January 2011 Update of THE GREAT DEPRESSION of DEBT (via Wbrussee’s Weblog)

Warren Brussee is a book author and has a detailed plan to fix our economic problems. I don’t agree with everything in it but there is a lot I like. He’s an intruiguing author who has thought seriously about these topics. I’d like you to read his blog post and maybe even buy his book.

James Pilant

“The Great Depression of Debt” is a hardcover updated edition of “The Second Great Depression, Starting 2007, Ending 2020.”  “The Great Depression of Debt” can be purchased at most bookstores or at Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Great-Depression-Debt-Survival-Techniques/dp/0470423714 HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE! WHAT ENDED THE FIRST GREAT DEPRESSION? A quick review on what happened during 1930 to 1945.  In trying to fight the depression, our count … Read More

via Wbrussee's Weblog

Buying Your Child Into A College!

From the Huffington Post -

Dr. Michael Bardwil donated $40,000 to his alma mater, a Jesuit school in Houston, Texas, after a school administrator advised it would guarantee his son admission. So when his son was rejected earlier this year, Bardwil was upset.

ABC reports that a school administrator asked that Bardwil donate $100,000 to the school, and in return the prestigious college preparatory would offer admission to his son. When Bardwil pledged $50,000 over a five year period, he assumed it was a sure thing.

The elite colleges and universities admit about 1/3 of their students based on parental giving, another 1/3 based on legacy enrollments (their parents went there) and the last 1/3 on merit. This is one of the most significant reasons that the upper classes have solidified. It’s very difficult to move up in the world without going to one of these school. With only 1/3 of the enrollment based on merit, your children and mine have little chance of getting in. The open spots are so few, a student can’t get in on high scores but only with almost superhuman scores. That’s not fair.

We like to think this country is a meritocracy where you get ahead becaue you’re smart or hard working. But most of us understand the truth and that truth is that having good contacts, going to good schools and having upper class mannerisms are the basic requirements for success. These people live in a bubble world where no amount of incompetence, poor conduct or even criminal acts can knock them down. Now, I’m sure you can remind me of Madoff or some other corporate malefactor. But let me remind you that the world economy was savaged by the geniuses on Wall Street back in 2007 and not one has paid any penalty for their criminal acts or simple incompetence.

The middle class lives in a world where any failure can doom your career. They live in a world where you can do everything, absolutely everything they taught you in high school or college would gurantee you success and still everything can be taken from them, their jobs, their homes, their insurance, their benefits, their pensions, their investments – everything. The children of the middle class are thrown out into a world of diminishing opportunity and low paying jobs.

Let me repeat, one of the key factors is the difficulty of the children of the middle class to get into prestigious schools.

I see nothing on the horizon that will change those rules.

You see this is the hardcore, the never changing affirmative action, the big quota system. The guaranteed access to the best spots to those who already have money or status is a vicious assault on the concept of merit.

It is astonishing considering the amount of federal aid these institutions gobble up that they are not required to admit based on merit.

James Pilant

Business Ethics Roundup 1/1/11!

Let’s start with a small disclaimer here. I have 42 business ethics web sites (by my definition which is broad) listed on my favorites in that single category. I have 56 business ethics “related” sites on my favorites. So, I ‘m never going to to get more that a partial glimpse at what’s going on. With that out of the way, let’s start the new year rolling!

The Crane and Matten Blog explain why business ethics is more significant culturally than CSR.

Here’s a quote - CSR is also, as might be expected, a lot more business-friendly than business ethics. In fact, people often tend to use CSR when they’re talking about the good things companies are doing, and business ethics (or a lack of them) when talking about the bad things they do.

The Ruder Finn Ethics Blog discusses ethics and giving while providing some fascinating statistics.

Here’s a quote - We give for many different reasons. We may give as an expression of friendship and love or just reciprocate. Retailers, economists and Wall Street eagerly all hope that people will spend much this year are and thus sustain the slow recovery of our economy. The National Retail Federation expects an increase in 2010 Holiday sales of 2.3% to $447.1 billion. (Gifts from the rich to the rich.)

From the web blog, Business Ethics Training, we have a review of the book, Ship of Fools: How Corruption and Stupidity Sank the Celtic Tiger.

Here’s a quote - With all the talk of toxic assets (real estate) and the resulting fallout in the States – its easy to overlook what happened in Ireland. Particularly the situation with NAMA (National Asset Management Agency), that holds the toxic assets.

From the web site, Ethix: Business Technology Ethics, we have a book review of After the Fall: Saving Capitalism From Wall Street—and Washington by Nicole Gelinas

Here’s a quote - Gelinas key message is that capitalism needs clear rules in order to flourish, and that must include allowing bad businesses to fail. Bail outs only encourage further bad behavior, and what we have seen in the recent financial meltdown is simply a lesson forgotten from what happened in the 1920s and ’30s.

