Until your house catches on fire.

I hope our government is watching this because we are living way beyond our means and we are going to be "forced" to do something similar to this.

Yes, it's not safe even in your own house. The safest place possible is in a Swiss bank account, because of their exceptional strict privacy regulations. But not in any saving account or investment whatsoever. Just in a plain old checking/current bank account in Switzerland.

tontosh-2444879

I hope our government is watching this because we are living way beyond our means and we are going to be "forced" to do something similar to this.

Not even close. You conservatives have got to stop thinking of government spending in the same way you think of household budgets. There is no similarity at all.

culheath....."Not even close. You conservatives have got to stop thinking of government spending in the same way you think of household budgets. There is no similarity at all."

Yep, typical Progressive thinking of "We don't have a spending problem".

Almost $ 17,000,000,000,000 in National Debt and continuing $ 1,000,000,000,000 deficit each year expecting to reach $ 20,000,000,000,000 by the end of "Drama" Obama's 2nd term and we don't have a spending problem.

Peppermint Patty's $ 2,300,000,000,000 Progressive budget is really great. Really like spending $ 2,000,000,000 on energy research and $ 100,000,000,000 on another Stimulus. That will get the economy going.

It must be hard to admit being a Progressive.

As for the Greckos......how do you like the EUroPIIgs telling you to give up your hard earned money because of your Progressive "lawmakers" stupid decisions ?

Our government is already considering confiscating personal retirement accounts and replacing them with an annuity for your retirement needs.

Abracadabra - instant access to over $15 trillion

Hello folks, as the sheeple and presstitutes tout the economic recovery despite record debt and a budget proposal that expands spending by 62% over the next 10 years, 162 billion next year alone, the news in Cyprus should raise a few eyebrows. I’ll get back to that in a minute.

What is going on in Europe is a microcosm of the economic state of the entire globe and a prelude to what will soon be occurring right here in the good ole USA. The banks are insolvent and you need go no further then to the bailouts and austerity going on all around the globe.

The European Union (EU) has removed any semblance of democracy or sovereignty for the EU countries. They are mandating that countries when offered a bailout have no choice in the matter and must accept it. The consequence to this draconian measure is that they must adhere to all the provisions which include austerity, privatization (forced foreclosure) of tangible sovereign economic assets and capitulation to EU Capital Controls. If allowed to be fully enacted, the will of the people is once and for all a footnote in history.

Now back to Cyprus, and people should stand up and take notice and see what happens all around Europe on Tuesday after the Monday bank holiday.

The Cyprus government without any notice or discussion is imposing a tax on all bank deposits. The Cyprus government raped their citizens with the direct confiscation of depositor's money via an alleged legal tax on existing deposits of 6.75 percent on amounts less than 100,000 euros and 9.9 percent above that.

ECB Executive Board Member Joerg Asmussen said.

”Officials have struggled to find an agreement that would rescue Cyprus, which accounts for just half of a percent of the euro region’s economy, without unsettling investors in larger countries and sparking a new round of market contagion.”

Read that last paragraph carefully. Officials raped Cyprus citizens to avoid "unsettling investors (banksters) in larger countries". I thought risk was part of any investment, but not for the banksters. We are fully immersed in an economic system that privatizes profits and socializes losses.

This Godfather offer you can’t refuse BS that the banksters are imposing is beyond arrogant and the corrupt government officials that are going along with it are criminals. These policies being implemented in my humble estimation is going to create bank runs in Europe and should everywhere as all the banks are colluding with each other. Banks are no longer safe and you get near zero interest for loaning your bank your money so that they can leverage and loan it 10 to 1.

Remember folks, if you don’t have your money in your pocket, you really don’t have it!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294388/ATMs-emptied-Cyprus-savers-learn-10billion-euro-bailout-agreement-includes-levy-bank-accounts.html

Unbelievable. Didn't they learn when Americans had the wool pulled over our eyes by the banks and Wall Street in their "too big to fail" scheme? Let the banks fail.

You conservatives have got to stop thinking of government spending in the same way you think of household budgets. There is no similarity at all.

@Culheath ... thank you for pointing out a basic fact that seems to elude conservatives. A given household's level of spending generally does not affect its income. And, if it cuts its spending, it doesn't have much impact on the community at large. The government is different ... it is a major employer AND spender. If someone doesn't think that's important, then I ask them to visit any one of hundreds of towns in the US where the only major employer has shut down. Then, tell me that there was no effect on the community!

That's why I cringe when I hear people like Rep. Ryan claim that a government should only spend what it takes in. That would mean that the government would expand its spending in a good economy, and cut it during a recession (making things even worse). That's exactly the opposite of what it should be doing!

