NASA Was Given $36 Million To Find 90% Of Dangerous Asteroids — And It Failed

Shutterstock

Business Insider | Sep 15, 2014

CAPE CANAVERAL Fla. (Reuters) - NASA won't meet a congressionally ordered goal to find 90 percent of nearbyand potentially dangerous asteroids larger than 460 feet (140 meters) in diameter, the agency’s Inspector General said on Monday.

The shortfall comes despite a 10-fold increase in NASA’s annual budget over the past five years – from $4 million in 2009 to $40 million in 2014 - to track and assess potentially dangerous asteroids and comets. So-called “Near-Earth Objects,” or NEOs, fly within about 28 million miles (45 million km) of Earth.

The agency’s efforts are poorly coordinated, ill-managed and under-staffed, according to a 32-page report titled “NASA’s Efforts to Identify Near-Earth Objects and Mitigate Hazards,” by NASAInspector General Paul Martin.

“NASA estimates that it has identified only about 10 percent of all asteroids 140 meters and larger,” Martin wrote. “Given its current pace and resources, (NASA) has stated that it will not meet the goal of identifying 90 percent of such objects by 2020.”

A one-person office manages a “loosely structured conglomerate of research activities that are not well integrated and (which) lack overarching program oversight, objectives and established milestones to track progress,” the report said.

NASA has found about 95 percent of the largest and potentially most destructive asteroids, those measuring about 0.62 mile (1 km) or larger in diameter.

About 66 million years ago, a 6.2-mile (10-km) -wide object hit what is now Mexico’s Yucatanpeninsula, triggering global climate changes that are believed to have led to the demise of the dinosaurs and most other species alive at that time.

More recently, a fragment of an asteroid estimated to be just 59 feet (18 meters) in diameter exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia. The force of the Feb. 15, 2013, explosion matched the energy released in 30 atomic bombs, blowing out windows and destroying buildings. More than 1,000 people were injured by flying debris.

“Recent research suggests that Chelyabinsk-type events occur every 30 to 40 years,” the Office of Inspector General report said, adding that most impacts would occur in the ocean rather than in populated areas.

Since 1998, NASA has spent about $100 million on programs to find, assess and mitigate potentially threatening space neighbors.

As of July 2014, the agency has discovered about 11,230 NEOs, including 862 of the largest asteroids. That figure includes only about 10 percent of the smaller nearby asteroids that are about 460 feet (140 meters) wide, far short of the agency’s goal to find 90 percent by 2020, the report said.

The report made five recommendations for beefing up NASA’s asteroid detection efforts, including adding at least four to six employees to help manage the program and coordinating projects with other U.S. and international agencies and with privately funded initiatives.

NASA’s Associate Administrator for Science John Grunsfeld said in a letter to Martin he expects a new NEO program to be in place by Sept. 1, 2015.

(Editing by David Adams and Eric Walsh)

Foreclosure Filings Jump as Investors Eye Exits

Image source: US Census Bureau, Housing Vacancy Survey.

Foreclosure Filings Jump as Investors Eye Exits
Feb 17, 2014 | It's Our Economy | Mike Whitney

“Speculators may do no harm as bubbles on a steady stream of enterprise. But the position is serious when enterprise becomes the bubble on a whirlpool of speculation. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done.”

-John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money

It’s too bad Keynes isn’t around today to see how the toxic combo of financial engineering, central bank liquidity and fraud have transformed the world’s biggest economy into a hobbled, crisis-prone invalid that’s unable to grow without giant doses of zero-rate heroin and mega-leverage crack-cocaine. This is exactly what the British economist warned about more than half a century ago in his magnum opus, “The General Theory…”, that you can’t build a vital, prosperous economy on the ripoff, Ponzi scams of Wall Street charlatans, mountebanks and swindlers. It can’t be done. And, yet– here we are again– in the middle of another historic asset-price bubble conceived and engineered by the bubbleheaded crackpots at the Federal Reserve. Go figure?

Just take a look at housing, which is at the end of an astonishing 18-month run that was entirely precipitated by what?

Higher wages?

Nope.

Lower unemployment?

Wrong again.

Consumer confidence, bigger incomes, credit expansion, growing revenues, pent-up demand?

No, no, no, no and no. Economic fundamentals played no part in the so called housing rebound. In fact–as everyone knows–the economy stinks as bad today as it did 4 years ago when the government number-crunchers announced the end of the recession. The reason prices have been rising is because of the Fed’s loosy-goosey monetary policy (fake rates and QE), inventory suppression, bogus gov mortgage modification programs, and unprecedented speculation. (mainly Private Equity and investors groups) Those are the four legs of the stool propping up housing. Only now it looks like a couple of those legs are in the process of being sawed off which is going to put downward pressure on sales and prices. Take a look at this from DS News:

“A majority of experts surveyed by Zillow and Pulsenomics expect large-scale investors will pull out of the housing market in the next few years…

Out of 110 economists, real estate experts, and investment strategists surveyed in Zillow’s latest Home Value Index, 57 percent said they think institutional investors will work to sell the majority of homes in their portfolios “in the next three to five years.” These investors are largely credited with propping up housing during its recession, helping to keep sales volumes from plummeting too far.

While their withdrawal will most certainly affect today’s still-fragile market—79 percent of those surveyed said the impact would be “significant or somewhat significant” should investor activity curtail this year.”

Experts Predict Level Playing Field as Investors Withdraw, DS News

This is what we were afraid of from the very beginning, that the big PE firms would pack-it-in and move on once they’d made a killing, which they have, since prices soared 12 percent in one year. Now they want to get out while they getting is good, which means that–in some of the hotter markets where investors represented upwards of 50 percent of all purchases–there will have to be a new source of demand. Unfortunately, the demand for housing has never been weaker.

Sales are down, purchase applications are down, and the country’s homeownership rate has slipped to levels not seen since 1995, 18 years ago. The Fed’s $1 trillion purchase of mortgage backed securities (MBS) and zero rates have done nothing to stimulate “organic” consumer demand. Zilch. No “trickle down” at all. All the policy has done is generate a temporary surge of speculation that’s distorted prices and created conditions for another big bust. Get a load of this article from Housing Perspectives:

“Although household growth is the major driver of housing demand, getting an accurate picture of recent trends in this measure is difficult…In its recent release, the HVS reported annual household growth of just 448,800 in 2013. This represents a 48 percent drop in household growth relative to that from 2012 and marked the lowest annual household growth measure since 2008, in the depths of the Great Recession (Figure 1).

Repeat: “…a 48 percent drop in household growth relative to that from 2012 and marked the lowest annual household growth measure since 2008, in the depths of the Great Recession.”

Do you really think there are enough firsttime homebuyers in out there in Mortgageland to fill that gap?

In your dreams! Keep in mind, that a lot of firsttime homebuyers are collage grads who want to start a family and put down roots. Regrettably, nearly half of those potential buyers have been scrubbed from the list due to their burgeoning student loans which now exceed $1 trillion. These kids will probably never own a home, let-alone have a positive impact on sales in 2014. Ain’t gonna happen.