David Yamada’s Minding the Workplace has several posts. I recommend you read his year end closing, but the one I discussing is the next to the last. He explains what one should do if bullied at work.

Here’s a quote - There’s a lot of cheap and sometimes dangerous “one size fits all” advice out there on how to handle workplace bullying situations, especially in newspaper work advice columns. These resources are no substitute for understanding the dynamics of workplace bullying and how they relate to one’s specific circumstances.

Federal Reserve Gave Citibank 1.6 Trillion Dollars In Loans; Morgan Stanley – 2 trillion And Goldman Sachs – A Mere 600 Billion

Bernie Sanders

Matt Taibbi writing in Rolling Stone -

I was in Washington last week and visited Bernie in his office, mainly to talk about the incredible results of the Federal Reserve audit, about which I’ll be writing more in the upcoming weeks and after the New Year. The audit of the Fed was undertaken because Bernie and a few other members of congress fought very hard during the Dodd-Frank regulatory reform debate to force open Ben Bernanke’s books, and as a result we now know the staggering details of the secret bailout era. We know that Citigroup received $1.6 trillion in loans, and Morgan Stanley $2 trillion, and Goldman Sachs – the same Goldman Sachs that bragged about how quickly it paid back its $10 billion TARP bailout – over $600 billion. We know that hedge fund billionaires who moved their corporate addresses to the Cayman Islands to avoid U.S. taxes were rewarded by their buddies in government with huge Fed loans; we know that the U.S. government likewise has been extending massive loans to a variety of Japanese car companies at a time when many American auto workers in Detroit have seen their wages cut in half, to $14 an hour. There’s that and there’s more on the outrage front, and we know it all because Sanders kicked and screamed and stamped his feet about Fed secrecy until just enough other members of the Senate decided to go along with him.

The TARP bailout was just a small part of the benefits showered on Wall Street, a Wall Street than in spite of the enormous public funds necessary to keep them operating paid out enormous bonuses.

But just for fun, and because I enjoy it, let’s see what Matt thinks about President Obama.

I contrast this now to the behavior of Barack Obama. I can’t even count how many times I listened to Barack Obama on the campaign trail talk about how, as president, he would rescind the Bush tax cuts as soon as he had the chance. He stood up and he said over and over again – I can still hear him saying “Let me be clear!” with that Great Statesman voice of his, before he went into this routine – that the Bush tax cuts were wrong and immoral. He said more than once that they “offended his conscience.” Then, just as he did with drug re-importation and Guantanamo and bulk Medicare negotiations for pharmaceuticals and the issue of whether or not he would bring registered lobbyists into his White House and a host of other promises, he tossed his campaign “convictions” in the toilet and changed his mind once he was more accountable to lobbyists than primary voters. He pulled an Orrin Hatch, in other words, only he did it serially.

I can live with the president fighting for something and failing; what I can’t stand is a politician who changes his mind for the sake of expediency and then pretends that was what he believed all along. You just can’t imagine someone like Sanders doing something like that; his MO instead would be to take his best shot for what he actually believes and let the chips fall where they may, budging a little maybe to get a worthwhile deal done but never turning his entire face inside out just to get through the day. This idea that you can’t be an honest man and a Washington politician is a myth, a crock made up by sellouts and careerist hacks who don’t stand for anything and are impatient with people who do. It’s possible to do this job with honor and dignity. It’s just that most of our politicians – our president included, apparently – would rather not bother.

Thanks, Matt!

James Pilant

Just A Few Bank Burglaries?

Felix Salmon writing in Reuters’ Analysis and Opinion -

In order to know that cases like these are “a tiny percentage of foreclosures,” you need to know what that percentage is, n’est-ce pas? So this defense is not particularly convincing, unless and until we can see some numbers. Surely, mistakes like these would happen occasionally even during the boom years. But if the percentages are rising, that’s clear empirical evidence that overwhelmed servicers are doing an increasingly shoddy job.

Next time a newspaper wants to write about this particular trend, then, let’s get the names of those bank representatives on the record, let’s ask them how they know that the proportion of dreadful mistakes they make is “tiny” or “minuscule,” and let’s be a bit more determined that we should be the ones making the determination as to how small the percentage is, rather than the bank’s own flacks.

Exactly. I made the same point several months ago when the banks said that only a handful of mortgages had been mishandled. The banks were lying about the scale of the problem. It turned out there were minimally hundreds of thousands. This does not give one confidence in bank claims of “just a few cases,” “a few bad apples,” and all those other things you say when you don’t want to admit the scale of your crimes.

I don’t believe Mr. Salmon is mistaken in his assessment. Breaking into people’s homes and taking their stuff is an extremely intimidating tactic. You can just imagine the desk bound suits chortling over a business lunch about how they forced the deadbeats out.