TRUSTVERIFY is the only post with the facts. Some of our other friends here never take the time to truly research the facts. I travel to Europe several times a year, and somewhat involved from a monetary standpoint and can tell you, politically, TRUSTVERIFY is completely accurate. As the world moves away from the dollar, those who like the current policies of our two party government, as yes, both parties have created this $hitty mess but neither wants the credit, the strength and worth of your dollar will be similar to the pesos. This problem of spending and debt is actually being engineered by Washington for a reason in which we will all see in four to eight years (this time frame has nothing to do with which party or what President controls the White House). Before you try to shoot this message do your research.

Thanks again "trust" for taking the time to put the info here for a little digestion!

Barry,

That would mean that the government would expand its spending in a good economy, and cut it during a recession (making things even worse). That's exactly the opposite of what it should be doing!

Actually Barry, that is exactly what our Government used to do before Herbert Hoover decided that Government intervention was the answer. As a result, Hoover and FDR's intervention caused the longest economic downturn in our history.

Alant98:

Not sure that the many 100's (1,000s ?) of USA depositors at UBS would agree with your statement about the safety of a Swiss "secret" bank account.

Barry-NJ:

A given household's level of spending generally does not affect its income

And therein lies the problem with most societal economic problems, i.e., they tend to live beyond their means!

That's why I cringe when I hear people like Rep. Ryan claim that a government should only spend what it takes in. That would mean that the government would expand its spending in a good economy, and cut it during a recession (making things even worse). That's exactly the opposite of what it should be doing!

Also, you are spot on in this statement. Unfortunately, most governments, like so many of the individual households "spend like there is no tomorrow" when the times are good, and make no plans/provisions for the bad times. Otherwise, many of those on assistance-of whatever source-would not be so impacted on the invariable highs and lows of an open economy.

oldmustang is a history revisionist. changes history to support stupid policies.

This is what happens when you bailout a bank. You have to let a bad business fail. We should have let them all fail 4 and a half years ago. These are the repercussions of our government's stupidity. There is no such thing as too big to fail.

Just for the record, it was the Republicans that bailed out the banks. So much for government not tinkering with private industry under GOP leadership.

Hello folks, we need to get rid of the Republican Democrat blame game, it serves no purpose other then to divide and both parties are equally complicit. Tarp was under a Republican Administration and QE3 is under a Democrat Administration.

People hold on to their political religion like it was their last bottle of water. If we are to come up with a solution to our economic problem it is going to be done by us, at the grass roots level and we are going to need everybody we can get to help fix it. The solution is not going to come from Washington, it is broken. Both parties have and continue to put us deeper in debt.

If we don't fix it folks, it aint getting done! We need to educate ourselves and do the research to understand why we are where we are in terms of our failed economy. And then help educate as many as we can. Together we can do it!

I would humbly recommend the PDF download or YouTube video of The Creature from Jekyll Island By Edward Griffin as a good start.

IMHO,

oldmustang is a history revisionist. changes history to support stupid policies.

The history of this country doesn't start after the stock market crash of 1929. The longest economic downturn in this country prior to the great depression was approximately 5.5 years, the average was approximately 2.5 years.

The first administration to ever intervene in the economy to help ease the people's pain was Hoover's. FDR doubled down on Hoover's failed policies and together they created a downturn so long that it more than doubled the previous record holder.

The revisionists are those who believe that the New Deal did anything more than start us down the path to where we are today.

Barry-NJ,... I have a tendency to disagree with your assessment on personal spending. This is related to hourly wage earners, and not salaried or fixed income individuals. Assuming the "game" isn't rigged with income subsidies, i.e., food, housing, and medical subsidies, the hourly wage earner will have so much left over after each check to spend on non essential items, which will be subject to sales taxes. Those sales taxes are then used by the municipality in which that person lives, to pay off bond debts for some desired public arena such a ball playing field. ( example ) The park improvement is to raise the overall quality of living in the town for all of the residents, ( predetermined by surveys and the like. ) As long as all the hourly wage earners are working and playing ball, supposedly they are happy and healthy. As soon as their work place, ( large factory ) goes belly up, the workers loose income, discretionary spending declines, sales tax revenues decline associated to the spending declines, the ball park then is not funded and declines, and the health and happiness of the workers decline. Subsidizing food for healthy nutrition in the fixed income crowd doesn't assist the sales tax revenues, thus helping the ball park, so the wage earner looses still on the happiness index, and the exercise index.

If you don't believe me, look at all the health problems, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, etc., in areas where there is little healthy exercise venues available, like walking in a safe park, because the park spaces are opened up due to sales tax availability to the municipalities. Yes, urban ghettos have basketball hoops in vacant lots, for the gang bangers to hang out in, but you don't see the more elderly taking a stroll there for their heart condition exercise. They don't even sit on their front porches in the sun in areas of large numbers of drive by shootings. And I'll note, often these areas have large populations of folks sustained by government subsidies, for food, shelter and medical care.