Maybe this is why the banks are suddenly speeding up their foreclosure filings, because they want to offload more of their distressed inventory before prices fall. Is that it? Check out this article on Housingwire:

“Monthly foreclosure filings — including default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions — reversed course and increased 8% to 124,419 in January from December, according to the latest report from RealtyTrac.

This marks the 40th consecutive month where foreclosure activity declined on an annual basis, with filings down 18% from January…

As a whole, 57,259 U.S. properties started the foreclosure process for the first time in January, rising 10% from December…

…this month’s foreclosure starts increased from a year ago in 22 states, including Maryland (up 126%), Connecticut (up 82%), New Jersey (up 79%), California (up 57%), and Pennsylvania (up 39%).

Scheduled foreclosure auctions jumped 13% in January compared to the previous month.” RealtyTrac: Monthly foreclosure filings reverse course, rise 8%, Housingwire

Like most articles on housing, you have to sift through the bullshit to figure out what’s really going on, but it’s worth the effort. The banks have been dragging their feet for 40 months now, slowing down the foreclosure process (and adding to the shadow supply of distressed homes.) in order to push up prices hoping to ignite another boom. Now–after 3 and a half years of blatant collusion–they’ve done a 180 and started speeding up foreclosures. Why?

It’s because they agree with the above-mentioned “110 economists, real estate experts, and investment strategists” who think that “institutional investors” are going to call-it-quits and move on to greener pastures. That’s going to push down prices, which means they’re going to lose money. So they want to get ahead of the curve and dump more houses on the market before the stampede. That way, they lose less money.

Keep in mind, the banks are up-to-their-eyeballs in distressed inventory. Even conservative estimates of shadow backlog puts the figure of 90-day delinquent or worse, above 3 million homes. But if you review the gloomier prognostications, the sum could easily exceed 6 million homes, enough to suck the entire bleeding banking system into a black hole of insolvency. There was an interesting article on the topic in Bloomberg last week. It seems that, “bond king” Jeffrey Gundlach has been warning mortgage-backed security purchasers that they should to pay more attention to underlying collateral in MBSs (vacant homes, that is) which have been “rotting away” for “six years” or more. Here’s a clip from the article:

“The housing market is softer than people think,” Mr. Gundlach said, pointing to a slowdown in mortgage refinancing, shares of homebuilders that have dropped 13% since reaching a high in May, and the time it’s taking to liquidate defaulted loans…

About 32% of seriously delinquent borrowers, those at least 90 days late, haven’t made a payment in more than four years, up 7% from the beginning of 2012, according to Fitch analyst Sean Nelson.

“These timelines could still increase for another year or so,” Mr. Nelson said, leading to even higher losses because of added legal and tax costs, and a greater potential for properties to deteriorate.”

Gundlach Counting Rotting Homes Makes Subprime Bear, Bloomberg

Let me get this straight: The number of “seriously delinquent borrowers” has actually gone up in the last year? Not only that, but many of these people “haven’t made a payment in more than four years”?

That’s a mighty fine recovery you got there, Mr. Bernanke. Sheesh.

Keep in mind, the backlog of unwanted homes could be a lot bigger than most people think. Way bigger. I was reading an article by Keith Jurow the other day, (“The Coming Mortgage Delinquency Disaster”, Keith Jurow, dshort.com) that paints a pretty grim picture of what is really going on behind the faux inventory numbers. Jurow–who has done extensive research on pre-foreclosure notice filings in New York state– says: “The number of monthly foreclosure filings in Suffolk County on Long Island …(were) more than 180,000 (while) fewer than 1,000 foreclosure filings had been served each month in (the last 4 years). By this calculation, Jurow figures that there should have been 1,192,000 foreclosures in New York state while the actual percentage of homes that have been repossessed remains in the single digits. (Read the wholearticle here.)

Chew on that for a minute. So, that’s a total of 180,000 homeowners who would have faced foreclosure under normal conditions, while less than 48,000 have actually been foreclosed. That’s 132,000 fewer foreclosures than there should have been IN JUST ONE COUNTY IN ONE STATE ALONE.”

The reason the prodigious shadow stockpile continues to balloon is quite simple, as Jurow points out in his piece: “Servicers do not foreclose on seriously delinquent borrowers throughout the entire NYC metro area. Completed foreclosures have actually declined rather dramatically throughout the nation in the past two years. The difference is that in the NYC metro, the servicers have not been foreclosing since the spring of 2009.”

So, there you have it; the banks haven’t been foreclosing because it hasn’t been in their interest to foreclose. Foreclosure sales push down prices which batters balance sheets and scares shareholders. Who wants that? So the game goes on. Only now, the dynamic is changing. Skittish investors are eyeing the exits, QE is winding down, and housing prices have peaked. The recovery has reached its zenith, which is why the bankers want get off on the top floor before the elevator begins its bumpy descent.

People who are thinking about buying a house in the near future, should watch developments in the market closely and proceed with extreme caution. No one wants to get burned in another bank swindle.

MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

Originally published in Counterpunch.

The Vampire Squid Strikes Again: The Mega Banks' Most Devious Scam Yet

The Vampire Squid Strikes Again: The Mega Banks' Most Devious Scam Yet
Feb 12, 2014 | Rolling Stone | Matt Taibbi

Call it the loophole that destroyed the world. It's 1999, the tail end of the Clinton years. While the rest of America obsesses over Monica Lewinsky, Columbine and Mark McGwire's biceps, Congress is feverishly crafting what could yet prove to be one of the most transformative laws in the history of our economy – a law that would make possible a broader concentration of financial and industrial power than we've seen in more than a century.

But the crazy thing is, nobody at the time quite knew it. Most observers on the Hill thought the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 – also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – was just the latest and boldest in a long line of deregulatory handouts to Wall Street that had begun in the Reagan years.

Wall Street had spent much of that era arguing that America's banks needed to become bigger and badder, in order to compete globally with the German and Japanese-style financial giants, which were supposedly about to swallow up all the world's banking business. So through legislative lackeys like red-faced Republican deregulatory enthusiast Phil Gramm, bank lobbyists were pushing a new law designed to wipe out 60-plus years of bedrock financial regulation. The key was repealing – or "modifying," as bill proponents put it – the famed Glass-Steagall Act separating bankers and brokers, which had been passed in 1933 to prevent conflicts of interest within the finance sector that had led to the Great Depression. Now, commercial banks would be allowed to merge with investment banks and insurance companies, creating financial megafirms potentially far more powerful than had ever existed in America.

All of this was big enough news in itself. But it would take half a generation – till now, basically – to understand the most explosive part of the bill, which additionally legalized new forms of monopoly, allowing banks to merge with heavy industry. A tiny provision in the bill also permitted commercial banks to delve into any activity that is "complementary to a financial activity and does not pose a substantial risk to the safety or soundness of depository institutions or the financial system generally."

