The Investor Revolution
I've been wondering recently why stock market investors don't have much power over companies. This explains it very well.
From what i understand this bill allows investors to have some say in selecting board members. This is a FANTASTIC idea. This is how private corporations work. The owners have a say. Any venture capital firm will tell you that this is how they operate. Companies aren't just allowed to do what they want without the owners authorization. This bill essentially brings this mentality to publicly traded companies. How good is it? Well, it sounds awesome and is a great start toward restoring capitalism in the economy.
A few other ideas i had regarding investor ownership. Remove corporate personhood. This would make investors responsible for corporate actions... both good and bad. A rising stock price is worth being an active investor. Another idea i had was an investor union. This would allow investors to have one or a set of representatives within the company. I'm not sure exactly how it would work but maybe an investor tax on the company like a penny per outstanding share per year to pay for this union. Shrug. just an idea. Maybe have a Chief Investor Outreach Officer. Anyway. Please register and comment on other methods of controlling corporations.
I'm also fond of making all health insurance companies into non-profit entities. This would remove the profit motive and allow them to focus on the health motive.
The most interesting thing to ponder is what would happen if investors really had a say in public companies.
- Green investors would love to buy big oil and convert them, for their own good, into future energy providers of solar, wind, and ocean. (I'd even buy some shares in Exxon-Mobil to help this happen!!). Yeah, it may be expensive but it's better than not being forward thinking, letting the companies fail, or worse, bailing them out.
- Investors could demand that companies split up to create more jobs if deemed too big to fail
Basically, investors have their lives to draw upon in making decisions, not just their pocket books. This could inject a longer term view into corporate culture.
There could be harm done, but investors would have to keep each other in check just as they need to keep the board and management in check.
Government was designed around three branches for checks and balances. Companies should be designed around this same model of checks and balances. Management (like the White House), Board of Directors (like the Court system), and Investors (like Congress). There are similarities but there are also differences. Regardless, three is better than two for checks and balances.
For example, just look at our two party political system and how corrupted by money and influence it has become. A third party candidate could provide a much need breath of fresh air, but also the balance to keep the Republicrats focused on the benefit of the people. This is why I believe we should institute all elections as instant run off voting. People wouldn't be afraid to vote their real values instead of the lesser of two evils.
Foreclosure Costs: Get paid to leave
Basically, as people are evicted from their house they are destroying it for the banks in "retaliation." This is what people do to property:
- put concrete in the toilet
- break the granite
- destroy the carpet
- unwire the electrical boxes
- break the heater and A/C unit
- break the water heater
- destroy the wood (cabinetry and floors)
- destroy the condenser
At least the prior owners were trying to jump start the economy by forcing the banks to spend money on replacing these products.
In this regard i can think of a few other things to help turn the foreclosures into an economic boost. Buy a single 1 gallon can of bright orange paint and put "X"s on all the wall, ceilings, and doors. Then dab a small on parts of window and door frames,. Messing up sections of fences, garage doors, dry wall, and insulation. Take a ball hammer to all tiles. Destroy the garbage disposal and sump pump. Block off any radon and exhaust vents with epoxy or concrete. Block up the chimney. Cut out a long section of the telephone wires outside. Scratch or sand paper all the windows. Epoxy the locks. Remove and toss all the doors. Admittedly, this is extreme and I don't recommend anyone do any of these things. This is a form of economic violence with which I do not agree. Despite this, you should capitalize on others doing it.
All this said, lenders are now offering $1k to $3k to lendees to peacefully leave. Be sure to get this statement IN WRITING or they will screw you again. They offer $1k - $2k if you clean up a bit before you leave and up to $3k if you leave within a week as well. To me, this is cheap given the damage people could do to their homes before they leave. Banks could easily spend $25,000 to fix the damage a miffed person could inflict on a house. This bribe money may increase if this phenomenon expands and damage increases.
Lastly, some people put excrement in the halls.
Gold to Rise to $2,000 Amid ‘Massive’ Inflation, Superfund Says
Gold to Rise to $2,000 Amid ‘Massive’ Inflation, Superfund Says
Gold may rise to a record $2,000 an ounce in the next three years as investors hedge against “massive” inflation sparked by governments printing money, according to Superfund Financial Singapore Pte’s Aaron Smith.
“In the next few years, after the deflation cycle, we’ll see massive inflation,” Managing Director Smith, 30, said in an interview. “Soon, when you go to buy a cup of coffee, you’ll pay $20 or $30 because the dollar won’t be worth anything.”
It continues to say that silver is a good investment. Over the next 3-5 years the gold to silver ratio will go down.
So does anyone see the problem with Aaron Smith's math? If we assume that a cup of coffee today costs $2 then inflation would decrease the value of the dollar by 9/10th to 14/15th using the $20-$30 cup of future coffee. This theoretical dollar of the future is about 6.7-10 cents today. If the "value" of gold is constant, the price wouldn't be $2000 per ounce. It would be $10,000 to $15,000 per ounce. A $100,000 house today will be a cool million to $1.5 million in this case.
This is considering a very expensive cup of coffee too. So, you could very well boost those numbers by 50-200% depending on where you get your coffee.