So note my disagreement, and the reason's why labor wages are significant to municipal sales tax receipts.

TrustVerify is correct. The two party system is a way to keep the people divided. The "team" mentality. Conquer and divide.

The U.S. government did the same thing to us as Cypress is doing to their people. The only difference is the U.S. took our money from the taxes they confiscate from us and gave it to the banks rather than direct depositing it from our bank accounts.

We've got to stop blaming one party over another, or one administration over another. They all bow and show their loyalty where their campaign dollars are buttered the most, and it's not with the people.

So note my disagreement, and the reason's why labor wages are significant to municipal sales tax receipts

Steve .. I don't disagree with you. Maybe I wasn't clear in my posting. My point was that labor wages in a small community, just like federal government spending, has widespread implications for the economy at large. This is different from household spending, where a cutback by any particular household has no measurable impact on the economy. It makes to sense to claim that a government should be run like an individual household.

The first administration to ever intervene in the economy to help ease the people's pain was Hoover's. FDR doubled down on Hoover's failed policies and together they created a downturn so long that it more than doubled the previous record holder.

1) The Hoover Administration was very reluctant to do anything. If it (and the Federal Reserve) had been more proactive, we could have avoided the economic misery caused by the collapse of banks, which didn't end until the Roosevelt Administration.

2) Mid-way through the depression, government spending was actually CUT. Many economist believe that action prolonged the depression.

Ironically, it was government spending (arms purchases by the British and American governments) that finally cemented the recovery.

Let the wealthy take it on the chin. It was their pocket lining that caused the whole problem. They are the ones who will suffer if the banks go under and the country defaults on its debt. Most common people don't own government securities. The whole scenario reeks of elitist money grabbing. At some point, it will be "off with their heads" and that will be none too soon.

Right wingers still trying to pretend it's Obama's policies driving our debt. The CBO said otherwise when it revised it's budget analysis in the summer of 2008. Before Obama even got the nomination. They projected a deficit of well over 1 trillion regardless of who won the election and 1 trillion plus deficits at least through 2011.

Whoever won the presidency in 2008 was going to face a grim fiscal situation, a fact already well known as the presidential campaign got underway. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) presented a sobering outlook in its 2008 summer update,[1] and during the autumn, the news got relentlessly worse. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) that became embroiled in the housing meltdown, failed in early September; two big financial firms — AIG and Lehman Brothers — collapsed soon thereafter; and others teetered. In December 2008, the National Bureau of Economic Research confirmed that the nation was in recession and pegged the starting date as December 2007. By the time CBO issued its new projections on January 7, 2009 — two weeks before Inauguration Day — it had already put the 2009 deficit at well over $1 trillion.[2]

The recession battered the budget, driving down tax revenues and swelling outlays for unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other safety-net programs.[3] Using CBO’s August 2008 projections as a benchmark, we calculate that the changed economic outlook alone accounts for over $400 billion of the deficit each year in 2009 through 2011 and slightly smaller amounts in subsequent years. Those effects persist; even in 2018, the deterioration in the economy since the summer of 2008 will account for over $300 billion in added deficits, much of it in the form of additional debt-service costs

Larry:

Right wingers still trying to pretend it's Obama's policies driving our debt.

What some of us are trying to say is it doesn't matter if Obama is to blame because he is in office, or it's Bush's fault when he was in office, the right wingers, the left wingers, or whoever is in power at some particular time.

ALL makes and models of the government are in bed with corporations and those who pay to keep them in power. It doesn't matter who the flavor of the month happens to be; the people need to take back their power because we've already given up too much.

The people will either smarten up and let go of this psychological "team loyalty" game the government uses to keep us divided and them in power, or we're doomed.

Debi: You aren't a right winger. What you feel and what they try to sell are 2 different things. Those on the right do indeed claim the majority of our debt belongs to Obama and that's ridiculous. I don't excuse Obama but I can do simple math.

Barry... Lots of people blame Hoover for the Depression economics, much of which was him being in the wrong place at the wrong time in history. Hoover actually paid out of his own pocket, for aid for victims who suffered devastating flood damage caused by the Mississippi River, earning him the nickname "The Great Humanitarian". In Hoover's day there wasn't the understanding of soil conservation, water conservation, and a Congress existed at the bidding of the big industrial barons of the day. Farms were horse and mule teams, and the military complex was biplanes and mule teams. After FDR and Truman we were a superpower, before that we were second fiddle to Europe's colonial ambitions.