Let’s get some lawsuits going. They are the public’s last line of defense and we can be quite sure law enforcement, politicians and regulatory agencies will sit this one out.

James Pilant

Net Neutrality – Obama Caves, A Young Turks Interview With Timothy Karr

This is 18 minutes and 23 second. A bit long for many of my readers. Nevertheless, this is a good explanation about how the new rules amount to a surrender on net neutrality.

James Pilant

Will Wall Street Ever Pay For Its Crimes? Or Just Its Fair Share Of Taxes?

These are brief interviews with Les Leopold. Here is a sample of his writing from Huffington Post -

We got into this crisis because Wall Street invented and pedaled fantasy financial instruments that turned out to be junk. While their party lasted, those complex derivatives were a gold mine for the largest financial institutions. According to the New York Times, the profits from the nine largest commercial banks “from early 2004 until the middle of 2007 were a combined $305 billion. But since 2007, those banks have marked down their valuations on loans and other assets by just over that amount.” In other words, the profits weren’t real.

He also has a book called The Looting of America: How Wall Street’s Game of Fantasy Finance Destroyed Our Jobs, Pensions, and Prosperity—and What We Can Do About It.

Can Chinese Students Save American Mill Town?

An infusion of Chinese students would probably be good for any American town. But the reason is unusual. Some American communities have been devastated by free trade. These story is a tale of a community that has no resources.

James Pilant

News Of Death Net Neutrality Working Through The Media

Okay, watching this thing is just painful. Not only are sites like mine going to suffer, if you want a decent internet speed so you can watch movies, you’re going to have to pay more for it.

It highlights once again, the President’s ability to take a solemn pledge on an issue, break it, and then declare victory.

Today, the White House hales a victory on Net Neutrality. Maybe they can sell that to the rubes but I can read law.

James Pilant

Internet Dead.

From Steven Axelrod on Salon -

The internet as we know it is officially doomed, as of today, and I’m already feeling nostalgic. Funny that a technology could move so fast across the landscape of my life – from a geeks-only fluke to a curiosity, to a useful tool, to a powerful engine of procrastination and finally a central venue for all my communications, research, entertainment and shopping, only to be reduced to the closed down, controlled, censored corporate cash cow it’s about to become, with the Obama administration’s blessing.

Internet, we barely knew ye.

But of course the Proprietors of our Nation couldn’t allow this internet business to go on the way it was heading. What a frightening thought – free, unobstructed communications, with no control and no profit … people just saying whatever they want, whenever they want, leaking documents, downloading YouTube videos that make Proprietor-controlled media outlets look like liars. You knew there’d be repercussions after the “Colbert bombed at the Press Association Dinner” narrative was reduced to one more punchline, a million downloads later.

He’s right. It will take a while but these things you’re reading like my blog, the sites you surf will probably go the way of the dodo bird and the passenger pigeon.

You might be curious as to why I’m not outraged myself.

In fact, my most fire breathing, screaming fits of anger were over this issue some months ago.

I simply realized that the Obama administration will sell out the internet in a total reversal of the President’s stated position. As far as the President is concerned, words have no meaning. He says whatever is necessary to get whatever he wants at the time.

You want to argue with me.

If so much as one person objects, I will happily put up the You Tube videos where the President declares that he absolutely supports net neutrality and will not compromise. I put them up on a previous post. It took me about a minute to find four separate events where he said these things.

So, it was inevitable.

The best guide to this President’s actions are to go on You Tube, run the issue and see what the President said during the campaign. Expect him to do the opposite and you will only rarely be wrong.

The independence of the internet was critical to the kind of support and networking, the Obama campaign used to win election in 2008. You see, the President isn’t even smart.

It was unwise politically, damaging his own campaign infrastructure and limiting the influence of the blogosphere which did so much for him during the campaign. It also alienates the aforementioned bloggers, who if they are anything like me, will never forget this latest outrage.

I’m not going to forget it.

What happens to me and this blog. Well, I’m going to keep going and I have a monitor that tells me the loading speed for the web site, when it gets longer than say five seconds, I’ll start considering shutting down.

I am stubborn though, maybe I’ll hang on until it’s just me and some close friends who tell me that they log on when don’t or can’t.

And it gets better. Our President is planning on fixing the tax code next year.

Of course, he’s going to cut up Social Security like a butchered steer, George W. Bush’s dream come true.

I’d like someone to tell me what the hell happened?

I want to know.

I can get being betrayed.

I can get changes of allegiance.

I definitely understant political expediency.

But this President makes decisions that don’t even make sense from an election point of view.

Earlier, I said that you could take the opposite of what the President said as a guide, but there is another one. If there are two options and one is the more politically foolish, the White House chooses that one.

Net neutrality is dead. Happy Christmas.

James Pilant