America has lost its moral compass and has been taken over by a greed-infested corporate culture.
Well, actually, it was Goldman Sachs that lost its compass and was taken over by greed, according to a N.Y. Times op-ed column written last week by a departing Goldman executive in London. But the allegation might just as well have been made against our entire Corporatocracy and the political system it controls.
As first expressed over 60 years ago by Harry Elmer Barnes and Negley King Teeters in their classic book, New Horizons in Criminology: “Most offenses are committed through greed, not need.”
And it was an explosion of greed that was the precursor to the tsunami of economic problems that have beset the middle class, followed closely by a host of financial crimes. Then came the lies, an orchestrated chorus of untruths intended to perpetuate the destructive trends that have benefited the wealthy.
During the years of greed preceding the Great Recession, trillions of dollars were gambled in the derivatives market on such outcomes as the direction of interest rates and currency gyrations, with a loser for every winner, while the actual losers, it turned out, were the American taxpayers, hitting particularly hard at the middle class.
And trillions more disappeared into the subprime mortgage fiasco and into an evil creation by JPMorgan called the credit default swap, a toxic-as-hell abomination devoid of any reserve requirement that was appropriately described by Warren Buffett as a “financial weapon of mass destruction.”
During this time, the U.S. government was cooperating fully, eliminating key regulations and cutting the legs out from under many others.
Then came the crime wave, which might be thought of as Phase Two in the attack on the middle class. It actually became apparent rather gradually. At first we were only aware of such minor offenses as the post-dating of stock options. Then came the insider trading scandals and finally a flood of other, more serious, crimes.
In the house of mirrors we now seem to live in, most of the prosecutions for these crimes have been launched by the SEC, and therein lies the rub. The SEC has no authority to convict anyone. The situation has been so ludicrous that, in many cases, the legal expenses of the defendants have had to be paid by the same stockholders who had been ripped off in the first place.
In discussing the matter of crimes, two companies in particular come to mind, and both have been in the news this past week. One is Goldman Sachs, the subject of the above-mentioned revelations by its departing executive which, incidentally, is hardly new information, but which represent a unique broadside from the inside.
Years ago, Greece hired Goldman to assess its problems and, when the company discovered the plight the country was in, it made a fortune betting against its own efforts to assist the nation. This then became a pattern it repeated with client after client.
In a recent example of the company’s lack of ethics, Goldman was El Paso’s paid advisor in its $21 billion buyout by Kinder Morgan last month. In the course of its involvement, it failed to advise El Paso that one of Goldman’s lead advisors on the team owned $340,000 of Kinder Morgan stock or that Goldman’s private-equity arm owned a stake in Kinder Morgan or that Goldman actually controlled two seats on Kinder Morgan’s board.
It appears that conflicts of interest and insider trading are not only accepted parts of the Goldman business plan, but may actually make up the key centerpiece of its strategy.
The other example in the criminal phase of the attack on the middle class is Bank of America, which was stripped naked and hung out to dry by Matt Taibbi in the current issue of Rolling Stone. Apparently, it would take a two-volume opus to detail all the nefarious dealings of this behemoth.
Briefly, they involved, among other crimes: plotting to rig global interest rates; bilking needy schools and cities; extracting multiple fees from unemployment checks; executing thousands of foreclosures using bogus, “robo-signed” evidence; knowingly selling worthless mortgages; and fraudulently inducing insurance companies to insure those same worthless mortgages; socking it once again to the middle class taxpayers.
The crime spree never gave the government a moment’s pause, however, in its obsession to prop up the institution, beginning four years ago with a $45 billion infusion of taxpayer funds. And, despite the bank’s payback, it hasn’t stopped there. Last year the Fed allowed the bank to receive FDIC insurance on a portfolio of particularly toxic assets, thus subjecting the public to significant additional liabilities. Finally, the latest move by the government to allegedly help stressed-out homeowners actually rewards the bank with a legal waiver that will enable it to avoid billions in lawsuits.
