The Financial Crisis and the Bailout Myth: A Wake-Up Call for Democracy
“The one-two punch of income vulnerability and rising costs have weakened the middle class at the same time that the revision of the rules of financing delivers a death blow to millions of families each year. Since the early 1980s, the credit industry has rewritten the rules of lending to families. Congress has turned the industry loose to charge whatever it can get and to bury tricks and traps throughout credit agreements. Credit-card contracts that were less than a page long in the early 1980s now number thirty or more pages of small-print legalese.” - Professor Elizabeth Warren, Harvard Law School, 2006 1
The reason for all of our financial troubles starts with the increasing dependence on financial institutions and deregulation. America is now a credit and debt culture. Average consumers depend on their credit score in almost every aspect of the American economy. Debt is an extremely profitable venture for banks. Strapping consumers with debt and requiring payments over long periods of time with high interest rates make debtors economic slaves. These individuals are the bank's best customers and make huge profits off this venture. Due to this, corporations won’t change their marketing models, and advertisement campaigns targeted at college students and individuals already strapped with debt. The practice may be unethical and detrimental to society, but it makes money.
"This year [2003] credit card companies will charge more than $7 billion in late fees (quadruple what they charged less than ten years ago). [Bankers] wouldn’t have dreamed of telling those families that with compounded interest at the new rates and special overbalance fees and late-payment penalties, they now owed $4,000 for their original $800 purchase.” 2
This is not to say that debt is all the fault of corporate America. The argument is often made that “nobody is holding a gun to customers’ heads and forcing them to put money on their credit cards.” Some consumer debt is due to irresponsible spending habits. However, most individuals do not want to rack up high credit card debt; they must in order to get by in the (increasingly hazardous) American economic system. In many cases, the debt is racked up from medical bills, daycare, or house payments after the loss of a job.
"For every family taking out a second mortgage to pay for a vacation, there are sixty-one more families taking on a second mortgage so they can pay down their credit card bills and medical bills. Ninety-one percent of the families in bankruptcy were carrying balances on their cars by the time they filed. A third of homeowners were carrying second or even third mortgages or had to refinance their mortgages to get some cash. The amount of debt was truly staggering. Nearly one-third of bankruptcy filers – more than 400,000 families – owned an entire year’s salary on their credit cards, a hole that was virtually impossible to dig a generation ago.
But the critics are off the mark on one point – the role played by over-consumption or its ubiquitous cousin, ‘trouble managing money.’ By 2001, those two reasons combined to account for less than 6 percent of families in bankruptcy. What about the rest? The overwhelming majority of bankrupt families faced far more serious problems. As we showed in chapter 4, nearly 90 percent had been felled by a job loss, a medical problem, or a family breakup, or by some combination of all three.
Potential Supreme Court nominee Judge Edith Jones asserts that ‘overspending and an unwillingness to live within one’s means ‘causes’ debt.’ She is probably right. These families certainly overspent, accepting medical care they could not afford and making child support payments that left them with too little to pay the rent. They also lived beyond their means, trying to hold on to their houses and cars even after they lost their jobs. But we are forced to wonder, what would Judge Jones suggest those families have done? Not gone to the emergency room when the chest pains started? Moved the kids into a shelter the day their father moved out? Paid MasterCard and Visa, even if it meant not feeding their children? It is doubtlessly satisfying to point the long finger of blame at personal irresponsibility and overspending. But only the willfully ignorant refuse to acknowledge the real reasons behind all that debt." 3
On top of that, there is no training for financial responsibility in classrooms today, and honest banking practices are a thing of the past.
"More than 75 percent of credit card profits come from people who make those low, minimum monthly payments. And who makes minimum monthly payment at 26 percent interest? Who pays late fees, overbalance charges, and cash advance premiums? Families that can barely make ends meet, households precariously balanced between lending industry, barraged with special offers, personalized advertisements, and home phone calls, all with one objective in mind: get them to borrow more money." 4
Banking interests often cite how the market would decline if restrictions were imposed. They say this like it is a bad thing. A generation ago, banks used to work for the people; people didn’t work for the bank, as they do today. The government regulates millions of products, from the paint the Chinese can put on toys to the safety regulations on cars. Saying America shouldn’t regulate the banking industry is like stating they shouldn’t regulate all useful products that are potentially dangerous.