Complementary to a financial activity. What the hell did that mean?

"From the perspective of the banks," says Saule Omarova, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, "pretty much everything is considered complementary to a financial activity."

Fifteen years later, in fact, it now looks like Wall Street and its lawyers took the term to be a synonym for ruthless campaigns of world domination. "Nobody knew the reach it would have into the real economy," says Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown. Now a leading voice on the Hill against the hidden provisions, Brown actually voted for Gramm-Leach-Bliley as a congressman, along with all but 72 other House members. "I bet even some of the people who were the bill's advocates had no idea."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-vampire-squid-strikes-again-the-mega-banks-most-devious-scam-yet-20140212?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter#ixzz2tGPpFDsG
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

Justice Dept. says Bank of America should be fined $2.1 billion for mortgage fraud

Justice Dept. says Bank of America should be fined $2.1 billion for mortgage fraud
Jan 30, 2014 | RT

The United States government is now seeking $2.1 billion in fines from Bank of America for selling fraudulent loans that precipitated the Great Recession, more than double the amount it initially sought last year.

Back in November, the Department of Justice asked a US district judge to levy about $863 million in penalties on Bank of America after a jury found the financial giant guilty of committing fraud.

During the trial, the federal government claimed that Countrywide, purchased by Bank of America in 2008, sold shoddy home loans to US-sponsored businesses Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It argued that the company was focused on selling as many loans as possible without concern for quality, or whether or not recipients would be capable of making the payments necessary.

For its part, Bank of American denied any wrongdoing and criticized the penalty as excessive, saying Countrywide’s sales of such loans only occurred during a short period of time before the company was acquired.

According to Reuters, the new request for $2.1 billion comes after a judge asked both the government and Bank of America for a different way of assessing the penalty that should be filed. Previously, the $863 million requested by the Justice Department was based on losses suffered by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Now, US District Judge Jed Rakoff is looking to calculate a penalty based on the gains Countrywide experienced rather than the losses others incurred.

While evidence from the trial suggested Countrywide earned roughly $165 million selling defective securities, US attorneys believe the penalty should be based on gross revenue rather than profit.

As noted by Reuters, a court filing on Wednesday found the government pushing the judge to deliver the maximum penalty in order to "punish defendants for their culpability and bad faith, and to deter financial institutions and their executives who would engage in similar fraudulent mortgage schemes.”
 
In addition to the fines sought from Bank of America, the US is also seeking $1.1 million from Rebecca Mairone, a former Countrywide executive who was also found liable for fraud. She has also denied any wrongdoing.

While the US continues its legal battle with Bank of America, it settled a similar case with JPMorgan Chase in November. The company agreed to pay $13 billion in fines for its role in selling fraudulent loans – $6 billion to reimburse investors, $4 billion in mortgage relief programs to homeowners and a $2 billion fine to end civil cases in five US states.

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Assault on Our Sovereignty, Our Constitution, Our Liberty (Video)

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Assault on Our Sovereignty, Our Constitution, Our Liberty (Video)
Dec 19, 2013 | The new American | William F. Jasper

Over the past couple of years, The New American has presented many articles, including a special “Free Trade Agenda” issue of the print publication (PDF), exposing the dangers of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. It is a regional trade agreement aimed at integrating the economic, legal, and political systems of Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam — and the United States. As such, it proposes a radical, unconstitutional transformation of our republic and of the entire governing structure of our nation.

The architects of the TPP admit that they plan to expand the outrageous ambitions of the TPP to an even larger group of nations, which they have dubbed the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific (FTAAP). The Peterson Institute for International Economics is one of the premier globalist think tanks and a key promoter of the TPP. A Peterson Institute study states that “the TPP is regarded as an interim arrangement or stepping stone toward a broader, regionwide Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific.”

The TPP and FTAAP promoters are consciously using the same formula of lies, deception and subversion that globalist leaders in Europe have been employing for decades to convert formerly independent nations into obedient “member states” of the European Union.


The TPP, if accepted, will transfer increasing legislative, executive and judicial powers to regional entities, and to the World Trade Organization, which claims ultimate jurisdiction over all matters covered by the agreement.

And what kind of matters are those?

Since all negotiations have been held in secrecy, we can only report on the issues the U.S. Trade Representative’s office admits the TPP covers, which include: customs, telecommunications, investment services, technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, intellectual property, regulatory coherence, development, non-conforming measures and cross-border trade in services, rules of origin, competition, agriculture, textiles, and environment.

One can only speculate the consequences when surrendering sovereignty on any of these important issues.

Wikileaks, an Internet whistleblower site, leaked one chapter of the text in late 2013. It showed the dangers the TPP presents to alternative, independent media and the right of citizens to communicate via the Internet.

The TPP would, in effect implement the anti-freedom measures of two badly misnamed bills that failed to pass Congress: the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). These bills would have drastically affected Internet freedom, allowing virtually anyaone — but especially the ruling powers — to stop publication of anything they find objectionable by claiming copyright infringement.

My colleague at The New American, constitutional attorney Joe Wolverton, points out that “such procedures bypass the U.S. court system and the Constitution by abolishing the due process owed to those accused of crimes.” And notes Wolverton, “The TPP is an attack on our laws, our courts, our freedom of expression, our Constitution, and our sovereignty.”

Contact your representatives now to stop the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and see the additional articles listed below that we’ve published detailing the dangers of the TPP.

Related articles:

WikiLeaks Publishes Key Chapter of Secret TPP Agreement
Regional Scheme for the Pacific Rim
Trans-Pacific Partnership Ready for Christmas Delivery?
TPP Secret Trade Agreement Puts International Tribunal Above U.S.
The “Free Trade” Agenda Threatens Our Rights
Trans-Pacific Partnership: Secret Surrender of Sovereignty

Agenda 21 “Plan Bay Area” & “Wildlife Corridors” Explained

© Steve Kemp Channel

Cross-posted from FindResolution.info under Austerity as Neuro-linguistic Programming

Agenda 21 “Plan Bay Area” & “Wildlife Corridors” Explained
Nov 21, 2013 | Farm Wars | Heather Gass

Editor's note: Heather Gass outlines how our UN and aristocracy have taken words such as "sustainability," and are using this deceptive language to hide both austerity and the manner of bailouts that are actually in process. This attributes the movement of wealth from that of the people, into the hands of those who have no conscience or humanitarian values. This is a form of psychological warfare and awareness is beyond critical, as partnerships are already being employed world wide with the monolithic powerful.



  Subscribe to channel

Wikileaks Disclosure of Trade Deal Chapter Shows It Will Kill People and Internet; House Opposition is Widespread

Wikileaks Disclosure of Trade Deal Chapter Shows It Will Kill People and Internet; House Opposition is Widespread
Nov 14, 2013 | Naked Capitalism

We posted on the New York Times news story that opposition in the House to authorization of “fast track” authority to the Administration on its pending Pacific and Atlantic trade deals was stiffening right just before a related story broke: that Wikileaks had disclosed the end of August draft of one of the critical chapters of one of the deals.