Regarding the recent stress test that the bank allegedly passed, Matt Taibbi charges that it is a sham made possible by “grossly overrating the mountains of toxic loans on its books.” In addition, according to Taibbi, the bank still faces “battles in courtrooms all over America to avoid paying back the hundreds of billions it stole from everyone in sight.”
And then came the most recent phase of the attack on the middle class, the orgy of lies. One might accurately say that we have become a nation increasingly built on a veritable mountain of distortions and untruths. If you are interested in such issues as climate change, the environment, the need for regulations, jobs, fracking, healthcare, and the list goes on, you had best put on your skeptical hat and be prepared to question most of the information you encounter.
As before, of the many candidates, two examples seem particularly worthy of mentioning, the first being the healthcare issue. Prior to the reform act, 60% of the public favored a single-payer government program. Yet, today, an even greater plurality opposes the Affordable Care Act approved by Congress, despite the fact that it is far less liberal than the single payer plan it had previously favored. What could have happened?
What happened was that the lie machine was shifted into high gear to protect the status quo and to continue to allow the insurance industry to run roughshod over the interests of middle America. The lies were skillfully and professionally articulated in a video that was featured on the front page of YouTube for an extensive period of time and was, from there, circulated throughout the country. It showed up twice in my e-mails. YouTube is owned by Google which is 30% controlled by two billionaires, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. In November, 2009, Forbes magazine rated Brin and Page as the fifth most powerful people in the world.
In short, the video provides an in-your-face collection of outrageously false information designed to scare the pants off just about anyone who sees it. Worst yet, the lies have been repeated ad nauseam by right wing politicians and the mainstream media. For those interested, a more detailed article on the subject of this video can be found by clicking here. If you believe you may have been influenced by false information on this matter, you might want to check out the article.
The second example of lies involves the vital jobs crisis. This is the heart of the problem besetting the middle class. There is hardly a dissenting voice in the chorus that sings the praises of our steady employment recovery. New jobs have been created every month for many, many moons we are told, and the unemployment rate has fallen from near 10% to 8.3%. However, this “good news” is, in reality, a case of cutting the middle class adrift in a voyage to nowhere because it ignores and distorts the actual picture.
Briefly, the truth is better revealed by the naked numbers that have not been tweaked by untold adjustments. Here is the basic data direct from the bureau of Labor Statistics that is believed to be devoid of any “fuzzy-math” adjustments.
Number of workers employed full time, 16 years of age and older:
December 2007 (Start of the Great Recession)………………...121,042,000
December 2011.……………………………....................................113,050,000
February, 2012.…………………………….....................................112,587,000
Jobs lost from December 2007 through February 2012.……… 8,455,000
Jobs lost during the last two months…………………………................463,000
Quite a different story from what we hear during this election year, don’t you agree? And, there’s more to it. According to the Labor Department, the population of the workforce between 2002 and 2012 has been growing at the rate of 145,000 per month. So, by combining the figures for the job loss with the workforce growth, the result is that while 8,455,000 jobs have been eliminated since December 2007 the workforce has also grown by 7,250,000, resulting in an overall current “misery number” of 15,750,000 which, incidentally, compares with a misery number of 15,821,000 as of one year ago. At this rate it will take, roughly, forever to restore the workforce to its pre-recession level.
The attack on the middle class, it seems, has no letup. Four days ago, in a case of perfectly bad timing, Republican Congressman Paul Ryan, the House Budget Committee Chairman, once again revived his plan for a major revision of Medicare combined with a renewal of the tax breaks for the wealthy. His proposals reportedly have the backing of candidate Mitt Romney.
And last, but definitely not least, the following chart clearly demonstrates the damage that has already been sustained by middle America. Prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it shows that the American workers’ share of the national income over the past 65 years has sunk to a recent series of record lows. The inverse would of course be true with respect to the share of the income attributable to the wealthy.