"Consider the toaster. People buy toasters for home use. No one makes them buy toasters, and they could live without toasters. If they understood electrical engineering, they could evaluate the safety of each toaster under every possible scenario. But toasters are regulated. No toaster manufacturer may peddle toasters that have even a 1 percent chance of catching fire. Toaster makers (and conservative economists) could point out that riskier toasters could be made more cheaply, and that permitting their sale would expand the number of toaster owners in the country. Companies might put special disclaimers and instructions on their toasters, telling customers how to extinguish the fires themselves. But as a nation, we have collectively decided that the risks posed by an unregulated toaster industry are not acceptable." 5
The housing market is suffering the same rapacious methods. However, the subprime mortgage crisis is a large problem better reserved for a closer, in-depth look. If you would like to know more, you can read “Credit & Debit Industry” from my book “Economic & Mental Slavery.” To understand the corporate model and its ruthless tactics the example of credit card debt should suffice.
Banking corporations use their unregulated predatory schemes to catch consumers in a debt trap without remorse. As these methods have become increasingly profitable, America’s GDP has become ever more reliant on the financial sector because of the wealth and capital it produces. Making no tangible goods to sell and distribute while making money off debt allows financial market bubbles to emerge.
“The money that’s made from manufacturing stuff is a pittance in comparison to the amount of money made from shuffling money around. 44% of all corporate profits in the U.S. Come from the financial sector compared with only 10% from the manufacturing.” – Raymond Dalio, Bridgewater Associates, 2004 6
“Between 1987 and 2007, debt—in all flavors, from credit card and mortgage to staid U.S. treasury and exotic Wall Street—became one of the nation’s largest, fastest-growing businesses. Over those two decades, so-called credit market debt roughly quadrupled from nearly $11 trillion to $48 trillion. This was abetted by a revolution in marketing, packing, and propaganda—in reality, public debt wasn’t the big balloon, private debt was. Without much publicity, the financial services sector—banks, broker-dealers, consumer finance, insurance, and mortgage finance—muscled past manufacturing in the 1990s to become the largest sector of the U.S. private economy. By 2004-6, financial services represented 20 to 21 percent of gross domestic product, manufacturing just 12 to 13 percent. And finance enjoyed an even bigger share of corporate profits.
The Rise of Financial Services and the Decline of Manufacturing
‘Risky’ doesn’t begin to describe this new focus in the American economy. Bingeing on debt is reckless, and financialization has a long record of being an unhealthy late stage in the trajectory of previous leading world economic powers. Moving money around instead of making things is always dicey, and the U.S. transformation has been the most grandiose to date. Since the eighties, three forms of assistance have been sought from Washington (and generally provided): government bailouts when pivotal financial institutions, loans, or profit methodologies got themselves in trouble; liquidity from the Federal Reserve to keep the wealth escalators going; and benign regulation and lawmaking. Favoritism, it used to be called.
One of the myths of the last quarter century has posited a U.S. economy smoother, better run than before, and burdened with only a few minor recessions. That’s bunk. The official downturns—minimized, cynics say, by controversial federal statistics—can be queried on that basis…
In the meantime, of course, the debt bubble (mostly private debt) has been getting bigger—and then still bigger. Not a few experts consider this a flat-out menace; I concurred in 2006, and agree still more today amid signs that the great bubble blown up over a quarter century is starting to quiver and leak. These are not circumstances in which a nation should put faith in an overgrown and overextended financial services sector, with its bankrupt mortgage lenders, hotshot hedge funds, and reckless mega banks, several of which (fined years back for colluding with a scheming Enron) wouldn’t know a civic obligation from a parking ticket.” 7
As the financial sector grew to an astounding degree, deregulation was occurring in unison. The Glass-Steagall Act was implemented in 1933 to regulate the banking industry after the number of crises in the 30’s. But over the years the act was slowly chipped away at by big business. In 1999, Senator Phil Gramm and James Leach proposed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in both the Senate and the House. The bill passed, and now investment banks, insurance companies, commercial banks, and security companies were able to permanently merge. Further deregulation over the years allowed less and less transparency and oversight.
