WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED
ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
YEAR THREE
Name
|
Published
|
OVERVIEW
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 14
|
Dec
18, 2012
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 15
|
Jan. 02, 2013
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 16
|
Jan. 08, 2013
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 16 EXTRA
|
Jan. 11, 2013
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART
17
|
Jan. 15, 2013
|
IN THIS
ISSUE
1. Tid
Bit.
2. A
different view on Social Security = A must read.
3. Senate
Demos. = President, act unilaterally on debt.
4.
Last press conference of first term.
5. No
body believes Obama.
6. GOP
promotes government shut down.
7.
What's next.
8.
Corporations must pay fair share.
9.
Drones are not new.
10. The Soul of America
11. Washington
TID BIT
I don't profess to be a
good writer. Some may think I can't
write at all, but take a look at a statement, that appeared on the internet
from a, supposedly responsible news organization.
"USA
Now, my question: Is
he confessing to doping while he is on Oprah Winfrey's interview, or is he
confessing to doping, in Oprah Winfrey interview? You see how different that statement is when
you just put in a comma. Oh, I miss them
sometimes too.
Also, instead, how
about this? During an interview with
Oprah Winfrey, Lance Armstrong plans to confesses to doping.
~~~
A DIFFERENT
VIEW FROM MINE
ON
SOCIAL
SECURITY
&
OUR DEBT
By Floyd Bowman
Publisher
"Opinions Based On Facts"
First, a correction
to a point I made in "Part 16 EXTRA."
In two places, I referred to the amount of money that had been stolen
from the Social Security Trust Fund, as $3.2 trillion. That amount is incorrect and I apologize for
the error. The correct amount is $2.7
trillion, as is referred to in the article printed below.
In Part 16 EXTRA, I
provided you my take on facts relating to Social Security. At that time, I told you about a retired
Economist by the name of Allen W. Smith, Ph.D., that has spent the past 12
years of his life, and many, many of his own dollars, trying to educate the
public about what has happened to Social Security (SS) over the years. My association with him is the basis for my,
rather extensive, knowledge on the subject.
Since my posting of
Part 16 EXTRA, Dr. Smith and I have been corresponding and I have learned that
he has a bit of a different view than I have, regarding the fact that SS is not
now and never has contributed to the budget deficit. I have tremendous
respect for Dr. Smith's opinions and, even though I still feel the same about
the matter, he does have a different view point and, as usual, he is right. I want you to read what he has written
me. It follows:
Floyd,
I agree
that there would be enough money to pay full benefits until 2036 if the
government had not stolen the $2.7 trillion. And I agree that the
government should pay back all of that stolen money. I also agree that
money the government owes its citizens should be taken just a seriously as debt
owed to foreigners. That is why I have fought so hard for the
past 12 years to end the government theft of Social Security. If the
looting had stopped in 2000, when I first started reporting it, the trust
fund would have a substantial amount of real assets today--not the whole $2.7
trillion, but a lot more than zero. And I will continue to use
these talking points in pointing out what the moral obligations of the
government are.
But for
purposes of understanding the problem, we need to recognize the harsh
reality. That reality is that Social Security does not have a dime in
real assets that can be turned into cash. The only thing Social Security
really has is its annual tax revenue. Instead of saying Social
Security has enough money to pay full benefits until 2036, the harsh reality is
that Social Security does not have enough money to pay full benefits even for
the current year.
As for
the government, itself, it is more than broke. It cannot operate without
borrowing massive amounts of money. The obvious solution in the past to a
situation like this would have been to raise taxes enough so that the
government could pay all of its bills, including its debt to Social
Security. That would be economically possible today, but it is not politically possible with so many crazy people
in the Congress led by a nut like Grover Norquist, who should be arrested and
put on trial for treason. I'm sure it is a violation of the Constitution
for members of Congress to ignore the needs of their constituents and pledge
their allegiance to a madman like Norquist.