The seemingly inescapable conclusion from this is that a massive attack on the middle class has been underway for some time resulting in a major shift in wealth to the upper class. Furthermore, with the cooperation of politicians from both parties who, let’s not forget, are being well paid by the wealthy, as well as the billionaire-owned, mainstream media, the effort has obviously been largely conducted under the radar, while any attempt to mitigate it has been met with counter complaints of class warfare against the wealthy.
The nation has, indeed, lost its moral compass, and unless it is restored, our beloved country will likely continue its downward course towards a possible economic Armageddon.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 40
Yes, the big money interests are conducting class warfare against the middle class because the middle class still has some money. The nature of our money is such that each party wants as much of that money to at least control as possible. Therefore, since money yields power, the parties which have and control the most money have the greatest advantages in gaining still more money. One can follow this process in any nation in history.
Finally, control of the media does allow the presentation of propaganda (lies) to help those who control the media gain still more money.
Note, that it is the nature of our money which is the problem, not human nature. Human nature likes friends and doing good things for those we care about. Human nature likes a feeling of security, not life in a dog eat dog rat race (if I may mix my metaphors) with the attendant high stress. It is the nature of our money which puts us into that state of insecurity. Politics wins through fear. Products are sold through fear. Churches gain contributions through fear. Organized crime profits through fear.
The only solution is to change the nature of our money.
It seems to me that the temptations of POM will always be there so long as we continue to use it. It takes only a small proportion yielding to that temptation to create huge problems of corruption, fraud, oppression, and crime. To prevent that small proportion existing one would have to do a really remarkable job of changing the way we all think.
I think it much more likely that enough of the big money boys can learn of the advantages of my system to put it in place. Once in place, the problems with greed and economic problems go away.
That will "do it" for the B$M folks because the rest of us will have nothing while "they" have it all ... then "they" can rebuild the world to "their" satisfactions with complete control with us their virtual slaves ... we are now, but not enough are willing to admit to it to change it.
IMnsHO
One of the "telling" things in much of this is the lack of subscription to the first premise for groups moving with a moral compass ... shared values. If we, as a society, do not say that government has the right to establish some kind of "group" values, it is unlikely those who demand their individual gain will have any interest in shared values. Yes, our moral compass is lost.
IMnsHO and E.
No Char - my family has more of a you mind your business and I will tend to my religious needs without you telling me how to live. In return I will extend the same courtesy to you.
(I hate to inform you)
people are mean.
It's not that we desire the piles of
gilt and coin -- that's just a ploy.
We want to enjoy standing above the
hoi polloi
We want with great passion to dance
at the top of the heap, to be elite.
So far as I've seen, there is only one singular instance of so-called "deregulation" that anyone can point at to even try to make a serious case for the "not enough government intervention" explanation of the economic crisis; the repeal of 1/2 of Glass-Steagall. I don't think I have to go over again the reasons why that explanation doesn't cut it.
On the other hand, there are several interventionist schemes which can be demonstrably shown to be integral to the crisis; without which the conditions which brought it about would not have been able to come about. Primarily the monopoly control of money and credit in the hands of state-sanctioned banking cartel. Without institutionalized fractional-reserve banking and compulsory "legal tender" fiat money, and the moral hazard inherent in the bailout culture they enable, the behavioral incentive structure for financial institutions would favor prudence, restraint, foresight. Instead, we have an inherently fraudulent, necessarily insolvent system that fosters recklessness and rewards political favoritism.
But I think it's important to take note of the fact that this fraudulent system, that benefits cronies at the expense of honest business and rewards rent-seeking at the expense of prudent investment, is positively foisted upon us by proactive government intervention -- it is not an inherent aspect of the market system, and in fact sabotages the market's ability to function smoothly.
You can't remedy this evil without rooting out the causes of it. No amount of piling on of more and more government interventionism is going to solve it; it will only make things progressively worse in the long run, no matter if things may sometimes appear to be getting better to the eye of the superficial observer.
We need a lot less government, not more.
The sooner enough people learn that lesson, the better of we and our posterity will be.
We do NOT need less government as much as we need an honest government !!!