So, I'm sort of one to look at US status as one which starts with the post Truman presidents, the building of the interstate highway system, commercial air transportation, and the electrification projects allowing rural America power, and also telephone communication for the general public. Truman's period changed war "thinking", and LBJ's years were the TV news years, and the subsequent social value changes including civil rights, and economic policy to pay for government expansion. You must remember Evert Dirksen who as a Republican made late night deals with LBJ, the Democrat. It was Evert Dirksen who said about government spending, " A million here, and a million there, pretty soon you're talking about real money. " Since when has the federal government considered a million dollars money? GM wasn't bailed out with a million or two, it was bailed out with thousands of millions. In Herbert Hoover's day, $50 could probably get you a matched team of mules.

Waa,ha,ha,ha,haha. Hope the Cypriots tell the sons-ah-bitchs where to go and what they can do when they get there. The US has exported gwaddamned right wing thieves.

Those on the right do indeed claim the majority of our debt belongs to Obama and that's ridiculous.

The point is, it doesn't matter WHO is to blame. It matters WHAT is to blame.

Whoever happens to be in the president's seat, democrat or republican, and with the aid of congress, has teamed up with corporations and we are now living in a state of crony capitalism. Here is a Wiki description of crony capitalism:

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of dirigisme.^[1] Crony capitalism is believed to arise when political cronyism spills over into the business world; self-serving friendships and family ties between businessmen and the government influence the economy and society to the extent that it corrupts public-serving economic and political ideals.

The term "crony capitalism" made a significant impact in the public arena as an explanation of the Asian financial crisis.^[2] It is also used world wide to describe virtually any governmental decisions favoring "cronies" of governmental officials. In many cases, the term is used interchangeably with corporate welfare; to the extent that there is a difference, the latter might be restricted only to direct government subsidies of major corporations, excluding tax loopholes and all manner of regulatory and trade decisions, which in practice could be much larger than any direct subsidies.

Here is the link. As you read, you will recognize our country as it is today:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism

Debi: "The U.S. government did the same thing to us as Cypress is doing to their people. The only difference is the U.S. took our money from the taxes they confiscate from us and gave it to the banks rather than direct depositing it from our bank accounts."

Quick: How much did all of TARP end up costing each taxpayer? Hint: It's about the size of the U.S. military budget for one week.

I don't mind TARP (even though it was a republican program), and I'm not even overly concerned about the size of the military. (Though I think government should listen to the Joint Chiefs rather than the industry lobbyists when if comes to military budget allocations.)

But saying that TARP had the same effect on U.S. taxpayers than what Cypress is now talking about is utter hyperbole.

What everyone fails to notice is the people of bankrupt countries are perfectly happy to let their governments bankrupt their country until the @!$%# hits the fan. Only then do they cry foul. The USA may be in the same boat. We have over 100% debt and yet we keep electing the people who put us in this situation (Republicans & Democrats) over and over again. Get a clue. The public debt is OUR FAULT.

Barry,

1) The Hoover Administration was very reluctant to do anything. If it (and the Federal Reserve) had been more proactive, we could have avoided the economic misery caused by the collapse of banks, which didn't end until the Roosevelt Administration

Hoover responded to the crash by exploding government spending and deficits so much so that FDR used it against him in the presidential campaign, saying he presided over the most profligate peacetime spending in US history. It was after the failure of increased spending that Hoover cut spending(by less than 1.5%) and astronomically raised taxes, helping to make the depression great.

You cannot in good conscience, attack the Fed's reaction to the crash, without first acknowledging the Fed's cheap credit, easy money policies that helped to create the boom and the inevitable bust in the first place. Also, many bank failures were due to more unintended consequences of government intervention. A law that did not allow banks to do business across state lines(some were unable to due business across county lines), made bank runs much more devastating.

2) Mid-way through the depression, government spending was actually CUT. Many economist believe that action prolonged the depression.

Not Economists, Keynesian Theorists. There is a difference. The beauty of Keynesian Theory is that when your policies fail, you can just say 'it proves that we didn't spend enough'. FDR's spending cuts were minimal and you're neglecting to mention the other things going on at the time that affected the economy. The Wagner Act allowed unions to shut down businesses all across the country through labor strikes and walk-outs. The new social security tax had just been implemented along with a new undistributed profits tax for business.

Ironically, it was government spending (arms purchases by the British and American governments) that finally cemented the recovery.

War can provide an immediate boost to the economy, but the overall effects of war(re-allocation of labor and raw materials, loss of life) are never good for the long term health of an economy.

Swan:

We have over 100% debt and yet we keep electing the people who put us in this situation (Republicans & Democrats) over and over again. Get a clue. The public debt is OUR FAULT.

It's our system. We could elect Mother Theresa and she would eventually give in to the system, or be out. The only ones who can change the system are the ones taking advantage of it just the way it is, so no change will ever happen.