I believe
we may be facing a crisis worse than anything this great nation has
ever faced since its founding. The Republican party has in recent
years controlled enough state governments to gerrymander many
Congressional districts in such a way as to make it almost impossible for
Democrats to win in these districts. That is why we have a Republican
House of representative and a Democrat Senate. You can't gerrymander
Senate districts. The Congress has become dysfunctional.
The
bottom line is that Social Security does not have any real assets except its
tax revenue. It has been the victim of a $2.7 trillion theft, but the
thief is on the verge of bankruptcy and has a dysfunctional Congress. At
this point I don't see how the government can or will repay its
massive debt to Social Security.
A number
of years ago, I was owed a substantial amount of money by a local
realtor. I took the case to small claims court and won. The
following day I received a letter from a lawyer for the realtor stating that
his client had filed for bankruptcy and it would be unlawful for me to attempt
to collect the money. There was nothing I could legally do about
this.
I fear
that the government's debt to Social Security may end up in a similar
way.
I'm sorry
to be so pessimistic but that is the way I see it at this time.
Friend
Allen
Dr. Smith is certainly
right of course. My concern is, that the
way Republicans lie, they will convenience the public and other legislators
that SS does add to the budget deficit.
Of course, it does now, in accordance with Dr. Smith's statements, BUT it is not the program of SS that has caused
it. My statement that SS is the most
successful program the government has ever developed is true and it should not
be changed.
I want to add a, "right
on," about Dr. Smith's reference to Grover Norquist. You might want to read Dr. Smith's comments a
second time, so as to really absorb his valuable thinking. Thanks so much Allen.
~~~
Senate
Democrats Urge Obama to Act Unilaterally on Debt Ceiling if Necessary
Senate
Democratic leaders sent what Politico describes
as a “strongly worded letter” to President Obama Friday, urging him to go at it
alone and raise the debt ceiling without Congress if a bipartisan agreement
can’t be reached in time. The letter is
the latest illustration of how Democrats in Congress are increasingly convinced
Obama has the legal power to raise the debt ceiling unilaterally through the
14th Amendment. So far, the White House has not been too eager to discuss the
option. In the summer of 2011, Obama said he wasn’t convinced. “I have talked to my lawyers,” Obama said
then, according to the Hill. “They
are not persuaded that that is a winning argument.”
Obama’s other main
choice for acting unilaterally if he’s not comfortable with the 14th Amendment
argument is the now-famous “platinum coin” option. But a Democratic aide tells the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent that
Senate Democrats see the 14th Amendment as the preferable choice because the
coin idea simply wouldn’t play very well with the public.
Whatever the legal
arguments for and against it, the imagery will be difficult to combat,” the
aide said. “What better symbol of
out-of-control government spending could you have than a trillion dollar coin?”
Reuters reports that
Democrats in the Senate are exploring other legal possibilities that could help
the president act without Congress.
In the letter, Senators
Harry Reid Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, and Pat Murray make it clear they will
support the president if he decides to circumvent Congress, insisting that
Obama “must make clear that you will never allow our nation’s economy and reputation
to be held hostage.” Failing to raise
the debt ceiling could have disastrous consequences for the economy, according
to the senators.
“In the event, that Republicans make good on
their threat by failing to act, or by moving unilaterally to pass a debt limit
extension, only as part of an unbalanced or unreasonable legislation, we
believe you must be willing to take any lawful steps to ensure, that America
does not break its promises and trigger a global economic crisis — without
congressional approval, if necessary.,” the Friday letter to Obama says.
~~~
LAST PRESS CONFERENCE
OF
FIRST TERM
By Floyd Bowman
Publisher
"Opinions Based On Facts
On Monday, January 14, 2013, President Obama held his
final press conference of his first term with some profound statements. As Jason Sattler of The National Memo,
reported on January 14, the President started noting that the economy is
growing and would keep growing “as long
as Washington politics don’t get in the way of
America
His tone
was stern and confrontational, as he declared his intention to use the
beginning of his second term to stop the trend of America
“The issue
here is whether or not America
“These are
bills that have already been racked up, and we need to pay them,” he insisted. “So, while I’m willing to compromise and find
common ground over how to reduce our deficits, America
Though
some Republicans have argued that hitting the debt limit wouldn’t necessarily
trigger a default, the President was definite that refusal to raise the limit
would have catastrophic effects.
