CLEARLY the game that the privately held federal reserve plays is one where the bigger the loss the better because they have orchestrated and campaigned and legeslated (with their puppet legeslators) that for the “good of the public” they will always be bailed out…so while they take larger and bigger risks to try to maximize their take, winning is good, and losing is fine since they have systemitized this method of convincing everyone that it would be just disasterous to let poor little toobigtofail fail…

I recommend everyone ordering a case or two of ‘THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND” and asking your loved ones and people in a position to change public opinion, to read this–we need to END THE FED.

I also found the comments of the representative about her dealings with Mr. Dimon and JP. Morgan Chase very interesting / sad. Newsweek did an article on this wolf in sheeps clothing a couple of weeks ago and painted him out to be the all knowing financial presence in our country. It even pointed out how much President Obama listens to this guy. Again, a very sad state of affairs.

I totally agree. The banking “crisis” WAS taken care of exactly how Rahm wants to take advantage, more specifically, it IS the kind of crisis, and it is going along just swimmingly… I am not being partisan with this statement–both parties are bought and paid for by the agents of the privately held Federal Reserve…

I hope everyone is ordering and reading their END THE FED book by Ron Paul, and writing their (most likely) NON-REPRESENTING elected officials to insist they support HR1207 and S604.

That saying is actually the core principle of what Naomi Klein calls “disaster capitalism”, and I am sure that is much closer to what Emanuel had in mind, not the reform and regulation Simon Johnson was referring to. It always causes me a moment of cognitive dissonance reading Simon Johnson making the Emanuel reference, it shifts the perspective to the other side of the looking glass.

This crisis was not wasted at all – the people close to Emanuel’s heart made trillions of it, before, during, and since the collapse and the bailouts. This was the most successfully “exploited” crisis so far.

Now, “crisis cycle” capitalism has become an institution, and the foundations for the next round have been put in place. It is all “bull”, all the time – first on economy and earnings, then on bailout gains, then back to the economy.

You have a powerful voice PRECISELY because of your HONESTY, AND THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT YOU SEE, and that you are concerned about which can RALLY OTHERS TO NOTICE!!! I Beseech you, forget about who may or may not like what you say! When you speak the truth, it is divine, and you are in a divine space here with your efforts!!! Peace be with you!!!

Examples: Incorrectly programmed calculations. Intentionally programmed “glitches” to create certain results. People working with data who have no understanding of the data, and can’t identify things that don’t make sense. Databases without data-dictionaries, and the same data with different names in different databases. Raw data provided by unreliable sources (e.g. worldwide partners).

Perhaps you could share more.

Overall, a great job Simon. I really appreciate that you are doing what you do – and sharing your perspective with the public.

- The housing bailouts are a moral hazard.
- The housing bailouts bailout the lenders and financial industry gamblers.
- Housing bailouts reward people who borrowed irresponsibly and punish people who were responsible and didn’t.
- Housing bailouts keep the prices of homes too high.
- Housing bailouts add to the debt bubble.

If we would let the housing bubble deflate naturally, more people would eventually be able to buy homes, including rhe responsible people.

Where along in our history as a country (U.S.) did long-term prudent thinking become completely submerged to short-term thinking exclusively?

We are doomed.

I disagree.

The assertion is lame and hollow. How do we have any idea what innovation was “lost” because of “the power of major corporations”? We don’t.

I disagree.

Those “pay packages and benefits” are, to a large degree, the result of monopoly or monopolistic competition, and the benefits associated with that.

The benefit of Capitalism – innovation, better products and services, and the creation of value – are all undermined through monopoly and monopolistic competition.

The primary economic role of government in a Capitalistic economy should be to ensure competition in the marketplace. *** It seems we do everything but that.

I disagree with this sentiment.

For the most part those better “pay packages and benefits” are due to the undermining of competition through size — i.e. effective monopolies or monopolistic competition.

I have said this hundreds of times: The primary economic role for government in a Capitalistic economy is to ensure competition in the marketplace, because the natural drive for business is towards monopoly – which ultimately undermines value.

BIG instituions and concentrated wealth and power marks the end of Capitalism.

I suspect we are headed towards armed rebellion (not immediately) – metaphorically aimed right between Jaime, Ben and Timmy’s eyes (and all they represent).