said:
The approach proposed by the Treasury is to designate in advance financial institutions "whose size, leverage, and interconnection could pose a threat to financial stability if it failed." Those institutions, bank or non-bank, connected to a commercial firm or not, would be subject to particularly strict and conservative prudential supervision and regulation. The Federal Reserve would be designated as consolidated supervisor. The precise criteria for designation as "systemically important" have not, so far as I know, been set out.
Think of the practical difficulties of such designation. Can we really anticipate which institutions will be systemically significant amid the uncertainties in future crises and the complex inter-relationships of markets? Was Long Term Capital Management, a hedge fund, systemically significant in 1998? Was Bear Stearns, but not Lehman? How about General Electric's huge financial affiliate, or the large affiliates of other substantial commercial firms? What about foreign institutions operating in the United States?
Switch, wannabe Rip Van Winkle, you are joshing us again. What fun.
viewers of FOX so-called News are old white men in their sixties.
They are obviously fearful of extinction, prejudiced, entitled, insecure, and dumb. I'm sure they had a place in the culture, all that ditch digging and deal making, but frankly, the world isn't served well by them anymore.
And Rush Limbaugh gives voice and demonstration to who and what they are. For me they are repupulsive, pitiful bullies, incapable of breadth and flex, unable to change, used to lording it over people.
Yes, utterly repulsive. Unbelievable that the society lets them have all the media attention, though maybe in the long run as they die off, we'll get a different species of whilte male. Let's hope so.
repulsive to the uttermost.
and LWC. There's a funny cartoon in the New Yorker showing a hill. At the bottom are fish, then reptiles, then amphibians, then monkeys, then humans at the top. On the way down to the other side of the hill are monkeys, amphibions, reptiles, and fish who are saying, "Well, that was a waste of time."
Have a great day, y'all.
Set your DVR: By The People: The Election of Barack Obama airs tonight on HBO at 9 p.m.
I had the chance to watch it over the weekend and it's a wonderful documentary. While it's not quite as good as the War Room
-- still one of my all-time favorites -- the film features some
remarkably intimate behind-the-scenes footage as Obama and his team
orchestrated a historic victory in last year's presidential election.
The filmmakers were there from the beginning and provide an amazing
window into Obama and the type of person who actually runs for
president.
Highly recommended.
H/T: Taegan Goddard
TDS Co_Editor Ruy Teixeira's latest 'Public Opinion Snapshot' at the Center for American Progress web pages takes a look at conservatives' success in propagating the "It's Obama's fault" meme regarding health care and the economy. Teixeira shows pretty conclusively that the public isn't buying it. On the economy:
...A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds just 20 percent blaming Obama’s policies for current economic conditions, compared to 63 percent who say this is a situation Obama has inherited.
On the difficulty of securing health care reform:
...A question in the same poll also asked respondents who was to blame for making health care reform legislation so difficult to pass. Almost half—49 percent—said “special interest groups such as big pharmaceutical and health insurance companies” deserved “a great deal of blame” and another 26 percent thought these special interests deserved “quite a bit of blame.” By comparison, just 18 percent thought Obama deserved a great deal of blame and another 20 percent thought he deserved quite a bit of blame. Almost three-fifths (58 percent) thought he deserved very little blame or none at all.
Teixeira adds "...The Bush administration and big insurance and pharmaceutical companies—are associated strongly with the conservatives and their policies. That should make conservatives very, very nervous."
Have a wonderful day and GO LINDAB!!! From what I read VA is a tough race.
See you all later.
Got a bright bright sunshiny day here. Cool, but promised to be warmer. (Don't think it'll make it, lol!) Good bit of wind. Actually quite lovely.
Nice day to vote. The word is that those staying home in VA are going to be the dems. . . . Only 40% turnout predicted.
He's just a dressed up monkey with a tin cup: we should stop responding to his chit.
How can the national press make a negative for Obama if a guy in Virginia runs away from him in the race for Gov. and ends up losing?
I give President Obama lots of B's for solid effort with good progress across a broad front. Michelle has all A's.