“If
congressional Republicans refuse to pay America
“We might
not be able to pay our troops, or honor our contracts with small-business
owners. Food inspectors, air-traffic
controllers, specialists, who track down loose nuclear materials, wouldn’t get
their paychecks. Investors around the
world will ask, if the United States of America
He pointed
out that he already had signed on for $2.5 trillion in cuts toward deficit
reduction and that he would
continue to work for more reduction, but, again, he said he would not negotiate
when it come to raising the debt limit.
“What I will not do is to have that
negotiation with a gun at the head of the American people — the threat that
unless we get our way, unless you gut Medicare or Medicaid or you know,
otherwise, slash things that the American people don’t believe should be
slashed, that we’re going to threaten to wreck the entire economy. That is not how, historically, this has been
done. That’s not how we’re going to do it this time.”
"While I will negotiate over many things," he said, "I will
not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay
the bills they've already racked up, through the laws they have passed."
Current
Republican leaders in Congress voted to raise the debt limit 18 times as
President George W. Bush led America
It is
interesting to note, that Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), House Majority Leader
Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-TN) voted for
debt limit increases in June 2002, May 2003, November 2004, March 2006 and
September 2007. Senate Minority Whip
John Cornyn (R-TX) voted to increase the debt limit in May 2003, November 2004
and March 2006.
~~~
Why Nobody Believes Obama
on the
Debt Ceiling
Watching the president
talk about the debt ceiling and his unwillingness to give up any ransom in
exchange for it, I find it impossible not to confront the point that as of now
nobody seems to believe him.
And the reason isn't
hard to identify: the fiscal cliff deal. Not because the fiscal cliff deal was
a bad deal; I think it was a good deal. But whatever you think of the deal, it
wasn't the deal that Obama said he would agree to. The administration put a lot
of emphasis on the $250,000 cutoff point, and the administration also claimed
for a while that they wouldn't agree to a deal that didn't address the debt
ceiling. But when push came to shove, they decided neither of those things were
red lines, which is fine. Maybe those were dumb red lines. But they were the
lines Obama drew. And then he backed down.
So now there's a
credibility problem.
~~~
GOP Rep Promotes
Shutting Down the Government: It’s a ‘Good Thing’
Igor Volsky
Think progress / News Report
Monday 14 January 2013
Republican Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (TN) insisted
that shutting down the government should be “on the table” as Congress and the
Obama administration deal with passing a continuing resolution, raising the
debt ceiling, and addressing the sequestration cuts.
Appearing on MSNBC on Monday, Blackburn echoed a growing
consensus within the Republican party, insisting that lawmakers should close
the federal government or allow the United States Blackburn insisted. “You know, there is the option of government
shutdown. There is an option of raising the debt ceiling in short-term
increments”:
CHRIS JANSING (HOST): [But
are your constituents] willing to see the government shut down? Are you hearing that, Congresswoman?
JANSING: Would you be willing
if you don’t get the kind of cuts that you think are necessary, would you be
willing to go into default or to shut down the government?
Jansing warned that should
the government shutdown, the FBI would stop working, “prisons won’t operate,
the court system closes, tax refunds won’t go out, the FAA would go off line.” But Blackburn
dismissed these concerns by arguing that Republicans will set priorities for
government spending and start eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse.”
The line of thinking has caught fire with “more than half” of the
Republican House caucus. As House Republican
Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) told Politico, “I think it
is possible that we would shut down the government to make sure President Obama
understands that we’re serious.” “We always talk about whether or not we’re
going to kick the can down the road. I think the mood is that we’ve come to the
end of the road.”
~~~
What's Next?
- By Senator Bernie Sanders
- So what comes next? President Obama’s initial proposal called for $1.6 trillion in new revenue. The bill that passed only brought in $620 billion – 40 percent of what the president originally requested.