Again, this is main stream Bloomberg reporting not Fox News. The question is, does Wall Street like inflation? Main Street sure doesn't.
John McCain Unveils Bill To Block Net Neutrality
From his press release:
This government takeover of the Internet will stifle innovation, in turn slowing our economic turnaround and further depressing an already anemic job market. Outside of health care, the technology industry is the nation’s fastest growing job market. ... Just this month, Google and Yahoo both released positive earnings reports.
That is the biggest load of crock. Up until last year we had Net Neutrality and it produced Google, Yahoo, etc, etc. Now he wants to ensure its demise? Is he an idiot?
This is what Google and Yahoo have to say about Net Neutrality:
From a letter (Google and Yahoo) wrote to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in 2006:
Until FCC decisions made last summer, consumers’ ability to choose the content and services they want via their broadband connections was assured by regulatory safeguards. … This “innovation without permission” has fueled phenomenal economic growth, productivity gains, and global leadership for our nation’s high tech companies.
To preserve this environment, we urge the Committee to include language that directly addresses broadband network operators’ ability to manipulate what consumers will see and do online.
So, indeed, the biggest and smallest high tech companies in the computer industry want net neutrality. Net Neutrality would create jobs within the telecom industry on the investors back and not burden the tax payers. It would continue the phenomenal growth of the internet instead of making everyone pay tax to the cartel. (Can we go RICO on them already?) We'd get better, faster service at cheaper rates. Who doesn't want that? OH YEAH. the telecoms. duh.
McCain was the top recipient of campaign contributions from the telecom industry, taking in $894,379 in the past two years.
Now we know why McCain is facsist... he places telecom corporate interests ahead of democracy, jobs, innovation, freedom, and speech. Bought and paid for.
Per the update:
Telecoms, Internet service providers -- they already have a kind of monopoly. The idea here [with net neturality] is to prevent them from abusing that monopoly. ... They want freedom all right. They want to find new ways to charge us more money. [...]
Whenever there's a fight on the Internet, it's always good to side with the geeks who built the Internet, rather than the fat-cat telecom lobbyists.
This couldn't be any more clear. Net Neutrality good, Telecom bad. The FCC should break them up for just suggesting that their power be enhanced and the fact that they are a force to be dealt with. If that doesn't say monopoly, I don't know what does.
Psycho-analysis for votes
Bloomberg Takes Robocalls To The Next Level, Microtargeting Population With 75 Different Calls
It is one of the highly meticulous ways that the Bloomberg operation is using its extensive voter database to contact New Yorkers before the Nov. 3 election and part of why the billionaire mayor has already managed to spend $85.2 million on his campaign.
Automated calls to get out the vote are nothing new in political campaigns, but the Bloomberg campaign's specificity is rarely seen at the local level. Campaign officials estimate they will have 75 calls reaching 890,000 people.
This kind of psycho-analysis of the voters makes me sick. This is exactly how money influences elections. The more money you have to spend on psychoanalysis of the voters, the more votes you can get. This is using the same techniques that business has been employing for decades to you get to buy products you don't need. Obama took this "PR campaign" to a new level and we are seeing it again here with Bloomberg.
Bloomberg is purposefully NOT telling the voters the parts they may not agree with. Each message is only to say the parts that each voting bloc DO agree with. So by all means, vote for the man selling snake oil.
House Health Care Bill Exceeds $1 Trillion
House Health Care Bill Exceeds $1 Trillion
Strong healthcare reform is needed to keep the American economy strong.
So the part that feels like a rock and a hard place is that without health care reform we'd be toast. The rock is the cost. They can monetize the deficit or tax us more. These are essentially the same thing. In one case the just take it and the other they inflate it (aka steal it with a hidden tax of the devaluation of the dollar). It sure seems like the dollar is going to inflate very quickly when all those foreign dollars come flooding home. If we didn't have to pay the Federal Reserve interest on the National Debt we could afford even more costly healthcare reform and still lower the deficit to boot. Seriously, why is the Federal Government paying interest on its own money? What kind of nonsense system are we living under? BTW, the Fed is a private corporation with little or no real oversight by the public Federal Government. They should be audited to prove that our financial system really is strong. This would boost the value of the dollar. That is to say, confidence would be restored. That's what we want, no? Otherwise it would be nice to know if our monetary system is just a ponzi fraud that makes all other fraud combined like a drop in the Great Lakes.
Any way this happens it's going to be ugly. My only hope is that democracy for and by the people is chosen.
Dollar’s Doom Puts a Face on New $1 Million Bill: David Reilly
Dollar’s Doom Puts a Face on New $1 Million Bill: David Reilly
The dollar may not easily snap back. U.S. policy makers and economists “actually argue for depreciation of the dollar to bail out America and make it more competitive,” Marc Faber, publisher of the Gloom, Boom & Doom report, said during a recent Bloomberg News interview. “Nobody in the world has ever become rich by devaluing the currency, but that’s what they’re advocating in America.”
This raises for some the prospect of a dollar crash and runaway inflation. That is why it may pay to start thinking about the design of a $1 million bill.
At least it's kind of a positive spin on the ugliness that looms...