The problem is that banks shouldn’t be giving out loans in such a high-risk market when it was likely that the market would fall. A great example is the mortgage bubble. The financial institutions that are begging for bail-out knew that bankruptcy was coming and still continued on their reckless path regardless. They could have either taken the hit early on, while they could have handled it (but their stock price would have fallen), or they could have borrowed more money, which is what they did. It became a game of financial leverage with banks borrowing 25 to 30 times the amount of capital to back the borrowing they were doing. This economic collapse was completely preventable.
Bailouts, A Fascist Proposal
"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary." - Adam Smith
“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group,” – FDR
The more there are riots, the more repressive action will take place, and the more we face the danger of a right-wing takeover and eventually a fascist society. – MLK Jr.
We have already spent a total of 900 billion dollars to bail out AIG, BEHR Sterns, Freddie Mack, and the Lemon Brothers. Now there is the proposal from Henry Paulson for even more.
Before continuing, it is important to know Henry Paulson’s personal history. Before coming to work for the American government, Paulson was the former CEO of Goldman Sachs. And before that position, he served as John Erlichman’s assistant. John Erlichman was the assistant to Richard Nixon. He is in the same league as Dick Cheney, who was once the CEO of Halliburton, a defense contracting company. These men go through what has been coined as the revolving door, where they move in and out of politics and big business, maintaining relationships at both ends. When big business interests become synonymous with governmental interests, fascism becomes the result.
Henry Paulson was one of the key figures in creating the problem that he is claiming he wants to resolve. Either Paulson is incompetent and can’t handle the task, or is intentionally trying to gain control to benefit himself and those on Wall Street. Paulson can be looked at as the Rudy Giuliani of finance. After 9/11, Giuliani was championed as a savior for the American people. He was said to be impartial, bipartisan, and a strong leader. The same things are being said about Paulson, but in both cases, it is an extraordinary conflict of interest.
If the government decides to intervene on behalf of the public, one thing can be said for sure: the American economic system will no longer be a free market. It wouldn’t even be a controlled or regulated market with the proposals that Henry Paulson is suggesting. A controlled market should be desired and is what America had after the devastating banking crises of the 30’s. But the banks and corporations bought the Congress and lobbied for more of a free market structure. If the government were to provide Wall Street with the bailout it is requesting, it would resemble fascism. There would be no better way to describe the event. As we will see, the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson, wants a blank check for 700 billion with no oversight or regulation. It would be corporations throwing in with the government at the expense of the people. If one were to look at German history during Nazism, private banks, in collusion with the government, did quite well.
“Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal.” – Martin Luther King Jr.
Besides the surrounding controversy of his character, Paulson is not in the best interest of the American people. Paulson has stated that he does not think any bailouts should be punitive. This is exactly the stance someone would take who wanted the most for the banks while disregarding the American public.
If the American government is going to bail out these large financial firms, a punitive measure should be required. Paulson does not call for such measures or suggest docking CEO pay or purchasing the banks for only a small percentage of their worth. If these banks really need the government’s help, they should be willing to take whatever the American people think is most beneficial to society and the public as a whole. If the banks refuse to accept punitive measures, they really don’t need the bailout. If the American government is going to bail out these large banking conglomerates that have terrorized the American people with their recklessness, a disciplinary measure should be enforced.
The people who own and run these banks are some of the richest in the world. Paulson is basically saying we should give these individuals a “golden parachute” after their ruthless banking practices and destroying working class finances and retirement funds. Paulson’s “bail-outs” are so lucrative that foreign banks are lining up to receive backing for the funds they invested in the American economy. These bail-outs should not be fun or easy; they should be disciplinary, full of harsh regulations, punitive, and a last resort.
What Does This Mean For The American Worker?What would these bailouts mean for the average worker? First off, if the bailouts were to take place, there should be concessions provided to workers affected by the financial collapse. This is another issue, if America spends all its resources and funds on bailing out large institutions with no regulatory or punitive measures, there will be no more funds left for the American public.
The average American has already taken a hit in the financial collapse. Many companies, businesses, and corporations put their money into the stock market instead of low-risk investments like government bonds. Now, Americans are going to have to start asking the question, “Can I even retire?” This will create what is called “the sandwich generation,” where working Americans not only have to take care of their kids, but their parents as well.