Corporations Must Pay
Their Fair Share
Today
corporate profits are at an all-time high, while corporate income tax revenue
as a percentage of GDP is near a record low.
In
1952, 32% of all of the revenue generated in this country came from large
corporations. Today, just 9% of federal
revenue comes from corporate America
At
1.6%, corporate revenue as a percentage of GDP is lower than any other major
country in the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development)
including Britain, Germany, France, Japan, Canada, Norway, Australia, South
Korea, Switzerland, Norway, Italy, Ireland, Poland, and Iceland.
In
2011, corporations paid just 12 percent of their profits in taxes, the lowest
since 1972.
In
2005, 1 out of 4 large corporations paid no income taxes at all even though
they collected $1.1 trillion in revenue over that one year period.
Large
corporations and the wealthy are avoiding more than $100 billion in taxes every
year by setting up offshore tax shelters in places like the Cayman Islands,
Bermuda and the Bahamas
In
2009, Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits. Not only did they not pay any federal income
taxes, they actually received a $157 million rebate from the IRS.
In
2010, Bank of America America Cayman Islands , which has a corporate tax
rate of 0%.
At
15.7%, revenue as a percentage of GDP is at or near the lowest level in sixty
years.
~~~
DRONES ARE
NOT NEW.
By Floyd Bowman
Publisher
"Opinions Based On Facts"
Recently, there has
been some discussion about the use of Drones.
I'm sure you have heard about the manless aircraft that is still
controlled by man. It carries lethal
weapons and a camera that provides a pilot, somewhere in the world, pictures so
that he knows where he is flying the Drone and when he wants to drop
weapons. Some have questioned the humane
aspect of using this type of warfare.
Drones were used in
World War II by Germany Germany
would launch them from their land with just enough fuel to get to London London London
Thousands of innocent
people were still killed and, at the time, it was thought that this was simply
one of war weapons that the enemy used.
Since World War II,
there have been various opinions about the justification for U. S. to drop atomic bombs on two cities in Japan , Hiroshima
and Nagasaki
The U. S.
WE ARE IN A WAR
NOW. IT IS A WAR AGAINST TERROR. We have never been in a war on Terror before
and there are no set rules on how you conduct this kind of war. I believe that the justification for using
Drones might be that while they do kill innocent people, they also kill
terrorist personnel.
The debate will
continue and the war will go on. There
is no question that both the U.
S.
Everything We Know So Far About Drone Strikes
Cora Currier
ProPublica / News Report
Published: Saturday 12 January 2013
There is a rather
detailed article about Drones and their use, that can be found on "Nation
of Change" web site. If you are
interested, it will bring you up to date.
~~~
The Soul of America
Sen.
Bernie Sanders
Posted: 01/09/2013
Despite such terminology as "fiscal cliff" and
"debt ceiling," the great debate taking place in Washington America
In America
Despite the reality that the rich are becoming much richer while the middle
class collapses and the number of Americans living in poverty is at an all-time
high, the Republicans and their billionaire backers want more, more, and more.
The class warfare continues.
My Republican colleagues say that the deficits are a spending problem, not a
revenue problem. What these deficit-hawk hypocrites won't talk about is their
spending. They won't discuss what they did to dig the country into this $1
trillion deep deficit hole. They waged wars in Afghanistan
and Iraq
Now, despite the deficits their policies helped to create and despite the
enormous suffering which exists in our society, the Republicans want to cut
Social Security, veterans' programs, Medicare, Medicaid, education, nutrition
programs, and virtually every program which benefits low- and moderate-income
Americans. They choose to turn their backs on the economic reality facing a
significant part of our population: high unemployment, reduced wages, 50
million without health insurance, college graduates saddled with enormous
student debt and elderly people living in desperation. And they have tried to
slam the door on any further discussion about how to raise revenue by ending
tax loopholes and unfair tax breaks.