We wrote yesterday that this deal, the Trans Pacific Partnership, already looked to be in trouble given both Congressional and foreign opposition. The Administration has conducted the talks with an unheard-of degree of secrecy, with Congressional staffers in most cases denied access to the text and even Congressmen themselves facing unheard-of obstacles (Alan Grayson reported that the US Trade Representative created an absurd six weeks of dubious delays in his case). But perversely, 700 corporate representatives got privileged access so they could influence negotiations. It’s not hard to see whose interests are really being served in these deals.

The Wikileaks disclosure could well have struck the fatal blow to this toxic pact. As we’ll see below, it may have been dead anyhow. Obama’s relationship with his own party is already on the rocks as a result of Obamacare (not just the rollout but the increasing recognition that the program has more fundamental flaws), so he has limited political capital available to whip Democratic Congressmen back into line. The opposition is more deep-seated and broad-based than I had realized (for instance, 18 of the 21 ranking full committee members in the House are against it). So the TPP looked to be on the Syria incursion path.

But it’s hard not to believe that the Wikileaks revelations will galvanize opposition among the other prospective members of the pact. It’s hard for democratic countries to agree to a deal that has been revealed will kill their citizens in order to enrich America’s Big Pharma incumbents. And that statement is not an exaggeration. Wikileaks disclosed the end of August version (apparently two drafts behind current text) of the intellectual property chapter, which includes the section on drugs and surgical procedures.

The intent is to strengthen America’s aggressive patent regime and require foreign countries to comply with it. For instance, the FDA considers minor changes in existing drugs, such as developing an extended release version so that a medication need be taking only once a day, to be a “new drug application” and will extend patents based on that. The draft also would severely limit the use of generics. Higher prices will restrict drug use and is certain to have adverse health consequences for some, potentially many, citizens. And although people overseas will suffer the greatest consequences, Americans will be affected as well. As Public Citizen wrote, “The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has proposed measures harmful to access to affordable medicines that have not been seen before in U.S. trade agreements,” and elaborated:



Another medical-industrial complex rent-extraction technique is by covering surgical methods . No, I am not making that up. See this section of an excellent discussion by Knowledge Ecology International:

An interesting example of how the US seeks to change national and global norms are the provisions in the TPP over patents on surgical methods. The WTO permits countries to exclude “diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals.” The US wants to flip this provision, so that “may also exclude from patentability” becomes “shall make patents available.” However, when a version of the IP Chapter was leaked in 2011, the US trade negotiators were criticized for ignoring the provisions in 28 USC 287 that eliminated remedies for infringement involving the “medical activity” of a “medical practitioner.” The exception in US law covered ”the performance of a medical or surgical procedure on a body.” The US trade negotiators then proposed adding language that would permit an exception for surgery, but only “if they cover a method of using a machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.” The US proposal, crafted in consultation with the medical devices lobby, but secret from the general public, was similar, but different from the U.S. statute, which narrowed the exception in cases involving “the use of a patented machine, manufacture, or composition of matter in violation of such patent.” How different? As Public Citizen’s Burcu Kilic puts it, under the US proposal in the TPP, the exception would only apply to “surgical methods you can perform with your bare hands.”

I’m not sure how this would work in practice, but I imagine it would be ugly. For instance, Johnson & Johnson dominates the market for replacement hips and knees. They also provide tools used to perform the surgeries on those hips and knees which surgeons need to buy (as in no one had the incentive beside J&J to make these implements, and surgeons would be unlikely to scrimp on a secondary cost when it gets billed back to the patient anyhow). So it looks as if J&J would also somehow be able to charge additional fees on each operation, say if it introduced a new hip replacement which required some change in how the hip was installed (a new surgical method). How this would be enforced is over my pay grade.

The pact in its end of August form would also, as we had discussed based on concerned raised by the Electronic Freedom Foundation, interfere with basic Internet operations. The International Business Times summarized the EFF’s concerns:

Here’s the text of the relevant section of the TPP’s intellectual property chapter leaked Wednesday:

Each Party shall provide that authors, performers, and producers of phonograms have the right to authorize or prohibit all reproductions of their works, performances, and phonograms, in any manner or form, permanent or temporary (including temporary storage in electronic form).

The EFF wrote in a July analysis of the language — which has not been amended in the intervening months — that the provision “reveals a profound disconnect with the reality of the modern computer,” which relies on temporary copies to perform routine operations, during which it must create temporary copies of programs and files in order to carry out basic functions. This is particularly so while a computer is connected to the Internet, when it will use temporary copies to buffer videos, store cache files to ensure websites load quickly and more.
“Since it’s technically necessary to download a temporary version of everything we see on our devices, does that mean—under the US proposed language—that anyone who ever views content on their device could potentially be found liable of infringement?” the EFF wrote. “For other countries signing on to the TPP, the answer would be most likely yes.”

Another way the TPP will harm the Internet is, similar to SOPA and PIPA, is to obligate internet service providers to act as copyright police. Now, as Dean Baker explained on Bill Moyers, if a website posts material improperly, the site owner and the host are obligated to remove it as soon as the publisher is notified (in practice, if the publisher does not comply pronto, a nastygram to the webhost will get the entire site taken down). ISPs are extremely low margin businesses. Forcing high-cost monitoring on them would lead them to increase their staffing considerably. The resulting hosting increases would force the closure of most small independent sites. The increased oversight of ordinary users (they’d be required to monitor ongoing communications for piracy, which sounds like an NSA wet dream) would also likely lead to higher access charges for consumers.

I attempted to read the draft, which was largely over my head (as in you need to know extant intellectual property provisions in order to be able to see how this treaty language stands relative to it). However, even a casual reading shows that much of the language is still under negotiation, with many passages having numerous TPP parties on each side of an issue. So the negotiations looked to be fraught even before the Wikileaks disclosure.

On the US side, Rosa DeLauro and George Miller are leading the opposition to the use of fast track authority altogether. This is the key section of their letter, which already has 151 signatures:

Congress, not the Executive Branch, must determine when an agreement meets the objectives Congress sets in the exercise of its Article I-8 exclusive constitutional authority to set the terms of trade. For instance, an agreement that does not specifically meet congressional negotiating objectives must not receive preferential consideration in Congress. A new trade agreement negotiation and approval process that restores a robust role for Congress is essential to achieving U.S. trade agreements that can secure prosperity for the greatest number of Americans, while preserving the vital tenets of American democracy in the era of globalization.

Twentieth Century “Fast Track” is simply not appropriate for 21st Century agreements and must be replaced. The United States cannot afford another trade agreement that replicates the mistakes of the past. We can and must do better.

Let’s hope that lame duck Obama overplaying his hand on the “trade” front will indeed rouse Congress to pull back authority that it has over the years allowed the Executive to abrogate. If so, this will be an unexpected and welcome important side benefit of blocking these toxic trade deals.