If we go further and compare the bankruptcy of the banking industry to the bankruptcy of individuals, the polarities are astounding. On October 17th, 2005, the number of bankruptcy filings almost dropped by 500,000 when the new bankruptcy law took effect. “After eight years and $40 million lobbying dollars, the 500-page [bankruptcy] bill, written mostly by financial interests, was made law. The law imposes a two-tier system that reduces the number allowed to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy and forces them to file under Chapter 13, which requires considerable repayment.
There are two types of bankruptcy, Chapter 7 and Chapter 13. Usually, most would pick Chapter 7 because it would liquidate assets, and the individual could start over. Chapter 13 focuses on repayment. Those who have high incomes are prevented from filing for Chapter 7. How do they determine “higher income”? In whichever state the individual filing for bankruptcy lives, that individual’s current monthly income will be measured against the state's median. If your income is more than the median, a new part of the law was added, you must pass the means test in order to file for a Chapter 7. The purpose of this test is to determine whether one has enough disposable income, ‘after subtracting certain allowed expenses and required debt payments, to make payments on a chapter 13 plan.’ To find out whether one can pass the means test, you subtract certain allowed expenses and debt payments from one’s current monthly income.
Before doing any of the aforementioned, one must complete a credit counseling by a permitted agency approved by the U.S. Trustee’s office. This counseling is designed to give one an idea about whether bankruptcy is appropriate or not. Counseling is a required action even if repayment is in no way feasible. If the bankruptcy is approved, individuals are then required to go to another counseling session, this time to learn personal financial management.
"The law undoubtedly adds some complicated requirements. This makes it harder and time-consuming for lawyers dealing with bankruptcy cases. The cost for lawyer representation goes up accordingly. The law also imposes new requirements for the lawyers themselves. The biggest change is that lawyers must be able to personally vouch for and verify their client’s claims.” 8
Now compare what the banking industry did to the American people with what Paulson is proposing to do for the banking industry; it’s absurd. The same administration that is recommending these “bail-outs” is the one that pushed for privatizing Social Security. One can only imagine the turmoil if that venture became reality.
Think of what America could accomplish and achieve with that 700 billion dollars! We could provide healthcare to the millions who couldn’t afford it. We could spend it on government-subsidized building projects for roads, schools, or environmental technologies. These developments would create jobs and stimulate the economy again. The financial sector and Wall Street would learn their lesson while allowing the public to recover and prosper.
Why are these ideas never discussed or proposed? Why is it that immediately after a financial collapse, does the government suggest helping the same people who made this mess? Could it be because the financial elites and political elites have become one and the same?
Enron: A case study in corruption
An excellent example of business corruption and government deregulation is Enron. The easily forgotten energy market-sales company left its employees and their retirements in the gutter while the executives made out like bandits. Enron started “cooking the books” early; it is still hard to grasp what the company actually did. They would always beat the expectations of the market because the accounting system they used allowed them to report future expected income and not current equity or cash flows (I’m not making this up). The company was highly unregulated, which made it so that the executives could rig the system and make a killing.
They would buy the stock low, drive the market up, then sell. Enron beat its numbers on such a consistent basis that it received many awards and was championed as the model corporation. The reckless finances of Enron not only hurt its employees but also the American public, specifically in California. After a meeting with California’s Governor Arnold Swarchenegger, Enron was put in control of California’s energy grid while pressing hard for deregulation. After achieving this feat, Enron proceeded to intentionally shut down power plants across the state, using any excuse to do so. This drove up demand and prices while terrorizing the Californian population and making Enron large sums of money. Eventually, reporters and investigators started to look closely at Enron’s finances, and the rest is history.
Economic Shock Treatment
What Henry Paulson is suggesting and trying to implement is the same tactics Bush used to get the American public into Iraq. Bush correlated what happened during 9/11 with Iraq, even if he didn’t overtly say it. He used deception and rushed the public into support to start of the war. Speed, scare tactics of WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction), and the threat of terrorists were key factors. After the war had commenced, the Bush administration started saying how it would be chaos if America pulled out, and the administration would “stay the course.” After a long period, Bush explicitly stated that there was no correlation between Iraq and 9/11, but the damage had already been done. Bush was making billions off of oil deals while Cheney did so with defense contracts. The war in Iraq is rapidly becoming the most expensive war ever and currently holds second place. 9
Now the same tactics are being used for the financial bailouts. Notice how this is now an “emergency” even though any individual paying attention to the stock market knew it was going to burn soon. Kevin Philips' book “Bad Money” is a testament to how even outsiders paying attention to the financial markets could tell a collapse was coming. There are many other books on the subject as well, including “Cash Proof: How to Profit From the Coming Economic Collapse,” written by Peter D. Schiff in 2007.