Howard Dean will get dinner from Dr. Nancy Snyderman and the President was helpful selling the public option.
later
accurate description and I'll follow the advice.
- Obama stated he wants to ramp of Afgan and the public option wasn't mandatory
By dog soldier on Nov 3, 2009 3:31 PM ESTFolks keep trying to push their desires on a person who is a moderate and is keeping his campaign promises. Not all of them, because they are not his to keep (closing GITMO, as the states don't want them).
Obama is not a progressive liberal; In fact, he is not a liberal and never campaigned as one. He is more liberal then the previouos occupant and the Republican Party which makes him a liberal by position; not by his policies.
I still wish that he'd review our *progress* in Afghanistan and realign goals, or a new grand strategy as you have called for.
Any direction Obama takes depends on a viable partner in Afgan. Just because Karzai delcared himself golden means nothing; the locals make that determination.
First. we need a defensive grand strategy.
There are so many angles in Afgan policies and directions, the data points lead to directions that turn in on themselves.
One idea is we deny al Queda a safe have in Afgan. since they are in Pakistan, did we do this?
If we leave Afgan, will they simply cross the border into Afgan and start up again?
Who cares? Has Al Queda become a moot point?
Should make a better deal with the Taliban members that are fighting us? Hard to do with most of the opium money in the world going into their pockets!
Build their infrastructure to make the people happy. To do that, you need troops to protect them.
We are an occupier, not a liberator. We loose.
Just a few points. Others can add more...I'll drop by later.
- that picture makes the townhall teabaggers a bunch of pikers
By Phil Specht on Nov 3, 2009 1:47 PM EST.
... it is what it is...
...again this is what they do in Philly... Remember - Santa Claus was booed @ an Eagles game.
However, this is a sports event - not a political event.
#34 makes more $ than all those losers combined....
Do you think he really gives a rats a@@
I wouldnt..........
BP asks McCaskill about anti-trust
Acquisitions, mergers, consolidations in finance, farming, insurance, energy, and other commerce have some business critics saying the result is less competition that leads to a less diverse marketplace for producers and less choice for consumers.
Independent agriculture producers complain big operators that control research, production, processing, and marketing are controlling prices and limiting competition. Senator McCaskill says the antitrust division of the Justice Department needs to get busy for the first time in a long time.
She says Missouri has gone from 27,000 feeder pig operations to about 5,000. She blames concentration of production and contracting by individual farmers with big producers for that drop.
“That just gives you some idea of the massive shift in the agricultural economy from independent families out there selling their products at market when they want to sell it based on price versus families who are having to take a price that is dictated to them by companies that are in fact paying them to raise cattle and pigs,” she says.
McCaskill says the antitrust division “has been in a coma.” She says the only major case it has prosecuted in the last decade was a case against Microsoft, and it didn’t work.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0911/S00021.htm
Failure by Design - the "Public" Option
Triumph of the Money Party
Michael Collins
Do you know what the "public option" does or who it covers? If you've had trouble finding out, it's not your fault. Reading the corporate media coverage provides little or no clue. It's hardly ever defined. There's a very good reason for the lack of clarity and definition. But first, a brief summary or a public debate that characterizes just about every public debate we have on critical issues.
If you think that the current version of the public option will provide a choice for a government administered health program, you're right. If you think that this option was designed for the general public, then you're wrong. It will apply to only the some of the uninsured, possibly as few as six million citizens. It's a kind of public option. snip
President Obama's outline of the public option in his September 9 speech to Congress is essentially unchanged in the current legislation. The option will be "available in the insurance exchange" and "it would only be an option for those who don't have insurance." (See What Obama Actually Said About Health Reform)
When land is set aside for "public use," does that mean only 5% or 6 % of the public? All of this makes no sense unless you accept the deliberately confusing definitions and assumptions of The Money Party.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0709/S00549.htm
The Money Party
The Essence of our Political TroublesThe Money Party is a small group of enterprises and individuals who have most of the money in this country. They use that money to make more money. Controlling who gets elected to public office is the key to more money for them and less for us. As 2008 approaches, The Money Party is working hard to maintain its perfect record.
Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent News
Washington, D.C.
is labeling the few elections tonight as "Super Tuesday." JMHO
I know MSNBC is the "Place for Politics" but jeesh! Super Tuesday was the Tuesday in 2008 with 24 presidential primaries.
We will be watching HBO at 9:00 EST the first viewing of "The Election of Barack Obama." This is billed as an outstanding documentary that was only meant to follow the early campaign of just one of many presidential candidates beginning in 2006 or 2007, never dreaming that their candidate to follow would actually win the office of the POTUS.
House Health Reform Bill Does Not Please Many in Health Care
By Ken Terry
While healthcare industry players continue to salivate over the prospect of millions of new patients with insurance, the unified House reform bill would also ding the healthcare and insurance companies to varying extents.
The measure, designed to cover 36 million more Americans, would hit the insurance, drug and device sectors with new taxes and restrictions. Hospitals would lose some reimbursement from the $426 billion in Medicare and Medicaid cuts in the House bill-about the same as in the Senate bill. But physicians would get socked much harder, unless the House can figure out how to pay for rescinding scheduled Medicare payment decreases that total more than $200 billion over the next 10 years. The Senate has the same problem, after the defeat of a separate bill that would have canceled the drop in Medicare payments to doctors.
cont.
industry.bnet.com/healthcare/10001337/house-health-reform-bill-does-not-please-many-in-health-care/
House Health Reform Bill Does Not Please Many in Health Care
By Ken Terry
cont.
Under the House bill, the pharmaceutical companies, which had earlier negotiated an $80 billion reform “contribution” with the White House, would have to fork up another $60 billion in rebates on drugs used by seniors who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, Medicare would be able to negotiate drug prices for the first time.
The device manufacturers got off somewhat easier in the House legislation. In place of the $40 billion that the Senate version would levy on the device makers, the House toll is around $20 billion. (The Senate is also planning to reduce it to that level, some reports say). In addition, the 2.5 percent tax on medical device revenues in the House bill would go into effect three years later than its Senate counterpart.
industry.bnet.com/healthcare/10001337/house-health-reform-bill-does-not-please-many-in-health-care/
- The tea-baggers started as a protest of the banksters getting rich
By dog soldier on Nov 3, 2009 4:16 PM ESTTheir origional protest is justified.
What happened is wealthy Repubs co-opted them into a general protest movement.
Many of their members are small business owners who fear the mandatory provisions of the health plan.
We shouldn't be too quick to dismiss them as losers, but do consider what their issues are.
Some are valid and some are bunk.
The Kaiser Foundation has produced a side-by-side comparison of the Major Health Care Reform Proposals. For me, this is just what I was looking for.
This interactive side-by-side compares the leading comprehensive reform proposals across a number of key characteristics and plan components. Included in this side-by-side are proposals for moving toward universal coverage that have been put forward by the President and Members of Congress. In an effort to capture the most important proposals, we have included those that have been formally introduced as legislation as well as those that have been offered as draft proposals or as policy options. It will be regularly updated to reflect changes in the proposals and to incorporate major new proposals as they are announced. This side-by-side offers a summary of the major components of these proposals; detailed descriptions of provisions relating to the Medicare and Medicaid programs in the House Tri-Committee and Senate Finance Committee bills can be found online.
www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)You must be logged in to post comments
If you already have an account, login below, otherwise signup now
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
ugg boots classic tall 5815
By maike l on Nov 24, 2009 9:01 AM EST -
Tuesday choices
By Gerry Lykins on Nov 24, 2009 6:50 AM EST -
Traditional Wedding Favors Could Very Well Be a Thing of Past Tradition
By dfds d on Nov 24, 2009 5:47 AM EST -
A Guide To Help You Choose A Wedding Photographer
By dfds d on Nov 24, 2009 5:46 AM EST -
Happy Couple With Better Sexual Relationships
By dfds d on Nov 24, 2009 5:44 AM EST
- Howard is first!
By mary vb on Nov 3, 2009 9:58 AM ESTGood luck to all the good folks who are helping out with their local elections! That's you, lindab.
~~~~~