Keiser Report: Working Class Debt Slaves (E506)

Keiser Report: Working Class Debt Slaves (E506)
Oct 5, 2013 | RT

In this episode of the Keiser Report, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert, discuss David Cameron as a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) which causes the wealth of the nation to drop. They also discuss Continuous Payment Authorities as a metaphor for our financial systems continuously taking toll payments, whether via interest fees or inflation. Max also notes that David Cameron claims 'profits' is not a dirty word; and yet, to every major, successful corporation on Earth "profits' is, indeed, a word to be avoided at all costs. In the second half, Max interviews Dr Michael Hudson of michael-hudson.com about the global economic policies turning the UK into Greece and the U.S. into Latvia and a world in which only the little companies make profits.


FOLLOW Max Keiser on Twitter: http://twitter.com/maxkeiser

WATCH all Keiser Report shows here:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=... (E1-E200)
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=... (E201-E400)
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=... (E401-current)

Four Horsemen - Feature Documentary - Official Version

Four Horsemen - Feature Documentary - Official Version
Sept 13, 2013 | RenegadeEconomist

FOUR HORSEMEN is an independent feature documentary which lifts the lid on how the world really works.

As we will never return to 'business as usual' 23 international thinkers, government advisors and Wall Street money-men break their silence and explain how to establish a moral and just society.

FOUR HORSEMEN is free from mainstream media propaganda -- the film doesn't bash bankers, criticise politicians or get involved in conspiracy theories. It ignites the debate about how to usher a new economic paradigm into the world which would dramatically improve the quality of life for billions.

"It's Inside Job with bells on, and a frequently compelling thesis thanks to Ashcroft's crack team of talking heads -- economists, whistleblowers and Noam Chomsky, all talking with candour and clarity." - Total Film

"Four Horsemen is a breathtakingly composed jeremiad against the folly of Neo-classical economics and the threats it represents to all we should hold dear."
- Harold Crooks, The Corporation (Co-Director) Surviving Progress (Co-Director/Co-Writer)

Follow us on https://www.twitter.com/RenegadeEcon
on https://www.facebook.com/RenEconomist
or visit our website http://www.renegadeeconomist.com

Support us by subscribing here http://bit.ly/1db4xVQ

Also you can check our shop at http://www.renegadeeconomist.com/info...

H/T Activist Post

The Resident: Evil Monetary Fiction

The Resident: Evil Monetary Fiction
Aug 18, 2013 | RTAmerica

If you listen to market reports on the financial industry, it sounds like we've pulled ourselves out of recession. Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo all announced huge earnings this quarter. We're back baby, right? Not nearly. Not even close. Because those earnings are a reflection on what our money really is. The Resident (aka Lori Harfenist) explores the nature of evil monetary fiction.

Follow The Resident on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/TheResident

Wells Fargo: Your Neighborhood Mega-Money Laundering, Drug War Profiteering, Prison-Industry Enlarging Bank

© Alternet

Wells Fargo: Your Neighborhood Mega-Money Laundering, Drug War Profiteering, Prison-Industry Enlarging Bank
Aug 6, 2013 | Alternet | Andrew Gavin Marshall

Wells Fargo is one big elite networking operation that's not afraid to get its hands covered in blood money.

Just recently, in late July, Wells Fargo surpassed the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) as the world’s largest bank by market capitalization. This followed Wells Fargo reporting a 19% increase in profits over the second quarter as the bank has been busy consolidating the housing market while other big banks have retreated from it. Wells Fargo had amassed a share of almost 40% of the U.S. mortgage market by early 2013.

Now, let's put this in context with the company's other recent activities.

Wells Fargo, which acquired Wachovia in the wake of the financial crisis, controlled roughly 28.8% of all home loans issued across the United States in 2012, compared to 11.2% of the market it controlled in 2007, just before the housing implosion. In 2012, the bank paid a $175 million settlement following revelations that “mortgage brokers working with Wells Fargo had charged higher fees and rates to more than 30,000 minority borrowers across the country than they had to white borrowers who posed the same credit risk.”

In the settlement, the world’s largest bank “admitted no wrongdoing,” noting in a press release that the bank simply wanted “to avoid a long and costly legal fight.” Then, in 2013, Wells Fargo agreed to a further $42 million settlement because “it neglected the maintenance and marketing of foreclosed homes in black and Latino neighborhoods across the country.” Again, of course, the bank admitted no wrongdoing.

But that's just the tip of things. A civil mortgage fraud suit was filed against Wells Fargo in late 2012 for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages over “reckless mortgage loans” made by the bank for over a decade in the lead-up to the financial crisis. Even in light of the massive settlement in 2012 over mortgage fraud, which simultaneously forced big banks to adhere to new rules regarding the mortgage market, it was found that both Bank of America and Wells Fargo had “flagrantly violated those obligations,” increasing foreclosure risks for Americans. Also, this past May, Wells Fargo agreed to pay a $105 million settlement in a fraud case brought by Orange County, which also implicated Bank of New York Mellon to the tune of a $114 million settlement.

It gets better. In 2010, Wachovia – which was purchased by Wells Fargo in 2008 – paid a settlement of $160 million for laundering over $100 million in drug money for Mexican and Colombian drug cartels. Further, the bank admitted that it had failed to “apply the proper anti-laundering strictures” regarding the bank’s handling of $378.4 billion in currency exchanges with Mexico between 2004 and 2007. A federal prosecutor commented, “Wachovia’s blatant disregard for our banking laws gave international cocaine cartels a virtual carte blanche to finance their operations,” as tens of thousands of Mexicans were killed in an exponentially violent drug war.

Thus, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, not only did the big banks receive sprawling government bailouts (Wells Fargo got $25 billion from the U.S. government), but according to the UN, proceeds pouring in from the global drug trade ultimately helped keep Wells Fargo and others afloat as “the only liquid investment capital” available to them during the crisis. But Wells Fargo didn't just profit from laundering money for major drug cartels -- it also profited, and continues to profit, at the other end of the drug war as a major investor in the prison-industrial complex, specifically with heavy investments in the GEO Group, the second largest private prison company in the United States.

As the largest bank in the world, Wells Fargo is deeply connected with some of the most powerful U.S. and international institutions to ensure that no matter how many crimes it commits -- fraud, illegal foreclosures, money laundering, you name it -- it will continue to consolidate markets, grow larger and presumably get away with its criminal activities for relatively small fines. The Global Power Project examined a total of 26 individuals on the executive committee and board of directors at Wells Fargo to assess their institutional affiliations. The most represented institutions (with three individual affiliations each) are the Council on Foreign Relations and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), followed by Harvard, Citigroup, Chevron, the Financial Services Roundtable and Target Corporation (with two individual affiliations each).