That's not to say we don't have some responsibility. You have some of the public unconcerned with taking money from the people to prop up the capitalistic banks (privatize profits, socialize losses) and overfeeding and over budgeting a military that has the ability to destroy the world ten times over:

I don't mind TARP (even though it was a republican program), and I'm not even overly concerned about the size of the military. (Though I think government should listen to the Joint Chiefs rather than the industry lobbyists when if comes to military budget allocations.)

Our only hope is to somehow change the system.

Sorry Debi but it's a government "by the people". There are always 3rd party candidates. Gary Johnson ran on a platform if fiscal responsibility. Did you vote for him? I did. Americans refuse to try anything new so this is what we get. You can't claim it's the system when there are other options and " the people" refuse to give them a shot.

Sorry Debi but it's a government "by the people".

Haven't you noticed Swan, a government "by the people" changed long ago.

Until a problem is acknowledged, there is no hope for change.

Debi: it is still "A government of the people, by the people and for the people."

"Corporations are people, too, my friend." Mitt Romney, 2012

Haven't you noticed Swan, a government "by the people" changed long ago.

Until a problem is acknowledged, there is no hope for change.

I think it's you that isn't acknowledging the problem. It's easy to blame someone else. Again who do you vote for? Do you vote for Republicans and Democrats year after year? That's the problem. WE put these people in office and when they screw up WE put them right back in again. If YOU personally can't even vote for someone new how do you expect things to change? How can you even begin to blame the system? WE are the system.

I'm not really a Michaen Jackson fan. I'm more of heavy metal guy however man in the mirror is still a great song.

Debi: it is still "A government of the people, by the people and for the people."

If you really believe that, dream on:

August 30, 2011 bytrhickman

"The Best Government Corporations Can Buy

The other day I got an actual, physical letter from CREDO wanting to know if my phone company wanted a ‘Tea Party’ president.

Now CREDO is, itself, a telecommunications wireless company based out of San Francisco. As a company it is very active in what you might call either ‘progressive’ or ‘left-wing’ politics depending upon your current leanings. According to the Wikipedia, they have raised over $65 million for “nonprofit organizations such as Greenpeace, Planned Parenthood and Democracy Now.

Their argument to me: switch my phone service to CREDO so as to put my money behind progressive political change rather than supporting AT&T or Verizon who, according to them, support Tea Party and/or Republican candidates and such ‘dangerous views’ as ‘wives, be submissive to your husbands’, ‘intelligent design’ and ‘counseling centers that (try) to turn gay men into heterosexuals through prayer.’

When my wife read this letter to me I was filled with anger, outrage and despair. Not because of any party affiliation on my part or allegiance to either ‘progressive’ or ‘conservative’ views. In fact, I support a number of progressive ideas and ideals.

No, I was outraged because this is the next logical step in the death of the American Republic.

CREDO is simply acknowledging a more efficient way of capitalizing and monetizing democracy.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in … a few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones.

The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. … Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

Albert Einstein (1949)

Einstein’s caution of fifty years ago has become today’s reality. You cannot get elected to office without a boat-load of money. The only entities who have enough cash to get politicians elected are corporations. So politicians enact laws to help pay back the corporations that get them elected (or bail them out when they should have failed like all those other businesses that were too small to have paid enough to elect anyone).

A 2003 documentary film The Corporation by Mark Achbar asserts that the corporation exhibits many of the traits found in psychopaths:

• Callous unconcern for the feelings of others.
• Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships;
• Reckless disregard for the safety of others;
• Deceitfulness: repeated lying and conning of others for profit;
• Incapactiy to experience guilt;
• Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behavior.

And yet, as Chris Hedges points out in his book ‘Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle’, under the American legal and political systems, corporations have the same legal rights as individuals. Worse, because they have access to vastly greater sums of money than individuals, their political contributions … which U.S. politics now demand in titan-sized numbers for the success of any candidate … corporations have vastly greater influence on which candidate you hear and see the most as well as which candidates you NEVER hear of because they have no bucks to become Buck Rogers.

One might argue that this means our government is essentially being chosen for us by psychopaths.

But now, thanks to CREDO, we no longer have to pretend. Instead of bothering to go to the voting booth to select from a field of candidates determined by which corporation gave the most money to their campaign, all we have to do is CHOOSE OUR CANDIDATE THROUGH WHICH CORPORATIONS WE SUPPORT. Then the corporations that are the most successful can chose for us the candidates that they prefer on our behalf … and buy them for us.

I believe in free enterprise. I believe corporations can and do make many aspects of our lives better … but I don’t want my government chosen by their board of directors. Corporate products need to be in stores … not in legislatures.

The best government corporations can buy … is cheap, disposable, hazardous and potentially lethal."

All that and you refuse to tell me who you voted for. Why is that?