Or how about an honest and knowledgeable government? Even honest politicians won't do us much good, if they lack understanding of the root problems. Good-intentioned folly is still folly; it still hurts people when all is said and done.
If we had an honest and informed government, then less government intervention would be the inevitable outcome. They would understand that money supply and interest rates constitute vital market signals, which should be determined solely by market forces. When these things are centrally-planned, it necessarily sabotages those vital signals, because the interest rate no longer reflects the actual, real conditions of supply of and demand for genuine capital. It causes investors and entrepreneurs to be guided by false signals; the structure of production which results is then inherently unhealthy, unsustainable. The "boom" created by artificially lowered interest rates must necessarily "bust," and then there must be a period of contraction, liquidation, and correction of the price and production structures which we know of as "recession."
The fact that politicians, central bankers and bureaucrats are corrupt and dishonest, and use the present banking cartel system to enrich themselves and their friends at everyone elses expense, is just part of the problem. The boom-bust-recession cycle is a product of artificial money/credit expansion as such; the intentions of the central planners who direct it are immaterial.
That said, I think it's important to note, that a position of such awesome power over the economic fortunes and direction of wealth distribution in society which is inherent in the fractional-reserve central banking system, is one that tends to attract exactly the kind of unscrupulous and megalomaniacal personality types that we see in charge of it now.
Were the politicians honest they would do the right thing by us and IF that were, as a "right thing", to adopt "your" idea of finance et al, then it would happen.
The "right thing" is that which serves the greater good, it is natural and generically "spiritual", INtuitive withIN each of us, but beat out of us via propaganda to follow our "leaders" who claim to "know best" concerning such things ... secular government or religious indoctrination, they all say "trust us" ... and far too many of them are both dishonest and pathological, the latter eventuating in the former.
IMnsHO
It seems the four hoirsemen of the modern apocalypse, banks, insurance, medicine and food have us by the sensitive bits.
And as an old British politician said in the 1960s, when you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.
And:
The nation has, indeed, lost its moral compass, and unless it is restored, our beloved country will likely continue its downward course towards a possible economic Armageddon.
About says it all !!!
Of course, as you well know, since you added many comments to the threads, for which I thank you, there were enough examples of regulations that were either eliminated or weakened to sustain two of my articles on the subject, not to mention the numerous examples of the regulators looking the other way as economic conditions went to hell..At one time there were such statutes on the books as not only the Glass-Steagall Act, but also the McFadden-Pepper Act and the Douglas Amendment to the Bank Holding Company Act, any one of which would have prevented much of the “too-big-to-fail” problem. Unfortunately, however, Congress either eliminated them or cut the legs out from under them over the years and the results continue to haunt us to this day.
As far as the real estate orgy of intentionally fradulent loans goes, do you really think that it occurred in an environment of appropriate regulatory control?
You've taken some reasonable positions in the past, but on this one - on which we've dueled endlessly - you are simply parroting the party line of the Koch-supported Tea Party and its Libertarian cousins...
.
How's this for preventing the "too-big-to-fail" problem? A government which does not intervene to protect businesses from the consequences of their own recklessness, mismanagement and fraud, while circumventing the judgment of the market.
The bail-out culture is not new. It's been prevalent since the '60's and '70's. Whether it is secretly an explicit promise from politicians and/or central bankers to particular businesses and/or financial interests is unknown; but it is almost certainly a tacit one; has been for decades. See: Penn Central, Lockheed, Franklin National Bank, Chrysler, Continental Illinois Bank & Trust.
What do you imagine this does for the behavioral incentive structure for big financial institutions?
What do you imagine would happen to that incentive structure if it were well-known and established that each business, just as each individual, was responsible for the consequences of their own actions and decisions?
How do you think the real prospect of bankruptcy would affect the decision-making process of financial institutions? Do you think maybe it would lead to more prudence and sound investment strategy, or not have any effect?
As far as the real estate orgy of intentionally fraudulent loans goes, do you really think that it occurred in an environment of appropriate regulatory control?