Meet the Elites

Elaine L. Chao, who sits on the board of Wells Fargo, was formerly U.S. Secretary of Labor in the George W. Bush administration, from 2001 to 2009. She was a Distinguished Fellow of the Heritage Foundation from 1996 to 2001 and has resumed that position since 2009. She was also the President and CEO of the United Way of America from 1992 to 1996, Director of the Peace Corps from 1991 to 1992, and Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation from 1989 to 1991. Chao is a member of the board of directors of Dole Food Company, News Corporation, Protective Life Corporation, the Institute of Politics of Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and a member of Harvard Business School Board of Dean’s Advisors, as well as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

John S. Chen, also on the board of Wells Fargo, is a senior adviser to Silver Lake Partners, a director of the Walt Disney Company, a member of the Board of Overseers Emeriti of the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University, a former member of the President’s Export Council, a member of the board of trustees of the Brookings Institution, chairman of the U.S.-China Policy Advisory Roundtable at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Wells Fargo board member Enrique Hernandez, Jr. is the president and CEO of Inter-Con Security Systems, and sits on the boards of Chevron, Nordstrom, McDonald’s Corporation, and the board of trustees of the University of Notre Dame. He is a member of the Harvard College Visiting and Harvard University Resources Committees and is a member of the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation.

Federico F. Peña, on the Wells Fargo board, was a U.S. Secretary of Transportation and U.S. Secretary of Energy during the Clinton administration, and previously a member of the Colorado House of Representatives and a former mayor of Denver. More recently, he has been a senior adviser to Vestar Capital Partners, on the board of Sonic Corporation and a member of the Diversity Advisory Board of Toyota North America. A former national board member of the Obama-Biden Transition Team, Peña is also former National Co-Chair of Obama For America and currently a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

John G. Stumpf, the president and CEO of Wells Fargo, is a member of the board of directors of the Financial Services Forum and chairman of the board of the Financial Services Roundtable, and is also on the boards of Target Corporation, Chevron, and on the board of trustees of the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

For a mega-money laundering, drug war profiteering, prison-industry enlarging global bank like Wells Fargo, the evidence is obvious: it helps to have affiliations with individuals and institutions that make up the U.S. and increasingly the international power elite. Like the other big banks, Wells Fargo is too big to fail, too big to jail, too criminal to control -- and too tumorous to tolerate.

About the Author

 Andrew Gavin Marshallis an independent researcher and writer based in Montreal, Canada. He is project manager of The People’s Book Project, and he hosts a weekly podcast, “Empire, Power, and People,” on BoilingFrogsPost.com.

Banking on Influence With Bank of America

Banking on Influence With Bank of America
July 19, 2013 | BLN | Andrew Gavin Marshall

This July, Bank of America was expecting to report an earnings increase of 32% from last year. The Washington Business Journal declared the bank among the top 10 “most improved brands” of the year. Bank of America is the second-largest bank in the United States following JPMorgan Chase.

So why does this bank deserve such an “improved” reputation? Perhaps it’s worth looking at a little of the bank’s record for some clarity.

During the first year of the global financial crisis, which the big banks helped to create and which they profited enormously from, the government stepped in to bail out Bank of America. They rewarded the bank $20 billion for its massive financial crimes, as well as a special guarantee for nearly $100 billion of potential losses on the balance sheets of Merrill Lynch, which Bank of America acquired during the crisis.

As it turns out, Bank of America and other big banks continue to get “backdoor bailouts” through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which acts as a legal guarantor and protector of the Wall Street chain gang of criminal conglomerates. The bank was recently added to a list, compiled by a corporate watchdog group, of the “dirty dozen” criminal financial institutions for its role deceiving investors, committing mortgage and foreclosure abuses and engaging in municipal bond rigging and illegal payments.

When Matt Taibbi wrote in Rolling Stone that Bank of America was “a hypergluttonous ward of the state whose limitless fraud and criminal conspiracies we’ll all be paying for until the end of time,” he wasn’t exaggerating. The bank foreclosed on tens of thousands of Americans through a “mass perjury” scheme and pushed worthless mortgages on pension funds and unions. As several big banks – including BofA, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo and Citigroup – agreed to pay a $25 billion settlement with the government over “abusive mortgage practices,” the Department of Justice granted the banks what amounted to legal immunity “from civil government claims over faulty foreclosures.” In January, Bank of America settled to pay $11.6 billion to the government-controlled mortgage company Fannie Mae in response to a legal battle over “bad loans.”

In June of 2013, six former BofA employees and one contractor issued sworn statements in which they accused the bank of lying to homeowners, fraudulently denying loan modifications and paying bonuses to staff who pushed people into foreclosure. One of the whistleblowers commented, “we were told to lie to customers.” Employees that pushed ten or more homeowners per month into foreclosure would receive a $500 bonus, and the Bank also “gave employees gift cards to retail stores like Target or Bed Bath and Beyond as rewards for placing accounts into foreclosure.”

Further, anyone who “questioned the ethics” of the bank’s practices was summarily fired – a policy that led to a lawsuit in which homeowners accused the bank of racketeering “to defraud homeowners who sought modifications and then acted as the kingpin of that [racketeering] enterprise.”

Of course, it doesn’t end there. Bank of America, along with multiple other big banks, has been accused of laundering money for Mexican drug cartels. The FBI confirmed that BofA was involved in laundering drug money for the Los Zetas drug cartel in Mexico. However, in a twist of fine news for the bank, U.S. government regulators indicated they would not hold the bank responsible for its actions.

Banking on Influence

So how does a massive criminal enterprise engaging in large-scale fraud, racketeering and money laundering get a free pass from the U.S. government? The bank’s financial clout in the economy certainly plays a part. But so too do its affiliations with dominant national and international organizations, institutionalizing the bank within the larger global power structures and the elites who run them.

Research conducted for the Global Power Project found 28 individuals at Bank of America, including executives and members of board of directors, with institutional affiliations. Four of the individuals who hold leadership positions at BofA are also affiliated with the major foreign-policy think tank in the United States: the Council on Foreign Relations. Three individuals are connected to Morgan Stanley, another major financial institution, while two affiliations exist with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (promoting big business “solutions” to environmental crises), the Business Council, Catalyst, Duke University, Stanford University, and BlackRock.

The following institutions each also hold one individual affiliated with Bank of America: Royal Dutch Shell, DuPont, Deere & Company, the World Wildlife Fund, the President’s Export Council, Harvard, the World Economic Forum, Brookings Institution, Sara Lee Corporation, Monsanto, CBS Corporation, BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Walt Disney Company, President Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, the Rockefeller Foundation, Business Roundtable, Financial Services Forum, PepsiCo, Carlyle Group, Booz Allen Hamilton, Goldman Sachs, the International Advisory Panel of the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the International Advisory Board of the National Bank of Kuwait.

Meet the Elites

Bank of America’s CEO, Brian T. Moynihan, was a former executive vice president at Fleet Boston and director of BlackRock. He is currently a member of the Business Roundtable and Vice Chairman of the Financial Services Forum, as well as being a member of the International Advisory Panel of the Monetary Authority of Singapore.