“Wall Street has produced a credit crisis for banks by securitizing more than $900bm of subprime mortgage loans. The ultimate default rate on these loans could rise as high as 20-25 per cent, so there is $200bn-$250bn of bad paper now circulating in the financial system. As the credit rating agencies have issued widespread downgrades of securities that previously had scores of triple or double A’s, investors have taken fright and been fleeing all asset-backed securities.” – Economist David Hale, November 2007 10
The tactics being used can best be explained by economic shock treatment. The American government has been implementing this tactic for years. It has been used to overthrow governments and even democratically elected leaders in El Salvador, Chile, Haiti, and Nicaragua. Since 9/11, the Bush administration has turned this tactic on the American population.
Economic shock treatment was born from the doctrine of Milton Friedman, a Pulitzer Prize-winning economist. He stated that “only a crisis, actual or perceived, produces real change.” It is in times of panic that a push comes for pro-corporate policies and “free market reform.” This is done so discussion will close, and politicians can get away claiming that “we have no choice.” Economic shock treatment is the thesis of Naomi Klein’s book “The Shock Doctrine.”
“The government’s top economic experts warn that without immediate action by Congress, America could slip into a financial panic, and a distressing scenario would unfold. More banks could fail, including some in your community. The stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet. Foreclosures would rise dramatically. And if you own a business or a farm, you would find it harder and more expensive to get credit. More businesses would close their doors, and millions of Americans could lose their jobs. Even if you have a good credit history, it would be more difficult for you to get the loans you need to buy a car or send your children to college. And ultimately, our country could experience a long and painful recession. Fellow citizens, we must not let this happen.” – George W. Bush
The bailout would only be stage one of the shock. The second stage would be radical reforms that would be evoked in the name of the crisis that the bailout created. This could be compared to 9/11 and the War on Terror (crisis) and the implementation of the Patriot Act and Homeland Security (reforms). If this bailout goes through, it would lock in any future administration to make hard decisions about squandered money.
All Are In Agreement: Political Activists, Politicians, and Government Officials Speak Out
“Well, I do a good bit of economic writing, and I was trying to decipher the plan this weekend, and it became quickly apparent to me that this is a financial September 11th, that the Bush administration was trying to use the shock of this crisis, the self-induced crisis in this case, to ram through legislation that was highly ill-considered in terms of the actual economic merits, on the one hand, and then, on the other hand, it was this extreme power grab that would give these huge sweeping new powers to the Treasury Department.” –Arun Gupta, Reporter/Editor at The Indypendent Newspaper 11
“That’s when you know the system is decayed and corrupt, that the people who brought us this disaster—Robert Rubin, with Bill Clinton pushing through the financial deregulation monster in 1999, which we opposed, which opened the gates for this kind of wild speculation and this casino capitalism, is still an adviser. He’s an adviser to Barack Obama. He’s an adviser to members of Congress. Henry Paulson cashed out at Goldman Sachs in 2006, 500 million dollars. And now he goes to Washington to bail out his buddies...
But the first step is to slow down Congress. Once this bill is passed—and it’s a blanket bill. It’s only four pages, Amy, four pages of a $700 billion blank check, transferring congressional authority wholesale, and I think unconstitutionally, to the White House, King George IV at work again. Once it passes, then the chance for comprehensive regulation and all the other changes to make Wall Street accountable, instead of allow Wall Street to create a corporate state or what Franklin Delano Roosevelt called fascism, which is government controlled by private economic power, represented by people like Henry Paulson—once this happens, it’s not going to be reversible.” - Ralph Nader 12
"The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress's throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! ‘This is welfare for the rich,’ he said. ‘This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters.’
The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!" - Ron Paul 13
Take Action!