So whose face should adorn this new bill? Here are some candidates with the winner at the end.
Ben Bernanke
Bernie Madoff
George W. Bush
Wen Jiabao
Henry Paulson
Richard Nixon
Jay-Z
Barney Frank
Alan Greenspan
That's the short list. The reasoning for the celebrating these people is spot on. There is even a video
So this is on Bloomberg. This is "opinion" but that source is legitimizing the sentiment that this is indeed a shared common feeling of being screwed.
As it gets worse
This is what is going on in the real economy. California is ahead of the pack due to their massive state budget cuts. This is what the rest of us have to look forward to. So while Wall Street is flying high, Main Street is collapsing. The question is, how long will the stock market continue to soar? The reason for Wall Street is Main Street. Without Main Street, Wall Street is just a fraud. Without Wall Street, Main Street would be fine. Right now, the banksters and government keep taxing us through inflation to bailout the richest of rich. This is a sick sick system we live under.
Why we need Net Neutrality
First and foremost: it'll create jobs at the expense of the corporations, not government. This will increase desperately needed tax revenue at all levels of government. As long as the corporations are at worst breaking even, then profits could stand to be invest in the American public by creating jobs. If it takes regulation to create and spur competition, I'm all for it.
AT&T Suggests To 300K Employees To Lobby the FCC
"We encourage you, your family and friends to join the voices telling the FCC not to regulate the Internet," Cicconi wrote in his letter. The company verified the letter.
So, basically they are astro-turfing. They are making it appear as if the "save the corporation!" movement is some kind of grass roots thing. Yeah right!
In the letter, he offered several talking points.
1. Wireless consumers enjoy a many options for mobile services;
2. Competition in the wireless industry is strong;
3. AT&T and other carriers need flexibility to manage their networks;
4. Net neutrality rules could hamper a goal of the White House to bring broadband to every U.S. household;
5. If the FCC passes the new regulations, the rules should apply to more than just network operators and should also include Web content companies like search engines.
Allow me to refute:
1. Wireless consumers enjoy an oligopoly of limited and expensive options for mobile services. Who in Europe pays as much as we do per text message?
2. Competition is limited due to the oligopoly nature of the industry. How many wireless phone companies are there in the USA?
3. "The Carriers" managed their networks VERY well in the 1990s and early 2000s when there was Net Neutrality.
4. Bringing broadband to all households is a great goal but it shouldn't mean giving up our freedom of speech and of association due to "politically motivated blocking." Imagine having to pay this cartel a fee if you want to run you're own blog or to use facebook or myspace?
5. Since when is a content provider a utility carrier? This kind of illogic is astonishing because it is utterly false. To me, this is the nail in the coffin that says that AT&T is only looking out for their own interests and not the publics best interest.
Let me be clear, net neutrality is key to maintaining our democracy, constitution, and freedoms. If we allow telecom oligopolies take away one of the founding principles of the internet (net neutrality), we deserve what's coming to us.
Net neutrality existed for most of the internet's existence. Only a few years ago this rule was abandoned. Already one ISP has "exclusive" content. This is a dangerous trend because it means that a telecom can determine your entire online experience. They will determine your experience to benefit their bottom line. This may include blocking a third party candidate that believes in enforcing monopoly and oligopoly laws. Yeah, wikipedia will be accessible to all, but what about a new emerging website? what if no one decides to "provide" them?
Look, the pipes for the internet are like air. It needs to be breathable, you cannot deprive anyone of it, it keeps you alive and functioning, and it's everywhere it needs to be. I believe, net neutrality is about keeping democracy alive and functioning. So many businesses, innovation, and commerce depend on net neutrality. It would be awful to lose it.
AT&T Boss Asks Employees to Fake It
AT&T’s network investments increased immediately following the imposition of the Net Neutrality merger condition and continued to rise over the two years of the merger agreement. When the neutrality condition expired on Dec. 29, 2008, the company sharply reduced its investment.
So when Cicconi says that Net Neutrality means no buildout, the opposite is true.
By pressuring the company’s employees to pose as average citizens and post AT&T talking points, Cicconi is asking them to be doubly deceptive. Not only are they asked to hide their true identities but also to spread misinformation on behalf of a company that seems to be getting more desperate by the day.
As you can see, net neutrality is actually an agent of competition, thus spending, thus jobs! AT&T is going to pull the "boo-hoo" sob story about net neutrality costing people jobs. This is bunk. It'll make jobs, preserve democracy, spur continued internet innovation, and make information and access equal for all.
READY TO REVOLT: Oath Keepers pledges to prevent dictatorship in United States
READY TO REVOLT: Oath Keepers pledges to prevent dictatorship in United States
the group's members, which number in the thousands, pledge to disobey orders they deem unlawful, including directives to disarm the American people and to blockade American cities. By refusing the latter order, the Oath Keepers hope to prevent cities from becoming "giant concentration camps," a scenario the 44-year-old Rhodes says he can envision happening in the coming years.
It's a Cold War-era nightmare vision with a major twist: The occupying forces in this imagined future are American, not Soviet.
"The whole point of Oath Keepers is to stop a dictatorship from ever happening here