Republicans like Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who say the revenue
debate is over don't want you to consider these facts:
• Federal revenue today, at 15.8 percent of GDP, is lower today than it was 60
years ago. During the last year of the Clinton
• Today corporate profits are at an all-time high, while corporate income tax
revenue as a percentage of GDP is near a record low.
• In 2011, corporate revenue as a percentage of GDP was just 1.2 percent --
lower than any other major country in the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development, including Britain, Germany, France, Japan, Canada, Norway,
Australia, South Korea, Switzerland, Norway, Italy, Ireland, Poland, and
Iceland.
• In 2011, corporations paid just 12 percent of their profits in taxes, the
lowest since 1972.
• In 2005, one out of four large corporations paid no income taxes at all while
they collected $1.1 trillion in revenue over that one-year period.
We know where the Republicans are coming from. What about the Democrats? Will
President Obama fulfill his campaign pledge to "protect the middle
class" or will he surrender to right-wing blackmail? Will Democrats in the
House and Senate stand with the vast majority of our citizens and such
organizations as AARP, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and
Medicare, the AFL-CIO, the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and
every other veterans' organization in the fight against cuts to Social Security
and veterans' programs, or will they agree to a disastrous corporate-backed
"chained CPI" concept which makes major benefit cuts to those
programs and raises taxes on low-income workers?
The simple truth is there are relatively easy ways to deal with the deficit
crisis -- without attacking the elderly, the children the sick or the poor.
For example, we have got to eliminate loopholes in the tax code that allow
large corporations and the wealthy to avoid more than $100 billion in taxes
every year by setting up offshore tax shelters in places like the Cayman
Islands, Bermuda and the Bahamas. This situation has become so absurd that one
five-story office building in the Cayman Islands
is now the "home" to more than 18,000 corporations.
Further, we must also end tax breaks for companies shipping American jobs
overseas. Today, the United State government continues to reward companies that
move American manufacturing jobs abroad, despite the fact that millions of
American jobs have been outsourced to China ,
Mexico
We must also recognize that Wall Street recklessness caused the economic
crisis, and it has a responsibility to reduce the deficit. Establishing a 0.03
percent Wall Street speculation fee, similar to what we had from 1914-1966,
would dampen the dangerous level of speculation and gambling on Wall Street,
encourage the financial sector to invest in the productive economy and reduce
the deficit by more than $350 billion over 10 years.
We are entering a pivotal moment in the modern history of our country. Do the
elected officials in Washington
~~~
Two New Fraud Deals Show
Wall Street Washington
Richard (RJ) Eskow
Campaign For America’s Future / Op-Ed
Published: Sunday 13 January 2013
FLOYD'S NOTE:
This article is so disgusting, that I
thought a long time about including it.
I finally decided to include the article, because it does show what goes
on and, apparently, we seem to be unable to stop it. Take note of the musical chairs of regulators
now, supposedly, regulating companies and banks they use to work for. God help us, we need you.
It must’ve been like old home week when the old gang of
Wall Street and Washington insiders finalized a couple more cushy settlements
last week.
Everybody knew the drill: Ignore the potential criminal
charges and agree on settlement figures they think the public will swallow –
figures that are big enough to sound impressive but far smaller than the banks’
ill-gotten gains. They’ve done this
dozens of times before.
But there was an empty chair at the negotiating table.
Bank of America was there, as it has been so many times
before. So were the other too-big-to-fail banks. Representatives from the
Attorney General’s office were undoubtedly there, too. The Attorney General was
a high-priced Wall Street attorney.
The banks’ “independent” reviewers were there, too, or at
least their reports were. Those reports said that there were very few problems
with the banks’ transactions. That should’ve have raised some red flags around
the negotiating table: An audit in San Francisco found that 84 percent of
foreclosures were performed illegally, while another in North Carolina found “singular
irregularities” in roughly three-quarters of the mortgages reviewed.
So i shouldn’t have been such a surprise when an as-yet
unpublished GAO report showed that these rosy reviews were
disastrously flawed.