“The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?” - Ron Paul 14
There is hope; we can all prevent these events from occurring again. We the people have to come together and take action against corruption, deregulation, Wall Street, the Bush administration, the government, and fascism.
There are already groups marching on Wall Street. Journalists have been doing their part to mirror the War in Iraq with what is happening today. Grassroots activist groups are organizing to march at the capital, write letters, and hold politicians accountable. There is pressure from the people to hold their politicians accountable. You need to get involved, too! Organize, write letters, and protest for your own interests.
“I wrote up this email [on the financial 9/11]. I sat on it overnight because I was hesitant to send it out. I’m a journalist, not an organizer. But after talking with a few people, they felt I should send it out, so I sent it out to about 150 activists, organizers, and media folks that I know in New York City. And it just exploded. You know, I don’t take any special credit for it. I was just tapping into this huge amount of anger and resentment that was out there.” –Arun Gupta, Reporter/Editor at The Indypendent Newspaper 15
“The public outrage out there is really enormous. The calls coming into C-SPAN yesterday were overwhelmingly against this bailout, this outrageous inequity, this double standard between the guys at the top and the people who are going to have to pay the bills under this bailout, the taxpayers and the consumers.
Mr. Gupta is right in the sense that this is leaderless, but it’s got to be more than just a rally of protests. It’s got to demand something. It’s got to be focused. Otherwise, it will fritter away. We’ve had rallies on Wall Street. It’s a great place to have rallies. You can really congregate a lot of people, and the Wall Street guys look out the window, and they can see the people are coming." – Ralph Nader 16
References:
1 Phillips, Kevin. “Bad Money. “Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Fail Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism” Penguin Group. 2008. p. 29
2 Warren, Elizabeth and Tyagi, Amelia Warren. “’The Cement Life Raft’ (Chapter Six)” PBS Frontline. November 24, 2004. <http:>
3 Warren, Elizabeth and Tyagi, Amelia Warren. “’The Cement Life Raft’ (Chapter Six)” PBS Frontline. November 24, 2004. <http:>
4 Warren, Elizabeth and Tyagi, Amelia Warren. “’The Cement Life Raft’ (Chapter Six)” PBS Frontline. November 24, 2004. <http:>
5 Warren, Elizabeth and Tyagi, Amelia Warren. “’The Cement Life Raft’ (Chapter Six)” PBS Frontline. November 24, 2004. <http:>
6 Phillips, Kevin. “Bad Money. “Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Fail Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism” Penguin Group. 2008. p. viii, ix
7 Phillips, Kevin. “Bad Money. “Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Fail Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism” Penguin Group. 2008. p. 29
8 Warren, Elizabeth and Tyagi, Amelia Warren. “’The Cement Life Raft’ (Chapter Six)” PBS Frontline. November 24, 2004. <http:>
9 Margolis, Eric. “The 2nd Most Expensive War in American History.” LewRockwell.com. February 13. 2007 <http:>
10 Phillips, Kevin. “Bad Money. “Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Fail Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism” Penguin Group. 2008. p. 96
11 Democracy Now! “As Bush Admin Pushes $700B for Wall Street, Ralph Nader Asks, ‘Why Is There Need for a Bailout?” democracynow.org. September 25, 2008. <http:>
12 Democracy Now! “As Bush Admin Pushes $700B for Wall Street, Ralph Nader Asks, ‘Why Is There Need for a Bailout?” democracynow.org. September 25, 2008. <http:>
13 Campaign for Liberty. “Letter from Ron: Time is running out.” campaignforliberty.com September 24, 2008 <http:>
14 Campaign for Liberty. “Letter from Ron: Time is running out.” campaignforliberty.com September 24, 2008 <http:>
15 Democracy Now! “As Bush Admin Pushes $700B for Wall Street, Ralph Nader Asks, ‘Why Is There Need for a Bailout?” democracynow.org. September 25, 2008. <http:>
16 Democracy Now! “As Bush Admin Pushes $700B for Wall Street, Ralph Nader Asks, ‘Why Is There Need for a Bailout?” democracynow.org. September 25, 2008. <http:>
Thanks for reading! Please comment!
Other Related blog(s): Nouveau Economics, Lyceum Recordz
Comments
Post a Comment