Guess you still don't understand it, or else who I voted for or didn't vote for, wouldn't have mattered.

I'm registered as an Independent, but only choose to vote in the local elections and for propositions.

I value my vote, and the candidates I am spoon fed in the larger elections do not deserve my vote, although if Elizabeth Warren had been a candidate where my vote would have been effective, I would have given her my vote.

So you don't even vote for President. I'm not sure why you are complaining then. The problem isn't with the system. The problem is people are naturally selfish. They will only change when it hits them hard enough. The debt has been rising since Reagan with some respite during Clinton. Who cared? It's not like it was a secret. Ross Perot ran on a fiscal responsibility platform. Did he win? No. People could have voted for him but most didn't. Did GM care during the good times when they were building substandard cars? No. They were still making money, and when they got in trouble the people WE put in office bailed them out. Look at your ballot. there are always other people to vote for but few do. It's not the system it's the people. Nothing forces them to vote for a Republican or Democrat. They are stupid enough to do themselves over and over again. You seem to think people should not take any blame for being stuborn, stupid and selfish. I beg to differ.

I live in Russia now. Russia does have its problems and many Americans like the bash Putin but at least he keeps Russia's debt low. It's close to 10% while US debt is over 100%. Sometimes it takes a bad ass to keep things under control.

So you don't even vote for President. I'm not sure why you are complaining then.

It's like having a choice of voting for the devil or the devil's twin. Those choices are produced by the system and not wanting to give my vote to either is not a matter of being selfish.

If there is a decent candidate on the ballot, I will vote for them, but it is very rare.

Again you willfully ignore the fact that there are more than two candidates. You aren't going to find a candidate who is perfect in your eyes unless you are running for office yourself. There are candidates promoting fiscal responsibility (Gary Johnson in 2012) and a balanced budget.

There were specific issues Gary Johnson and I were in agreement with; such as ending the war and ending the war on drugs.

But candidates say many things the voters want to hear and then change their story once in office; i.e., Obama and the protection of civil liberties. That's why past character is important and a key to who the candidate really is, not what they portray.

Johnson was in the construction business and built that company into a multi million dollar business. Knowing a little about the construction business, that would not have been possible without making deals with the devil; thus, he did not get my vote.

that would not have been possible without making deals with the devil; thus, he did not get my vote.

Oh so you're a religious fruit cake. What a waste of time. Well I guess there is no point in discussing this any more.

Oh so you're a religious fruit cake. What a waste of time. Well I guess there is no point in discussing this any more.

Isn't it funny how people can read things so wrong?

I'm actually an atheist and was just using the word "devil" as another term for bad or evil.

You may think discussion with a "religious fruit cake" is a waste of your time, but continued discussion with someone narrow minded and unable to see the forest from the trees, is a waste of mine.

It's not my fault that you can't make yourself clear. The word "devil" devoid of context means devil. Furthermore the idea that because someone is a successful business man they are automatically morally corrupt is patently ridiculous.

The word "devil" devoid of context means devil.

The phrase "deals with the devil" is devoid of context?

It's not my fault that you can't make yourself clear.

It was clear. You wrongly accused me of being a religious zealot because you did not recognize the secular meaning of a commonly used phrase, and you want to blame me?

This is a microcosm of what is meant by no one wanting to accept responsibility and accountability any longer, from this little incident, all the way up to the banks and Wall Street and those in charge of this country. Everyone claims "It's not my fault".

The phrase "deals with the devil" is devoid of context?

Yes, it is devoid of any context which would cause someone to necessarily assume devil did not mean a malicious supernatural being.

It was clear. You wrongly accused me of being a religious zealot because you did not recognize the secular meaning of a commonly used phrase, and you want to blame me?

Nonsense! The phase in an of itself can have a secular connotations, however your use of it was devoid of any context which pointed in that direction. There are many stories of people making deals with the "devil" to gain success in life in exchange for their soul. In case you hadn't noticed this web site is rampant with posters who frequently use devil for its most basic meaning. I suggest you make yourself more clear in the future.

Everyone claims "It's not my fault".

And you're one of them

BTW look up "deal with the devil" on wikipedia. You have to scroll way down to the bottom before we get to your usage.

The fed gave a stealth bailout that dwarfs the TARP bailout in 2008. The Fed allowed banks to borrow unlimited free money that totaled 12.8 trillion which allowed them to pay back TARP loans in months despite continuing double digit defaults. This watered down our money and allowed bank CEO's to continue to get mega million bonuses while they paid us back with profits from our own money.

Frankly, the government of Cyprus should tell the IMF, the banks, and Germany they won't be imposing the austerity measures and just default on the debt.

What are they going to do, attack the country?

Just like America. If you work hard, pay your bills, put what you can aside and don't live on credit you get to pay for all the irresponsible jerks living on credit then filing bankruptcy.