But then, the insiders had it wired. The reviewers
included Promontory Financial Group, whose CEO
was Comptroller of the Currency under President Bill Clinton. Then he became a
senior attorney at Wall Street defense firm Covington & Burling. Small
world: The Attorney General of the United States
Promontory and the other
reviewers have an underlying conflict of interest: they’re reviewing their own
client base. That’s the same conflict of
interest that corrupted the for-profit “ratings agencies,” leading them to rate
their clients’ toxic mortgage-backed securities as “AAA.”
Promontory was also the
firm that said “well over 99.9 percent” of the loans
issued by Standard Chartered bank complied with the law and only $14 million of
them were illegal. Then the bank admitted that $250 billion of its deals, not
$14 million, were illegal. That’s 17,000 times as much illegality as Promontory
found in its ‘review.’ (17857.142 as much, to be precise, but who’s counting?)
Promontory kept the foreclosure gig anyway, with no
objection from Washington’s regulators or law enforcement officials.
But then, who around that table would question
Promontory? We know them, they probably thought. We’ve always known them.
Promontory and the other “independent” reviewers
collected $1.5 billion in fees for worthless work, from a settlement that was
supposed to help the occupant of that empty chair.
But of course the chair was empty. The
occupant’s invitation was never sent out. It never is.
The Securities and Exchange Commission has attended many
such meetings – meetings in which senior bankers bind their shareholders to
billions in fines and restitution, sometimes as penalty for fraud against those
very same shareholders.(The banks also have a knack for covering their obligations with money from
investors they’ve already defrauded, including working people’s pension funds)
The SEC’s senior attorney always has a seat at the table,either literally or
figuratively, whenever a big bank settlement is negotiated.
A new person was appointed to that position just today. The SEC’s new chief counsel held a
senior regulatory position under President Clinton, too. But if you think he
went to work for Covington & Burling after leaving public service like his
colleague did, you’re wrong.
He worked for Arnold & Porter.
After joining Covington
One of this weekend’s settlements with Bank of America America
Fannie Mae’s CEO hasn’t been there long. His last job was
as General Counsel for … Bank of America
That happens a lot in these deals. Get used to it.
Bank of America
BofA also agreed to sell the servicing rights to these
mortgages … undoubtedly to another one of the banks sitting around that
frequently-used table. The buyer will need to recoup their investment, of
course — and loan servicers boost their income by overcharging the occupant of
that empty chair.
So whose chair is it? You already know. That chair
belongs to the borrower whose home value was artificially inflated by a
bank-hired appraiser. It belongs to the homeowner who paid her mortgage on time
every month, but was still hit with unjustified ‘servicing charges’ that caused
her to fall behind … and lose her home.
That empty chair belongs to the minority communities
targeted for predatory lending, then left to wither and die. It belongs to the
bedroom communities whose residents invested their life’s savings in real
estate whose value had been artificially pumped up by by bank speculation. It
belongs to millions of families – in Hendersonville ,
in West Garfield
Park , in Baltimore
and Jacksonville and Bakersfield
That chair belongs to the family who lost $50,000 or
$75,000 or $100,000 when they lost their homes, and then got $1,200 back in
that “big” $25 billion deal - and only then if they were “lucky.” It belongs to
all the Americans who lost trillions of dollars in housing value when the
bank-created bubble finally burst, and who were then left holding the debt.
That chair belongs to all the people who can’t find work
because nobody’s hiring. Nobody’s hiring because nobody’s buying. And nobody’s
buying because so many people are struggling to pay their overpriced loans.
That chair belongs to you, and it belongs to me. And as long as it’s empty these deals will all
turn out the same. A small circle of
friends will keep cutting the same cushy deals over and over again until we go
to Washington
No more deals, no more negotiations. Not until we’re in the room. Not until we’re seated in the chair, at the
table, in the chambers of justice, that have always rightfull belonged to us –
and only us belonged to us – and only us
~~~
If, the good Lord is willing and the
creek don't rise I'll talk with you again next Tuesday January 22, 2013 if not
sooner.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL
&
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Floyd.
Floyd,
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work. People need to know the facts.