Of course not. It happened under conditions of government cartelization of banking with a government-granted monopoly over money and credit; government monopolization of accreditation and inspection; hardly "appropriate" to either a healthy economy or a free society.
I'll ask you (again): Do you think any of it could have happened under conditions of sound commodity money and free market banking (implying 100% reserve requirement, as institutionalized fraud is anti-market)?
you are simply parroting the party line of the Koch-supported Tea Party and its Libertarian cousins...
Nonsense. I'm not "parroting" anything. I understand the problem and have a valid solution.
And the philosophers and economists who have most influenced my thinking are definitely outside of the Koch/Tea Party circle.
The position here is that there should be adequate regulations and other safeguards to prevent the type of situation where financial institutions need the taxpayers to step in and save their skin. The massive bailout committed by the Bush administration was abhorrent to me because it should not have been necessary. The 700+ billion dollar handout by Obama was a farce and just represented more funds primarily handed over to companies that, in the final analysis, simply unloaded the temporary jobs involved.
And, with all due respect, I don't think you do really understand the problem. I believe that if you had accompanied me, back in 2005, you might feel differently. I'm referring to the occasions when I met with loan officers of the sub-prime lender, Ameriquest and reviewed closing documents that revealed there were no income verifications to justify the loans; that the loans were based on assumed income levels, and that - even then - the illusional data was further corrupted by the fact that the borrowers' ability to meet their obligations was predicated only on the initial interest rate which, in many cases, was 1%; and noting further that the lists of fees paid to Ameriquest at the closings amounted to nothing less than highway robbery.
And you might feel differently if you realized as I did, having spent my career in real estate financing, that the only reasons these attrocities could have occurred were that the regulators had relaxed the regs that previously would have prevented them.
Further, you might also feel differently if you had heard, as I did, the chuckles of the loan officers as they described how their company couldn't unload the loans fast enough knowing they had no hope of remaining in good standing.
If you had absorbed all of the above and also accompanied me out into the Mojave Desert just to bear witness to the hovels where Ameriquest's totally naive and clueless victims lived before being magically transported into spanking new multi-bedroom, multi-car-garage homes, I believe, then, you might understand the problem.
>> that a massive attack on the middle class has been
>> underway for some time resulting in a major shift
>> in wealth to the upper class.
When was it that those in power realized that a powerful
consumer class that is education with mobility is their
major threat?
All the American dream stuff work hard and pull yourself
up may be relevent for third-world refugees, but not for
Americans anymore.
Must as I agree with Larry on most things, these problems
are not a result of what kind of money we use, good people
can use money without abusing their power, this is a
calculated concerted attack on a class level, it is pure
Marxist dialectic theory of class stuggle and exploitation.
The truth is that the class of people who have real power
in this world, have been those with money and power.
Until recently there has been room in American resources
and the economy that people could find a place to work
and do something to meet the needs of others for a
profit.
Now, every kind of business has undergone the same
transformation, consolidated and incorporated, the profits
goes to those with the money, who are those who always
have the money. The power stays with those peolpe, and
anyway who wants to survive can no longer find anyplace
for themselves in this economy, they must pay very highly
for even an unsustainable position in the American economy
that keeps them merely dying at a slow rate -- forget about
owning a house, health care, eduction, saving for retirement,
vacations, participation in the political system, or being able
to find a place to invest their money that is safe, the whole
system has been swallowed up whole by the same people
behind the same corporations who run this country more
like a more successful version of the Soviet Union than
any kind of faithfulness to the vision of those who started
the country, or even what most people want.
We hear every day about the evils of socialism and
re-distributing the wealth, but the greed and cruelty of
the top of our corporate hierarchy has made any other
solution but a massive top down reset all but impossible.
So far, Obama has raised in total $163.2 million but his SP, Priorities USA Action, only raised $2 million last month, half of it coming from comedian Bill Maher. The vast majority of donations to the president have been between $250 and $1,000.
This is the nub of the problem - and by that I mean every national problem - and thanks to the Supreme Court, the playing field has shifted dramatically in favor of the plutocrats...