Poor Katy living in a fantasy world where people are always taking advantage of her hard work and moral superiority. Get back to me when something happens that actually afefcts you in the Real World. Like most Right WIng ideologues you react to the phantasms in your head - things that"might" happen and almost never do.

I am no right wing conservative I am a moderate progressive independent. But I as Katy and many liberals are just as tried as she is about the American Dream of working hard , saving, and having to bare the burden of the many irresponsible out there from ALL ideological political beliefs. AND THAT INCLUDES THE GREEDY CORPORATIONS THAT HAVE ADMINISTERED THEIR MONEY BADLY and we have had to bail them out. Not to say the average investors that lost a great deal of their savings in now closed corporations. Your damn right American in general are pissed off and worried and rightly so.

China they've got majority of US debt.

Their share of US debt is about the same as that held by Japan. This Chicken-Little stuff is crap.

So Ronald, you have no problems whatsoever with a government forcibly taking YOUR money you earned by the sweat of your brow to pay for their irresponsible behavior? Really? How is Katy morally superior in the respect that she values hard work, is fiscally responsible and does not live beyond her means? Sounds like you are the one with a 'moral superiority' problem to believe she should just accept tyrannical governmental behavior. There is nothing ideological about standing up for one's personal freedoms and liberties as well as the right to keep what they rightfully earned. And for you to believe that there is a world where people and or governments don't try to take advantage of one's hard work for the benefit of a few others...well..sounds like you are the one experiencing a 'phantasm' my friend. Re-read the article without your ideological lenses..because it 'just might happen'.

I'm curious how a 70 year old woman who has worked since she was 12, paid cash for everything and never voted for a Republican ever became a right wing ideologue living in a fantasy world.

Gary-1874133So

Ronald, you have no problems whatsoever with a government forcibly taking YOUR money you earned by the sweat of your brow to pay for their irresponsible behavior?

It's not the government, it's the banks.

And for you to believe that there is a world where people and or governments don't try to take advantage of one's hard work for the benefit of a few others....

Here we would call them the 1%. Especially the 1/10 of 1% who have been robbing the productivity from the rest of us at an ever accelerating rate for the last 30 years.

Absolutely, culheath, Amen.

Privatize profits, socialize risks. That's the capitlist/fascist way.

"As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word
derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied
bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism
was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism,
with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and
revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive
persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of
nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both
classical liberalism and Marxism."

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html

"Here we would call them the 1%..."

And in communist Russia they called them the ruling party.

The problem isn't capitalism. It's crony capitalism.

----------

World's worst economies are home grown - Most of their injuries are self-inflicted by corrupt, arbitrary leadership

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37603745/ns/business-forbescom/

Forbes screened IMF data for countries that have low and declining per-capita GDP, high trade deficits and high inflation, all indicators of bad economic management regardless of the country's inherent wealth.

All have at least one trait in common: Their governments discourage private investment — and economic growth — through policies of crony capitalism, expropriation or arbitrary enforcement of the laws. That makes it hard to generate hard currency to pay off government debt and discourages citizens from investing in education to improve their own economic lot.

Sixth-place Burundi, like many of the countries on this list, has another big problem: bloated government payrolls.

The world bank and IMF hold most of the debts accordingto what I've read

Actually, a lot of it is held by the Federal Reserve, which is owned by the Federal Banks.

So, indirectly, the big banks own a large part of the debt.

Also, a large part of the debt is owed to various trust funds (SS, Fed retirerees) set up for the various agencies that work on a "pay now, get later" type system. Remember, the US Post Office has to pay 75 years in advance, where do you think that money goes, into a "lock box" ?

A "levy"? Is that what NBC News and its reporters now refer to "confiscation" as?

I think the one-time levy (or tax) is stupid, but is it any different than a property tax?

That's nothing CNN headline reads Cyprus gets big bailout

Yes, I think sudden confiscation of assets is wrong and far different than a property tax that has hundreds of years of historical precedent. Nobody buys a house without expecting a property tax bill every year. On the other hand, nobody opens a savings account with the expectation that they will wake up one morning and find the government has taken 10% of their money.

Whether or not Cyprus is to blame, it's clear that their citizens also have NO real representation in this matter. Cynicism aside, people can still ultimately choose to vote people out of office if they feel those people want to tax them too heavily.

Cypriots are being extorted by the EU in this case with a "take it or we'll screw you" offer.

You hit the nail right on the head, Steve. The rich are doing better than EVER, while the rest of us struggle just to eat. As long as you are a RICH turd you have nothing to fear, just steal more from the WORKING class and the mouths of the poor.

Yep grouchee, as long as you put your money in the Cayman Island banks, or Switzerland you'll be just fine. The local banks can be raided to save the rich from any monetary loss.

A property tax (in this country, at least) is debated upon and voted in by our elected representatives in accordance with local laws and state constitutions. This unprecedented seizure of personal wealth was decided in secret over the weekend by the I.M.F., elected by no one in Cyprus, based on no law or legal authority that anyone has been able to cite. Yes, I'd say there's a huge difference. It's called representative democracy versus tyranny.

This unprecedented seizure of personal wealth was decided in secret over the weekend by the I.M.F., elected by no one in Cyprus, based on no law or legal authority that anyone has been able to cite.

Well, obviously it has a legal basis or it couldn't be implemented. And, as the article makes clear, it is being done by the Cypriot government. The article made no mention of the IMF, which has stayed out of the Euro zone for the most part.

This is just the beginning of the real depression.....you know, the one that has been delayed by GIVING more and more to the rich.....because they're "entitled". Bail out the rich bankers and Wall Street THIEVES and to hell with the rest of us.

I don't get why you are so mad at the wealthy. The wealthy people I know have worked very hard long hours to build their business even went back to school to better their knowledge about running a business. When you talk like a person that thinks they deserve the same as a person that worked hard for their wealth you sound like an envious immature person.I don't agree with the large bonuses the ceo's get but think about it they have lots on their plate and are responsible for the growth of the company. This is a capitalist country if you want the same as every one else with very little output go to a socialist or communist country and stop trying to change this one.

This is insane that the EU can get away with this and if I were in any of those debt ridden countries I'd be pulling all my savings out immediately because this is only the beginning.

The EU is doing nothing. The Cypriot government is doing it in order to get a bailout from the EU. Do you think that the EU has an obligation to lend money to countries on whatever terms those countries feel like meeting? If Cyprus feels those terms are onerous, it doesn't have to take the bailout funds.

It isn't the poor or middle class demanding the right to pay ever lower taxes despite the 400 richest on Forbes list having a net worth that exceeds the bottom 65% of Americans or 185 million people. They aren't over taxed.

I am a liberal who believes in fiscal responsibility. I support cuts in social programs but also increased taxes on those that can most afford it. I opposed Bush increasing our debt 6.4 trillion over his 8 years. An average of 800 billion each and every year despite his funding his wars off the books.

In Bush's first campaign he promised to cut taxes for the rich 400 billion a year yet promised to cut the debt in half. He doubled it. Now Ryan proposes to cut taxes 450 billion a year for the rich and balance the budget in 10 years. He's lying also. When republicans are serious about balancing the budget the number one item on the bill won't be cutting revenue.

i think iceland would be a better example, they jailed the bankers and refused their debt/austerity plan and are now on the fast track to recovery

Iceland.....the only country with any brains!!!!!

or is it? We only have the capitalist's story on that.

There are more rich democrats than republicans. Gates or Buffet either one are worth 300 times a Romney. Why is it ok to take money from democratic tax payers to fund foreign occupation but not ok to take from republicans to fund our own?

You refer to "nations"......it would be far more accurate to refer to "the filthy rich".

Grouch, you seem to have a money envy problem. Don't you have an Occupy meeting to go to today?

Neg- money envy? really? when corporations and banks position themselves to be "too big to fail" what they have really done, with our elected officials help, is to use public monies to cover there risks. I have contempt for that kind of wealth and will always stand against it.

If you will check there are lot's of wealthy people that are not bankers or ceo's. So I agree with neg that grouch sounds like he should have what the wealthy have with very little work or brains. He sounds like waa waa I'm not as smart as the ones that made money so I should be equal for doing nothing but complaining about the wealthy. Grow up

They closed the banks until Tuesday. At least they can think that far in advance.

You wouldn't have a choice since they already have you money and lowering your account by 10%.

AG holder has openly stated now that not only are the banks to big to fail but are now to big to prosecute, so this pretty much gives them a free pass for anything, if they bet and fail we will bail them again if they break outside the the minimum banking regulations we have now it will be ignored or any fine that may be levied will never equal out the profit made on the illegal bet/deal

You are right about that!

@B707320C ... Thank you for pointing out that the primary problem that Cyrpus faces stems from its use of the Euro. The heart of Greece's problem is also the Euro. These "southern" European countries have no business being in the same currency union as the hyper-efficient French and Germans. If these countries controlled their own currencies, they could deflate their way out of trouble. That's not an easy solution, but far less painless than what they're facing.

They did it to social security, now they'll try to do it to our life savings. Republicans won't be satisfied until the top 1% have it all and we're eating out of garbage cans.

They can't. Banks are closed until Tuesday.

I agree, just when you think the socialists can't be any dumber they figure out a new way to cause a run on the banks.

Devaluation is like rain, it falls on the rich, the middle class and the poor alike.