The mess that is happening right now about what is called Obamacare is such an ugly and disgusting thing that it fits right in with all the rest.
The idea that here we have health care, health insurance reform, whatever you want to call it, yet when it passed it did not go into effect, and it is only almost 3 years later that it is being taken a look at legislatively is kick in the face to all Americans … except to the greedy criminals that run everything, this is all diversion.
Republicans and Democrats both participated in this sham, but something out there for people to argue about and waste their energy on for 3 years and then put in front of the Supreme Court at the last minute … and if it gets declared unConstitutional, then along with all the other stuff Obama looks even worse.
The decision of the voter is, do we mess around with people trying to bring "change" to a country that is a mess, or just give in and vote for the status quo, whatever the voice of money sets before us?
What happens if "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" gets dumped? Does Obama or someone else have to re-fight the whole battle, and will voters rally behind him again when it appears he cannot get anything done?
"What Happens Next" is a powerful formula that Hollywood invented but that basically is keeping the whole country sitting down passively watching while the powers in this country lock down their crimes and shut the door on yet more Americans.
Imagine, for a moment, what it would be like if no one was forced to buy auto insurance. That's the type of situation the GOP is promoting for health care.
The truth, of course, is the GOP believes that the failure of Obamacare would be a political plus and they could care less about any other aspect of the situation.
It almost makes me want to see the abominable High Court rule the whole act unconstitutional, which would remove Obamacare as a campaign issue...But, the truth is it's too important to too many people to wish that...
I have to mention that you are just assuming that the Republicans are being sincere when the fact is they just argue about everything changing their arguments and pretending they never did whenever they need to justify themselves. That'e the benefit of measuring everything by patriotism and morality, they can say whatever they bloody well please.
I still remember when Clarence Thomas was appointed to the SC and the first thing her participated in they make some kind of argument based on our law being derived from GOD … not the consent of the governed mind, GOD. It was clear way back when they were well into putting Orwell's Newspeak to practical use and it has been getting worse and worse.
I think either way it is going to be good for Democrats. … and I simple cannot believe the statement Obama made on judicial activism, that was the most hardline comment from a President I think I've ever heard in my entire life. The problem is that I don't think the President made it very well because most Americans don't understand the whole argument here, though it has been very well set-up and framed for years with Republicans.
If it goes I think Obama is going to have to do Medicare for all by executive decree, and then he is going to do something to take on the biased members of the court who have not recused themselves. I am not sure if there is a path to impeachment of the judicial by the President, but something has got to be done.
The fact is that basic nature of the world is changing in the developed world - there is not an economy like their used to be, and the very well off and those who think they are higher than everyone else wants thing to go on as long as possible because it makes them look very important to other people. It makes us a classist society which is not the American way. There needs to be a response on the Republican side other than just ignoring it.
I cannot believe even Mexico has universal health care now … and still the US pushes this system because it places the military at the top. I am OK with that, but there are other ways to pay for it and for the military to act. We need to stop acting military in secret and without goals and answerability.
I don't think exactly that our people don't get it, although a large number of those that support the Republican party still probably do not.
I think the problem is that as you say, Republicans, but corporations, private interests, money, etc are constantly working. That's as it should be, but, these days the work is mostly political ways of trying to lower their external costs to the country, the people, the environment.
Most people do not really know how our system works. It's gets more opaque by the week, with special interests running things. They may feel they have to run things because as soon as they let up pushing they just hear "no" from people who do not know what they are really opposing.
There have been lots of talking about the US role in the world, and I am a believer in however the US has got to maintain superiority we should, and we should use it - - - wisely. I think China/Russia/RadicalIslam is an enemy and in any case they think we are. There is no magic solution to end war and I think it is important that the best system, and the best hope for people's freedom prevail. That said, it is just as important and maybe more than we fix our society so that we can honestly pursue that agenda for everyone on the planet, not just arms makers and the military industrial complex. The excuse that we are doing this for empire has allowed our own companies to declare war on our own people.