Charles O. Holliday, Jr. is the Chairman of the Board of Bank of America and a director of Royal Dutch Shell, and was the CEO of DuPont from 1998 to 2009. He was the former Chairman of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the Business Council, Catalyst, the Society of Chemical Industry, and is a founding member of the International Business Council. Holliday is a director of Deere & Company, a member of the board of Planet Forward, Climate Works Foundation, the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University, and is a member of the board of directors of the National Geographic Education Foundation and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

Mukesh D. Ambani is a member of the board of Bank of America and is the Chairman and Managing Director of Reliance Industries. He is a member of the Global Board of Advisors of the Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the Prime Minister’s Council on Trade and Industry for the Government of India, a member of the board of governors of the National Council of Applied Economic Research in New Delhi, and a member of the Millennium Development Goals Advocacy Group. Ambani is also a member of the Foundation Board of the World Economic Forum, a member of the Indo-U.S. CEOs Forum, a member of the International Advisory Board of the National Bank of Kuwait, Vice Chairman of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, and a member of the Advisory Council of the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. Additionally Ambani is a member of the Business Council, the India-Russia CEO Council, Co-Chair of the Japan-India Business Leader’s Forum, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Indian Institute of Management, and is a member of the International Advisory Council of the Brookings Institution.

Monica C. Lozano is Chairman and CEO of ImpreMedia and CEO of La Opinion, as well as a member of the board of directors of the Walt Disney Company. She is also a member of the Board of Regents of the University of California, a Trustee of the University of Southern California and a director of the Weingart Foundation, as well as a member of the board of directors of the Commission of the 21st Century Economy. Lozano was a member of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board from 2009-2011, and has since been a member of President Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness as well as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Charles O. Rossotti is a senior adviser to the Carlyle Group and was the Commissioner of the IRS from 1997 to 2002, also sitting on the board of directors of Booz Allen Hamilton, Quorum Management Solutions, Primatics Financial and AES Corporation. He too is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Linda P. Hudson, who sits on the board of BofA, is the President and CEO of the military contractor BAE Systems, and former Vice President of General Dynamics. Hudson sits on the board of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum and on the executive committee of the Aerospace Industries Association. She is a member of the University of Florida Foundation Board and the International Women’s Forum.

Anne M. Finucance, who is the Global Strategy and Marketing Officer at Bank of America, is also a director of Partners HealthCare System, CVS Caremark Corporation, a trustee of Stonehill College and Carnegie Hall, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Finucance sits on the boards of the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, the American Ireland Fund, the International Center of Journalists, and the National September 11 Memorial & Museum.

Banking on America?

Bank of America is, in short, a profound symbol of much that is wrong on Wall Street: massive fraud, money laundering, racketeering, conspiracy, and weighty influence in Washington and beyond. Surely it’s comforting to know that a woman who sits on the board of BofA, Monica Lozano, also sits on President Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, advising the president as to how to appropriately manage the economic “recovery”. In terms of the media reporting on Bank of America’s crimes, Lozano, as CEO of a media company and board member of the Walt Disney Company, along with BofA board member Charles K. Gifford — who sits on the board of directors of CBS Corporation — signal that a “fair” portrayal of the bank’s activities aren’t exactly what the public should expect.

What is clear is that Bank of America, like all big banks in our era, isn’t merely a financial institution but simultaneously acts as an influential institution in the media, military industrial complex, think tanks, chemical companies and government circles.

The bank is too big to fail. Too big to jail. And too connected to change.

Andrew Gavin Marshall, BFP Partner Producer, contributing author and analyst.

Athens under lockdown today and closed to democracy

Lifewise: Athens under lockdown today and closed to democracy
July 18, 2013 | New Statesman | Yiannis Baboulias

There are two kinds of deficit that have taken hold in Greece: the economic one, and the democratic deficit created by government spin and five years of austerity and authoritarianism.

The Greek capital will be closed for the day, nothing to see here, move along. From Panepistimio to Mets, two of the borders of the historic center of Athens, it’s about two kilometres in a straight line. From Acropolis to Mouson Avenue, it’s almost six. These are the borders of the area of Athens where a curfew has been declared for today (see map below). To get a sense of the scale, think of an area in London from Westminster to Holborn and from Marble Arch to Bethnal Green Road.

From nine in the morning till eight at night, the centre of Athens will be under lockdown. No protests or assemblies allowed. This decision (taken by the Chief of the Greek Police no less – not an elected official) was deemed necessary because the German Minister of Finance, Wolfgang Schäuble, will be visiting Athens. To ensure that nothing will hinder Schäuble’s route, or tarnish his eyes with images of dissent, the road that leads from the airport to the Greek Parliament will also be closed while he is on it.  

Read more..

Everything Is Rigged, Continued: European Commission Raids Oil Companies in Price-Fixing Probe

European finance workers
Jason Alden/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Everything Is Rigged, Continued: European Commission Raids Oil Companies in Price-Fixing Probe
May 15, 2013 | Matt Taibbi | Rolling Stone

We're going to get into this more at a later date, but there was some interesting late-breaking news yesterday.

According to numerous reports, the European Commission regulators yesterday raided the offices of oil companies in London, the Netherlands and Norway as part of an investigation into possible price-rigging in the oil markets. The targeted companies include BP, Shell and the Norweigan company Statoil. The Guardian explains that officials believe that oil companies colluded to manipulate pricing data:

The commission said the alleged price collusion, which may have been going on since 2002, could have had a "huge impact" on the price of petrol at the pumps "potentially harming final consumers".

Lord Oakeshott, former Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said the alleged rigging of oil prices was "as serious as rigging Libor" – which led to banks being fined hundreds of millions of pounds.

The inquiry also involves Platts, the world's largest oil price reporting agency. The concept here is very similar to both the LIBOR scandal, which involved banks manipulating the benchmark rates for interest rates, and to the possible rigging of interest rate swap prices through the manipulation of ISDAfix, the benchmark rate for those instruments, which is also the subject of a regulatory probe.

We wrote about both of those scandals in last month's Rolling Stone article, "Everything is Rigged." In that piece, finance professionals talked about the potential for manipulation in other markets that involve voluntary price reporting:

What other markets out there carry the same potential for manipulation? The answer to that question is far from reassuring, because the potential is almost everywhere. From gold to gas to swaps to interest rates, prices all over the world are dependent upon little private cabals of cigar-chomping insiders we're forced to trust.

"In all the over-the-counter markets, you don't really have pricing except by a bunch of guys getting together," Masters notes glumly.

That includes the markets for gold (where prices are set by five banks in a Libor-ish teleconferencing process that, ironically, was created in part by N M Rothschild & Sons) and silver (whose price is set by just three banks), as well as benchmark rates in numerous other commodities – jet fuel, diesel, electric power, coal, you name it.

One analyst I spoke to for that piece talked specifically about Platts (and another, similar price assessment company), noting that they "do benchmarks for the entire oil market, the entire refined products market" and "you name it" – any of these benchmarks that rely on voluntary reporting could be manipulated.

Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Financial Scandal Yet

It's not clear yet exactly what is alleged to have occurred, but Europeans have long complained that retail gas prices have not seemed to match wholesale prices. In fact, complaints that wholesale prices at gas stations were noticeably slow to fall when wholesale prices fell prompted the U.K.-based Office of Fair Trading last year to conduct a cursory inquiry into possible anti-competitive behavior in the fuel markets. Early this year, they announced that they hadn't found enough evidence to warrant a full-blown investigation. But complaints persisted.

The story is obviously hugely significant in its own right, just as the LIBOR story was. But both are even more unpleasant in conjunction with each other, and the other price-fixing scandals that have cropped up in the financial markets in the last year or two. We've had other price-fixing scandals involving gas in the U.K. and here in the U.S., just a few weeks ago, it came out that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) concluded that JPMorgan Chase used "manipulative schemes" to tinker with energy prices in Michigan and California.

FERC last year also recommended a massive $470 million fine against Barclays for similar activity. (Barclays has vowed to fight the penalty.) Deutsche Bank, meanwhile, settled with FERC for $1.7 million after the commission alleged that the German bank was involved with manipulation in the California energy markets for several months during 2010.

More on all this later . . .

Money Swindlers: How to Invest a Billion Dollars into Controlling Democracy

How to Invest a Billion Dollars into Controlling Democracy
May 6, 2013 | bravenewfoundation

After killing higher education, the conservative oil tycoon billionaires, the Koch Brothers, are after our free press and the newspapers that could serve as a broader platform for their conservative ideology.

Stop the Koch takeover at www.KochBrothersExposed.com

Elizabeth Warren On Illegal Foreclosures. INCREDIBLE VIDEO

Elizabeth Warren On Illegal Foreclosures. INCREDIBLE VIDEO
Apr 11, 2013 | Les Grossman


Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat and longtime consumer advocate who is quickly developing a reputation as perhaps the Senate's most effective cross-examiner. Following a series of probing questions that would not have been out of place in a court room, Warren excoriated the regulators for not immediately turning over case records of borrowers who may be considering private legal action against their bank.

 "You have made a decision to protect the banks but not to help the families who were illegally foreclosed on," Warren said. "Families get pennies on the dollar for being the victims of illegal activities."

She continued: "You know of cases where the banks broke the laws, but you are not going to tell the homeowners. People want to know that their regulators are watching out for the American public, not the banks. Without transparency, [we] cannot have any confidence in your oversight or that markets are functioning correctly."

Over the past few months Warren and other legislators have repeatedly asked bank regulators at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve for more information about the case-by-case review of homeowner loans that was dropped in January in favor of a blanket $9.3 billion settlement.

At the hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, Warren and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) made clear that they were not happy with the answers lawmakers have received thus far about the program, which is widely considered an expensive and lengthy debacle.

Last week, the Government Accountability Office issued a scathing report of the reviews, finding that regulators did not provide proper oversight and that some errors likely went undetected. On Tuesday, regulators released new information suggesting that banks may have made errors in as many as 30 percent of all loans that qualified for a review, a figure far higher than previously reported.

Thursday's hearing was framed by the Senate committee as an opportunity to understand better the relationship between the financial institutions that agreed to the loan reviews nearly two years ago, and the independent consultants -- companies like Promontory Financial and Deloitte -- hired by the banks to conduct the reviews. As HuffPost and others have reported, those reviews were compromised by inconsistent oversight of the often-poorly trained contract employees and by improperly close relationships with the banks themselves.

Under questioning from Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat, regulators came the closest to acknowledging that the reviews, which resulted more than $2 billion in payments by the banks to consultants, were poorly conceived and supervised.

"The OCC and the Fed greatly underestimated the complexity of the task," said Daniel Stipano, a top lawyer at the OCC. He cited the number of financial institutions, consultants and homeowners involved and the difficulty in negotiating state law as among the challenges that reviewers and regulators had to negotiate.

Asked if he thought the structure of the reviews was appropriate in hindsight, Stipano responded "no."

"We would take a different approach" if the process were done again, he said. He declined to say what changes regulators might make in the future.

Brown led off the committee by asking officials to reveal the name of an independent consultant that regulators had admonished for shoddy work. The officials declined, citing the confidential bank-regulator relationship. They did not rule out the possibility of disclosing the name of the consultant in the future.

Brown seemed to find this response unsatisfactory. "How does disclosing the identity of an underperforming third-party entity damage the relationship with banks?" he asked.

Warren focused many of her questions on the January settlement into which most of the banks conducting the foreclosure reviews entered. That deal requires they distribute $3.6 billion in cash payments to 4.4 million homeowners who received a foreclosure notice in 2009 or 2010 -- a number far greater than the half-million or so who applied for a foreclosure review with a specific complaint. Most borrowers will receive less than $1,000 each.

Warren noted that regulators have given conflicting answers as to the number of loans that reviewers found to contain bank errors. Regulators have said roughly 100,000 reviews were completed, or nearly so, when the program ended. The Federal Reserve, for example, initially said that errors were detected in 6.5 percent of those loans, but subsequent estimates have put the percentage both higher and lower than that figure, Warren said.

Barack Obama – the 21st Century ‘Carpetbagger’ for the U.S. Power Elite

Barack Obama – the 21st Century ‘Carpetbagger’ for the U.S. Power Elite
Apr 15, 2013 | The People's Voice | Larry Pinkney

“Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth.” –Lucy Parsons

“It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.” –Albert Camus

The indefinite detention – NDAA signing, drone man Barack Obama is singularly the most insidious and hideous U.S. politician thus far in this 21st century. There is nothing – absolutely nothing – that he will not say or do in willing service to his corporate / military masters of the U.S power elite, at the horrible expense of everyday ordinary Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow people.

Barack Obama – the consummate political pimp, has taken the outrages against ordinary people by his predecessor George W. Bush, to a level unmatched in the history of this nation or of humankind as a whole. He has (without Congressional approval) militarily attacked sovereign nations in Africa and the ‘Middle East.’ He has shredded the U.S. Constitution with his draconian (NDAA) indefinite detention law and his obscene ‘Kill List.’ He is now, in 2013, in the process of dismantling Social Security for senior citizens, the disabled, the needy, and the future; after having already wiped out (in his first presidential term) the non-mandatory single payer universal health care option on behalf of his corporate pharmaceutical benefactors.

To refer to Barack Obama, as a 21st century ‘carpetbagger’ on behalf of the Wall Street and military power elite is, quite frankly, an understatement. He is far, far worse. His incessant obfuscated and misleading rhetoric, combined with his brazenly opportunistic use of his slightly darker skin pigmentation, has horribly redefined, the already deplorable realities, of opportunism and exploitation.

This man, Barack Obama, has proven to be the perfect tool for his Wall Street corporate / military masters and the U.S. corporate-stream media. He has proven to be the bane of humanity – all in the fallacious name of ‘progress.’

White ‘Liberals’ and the Black Bourgeoisie

White ‘liberals,’ not to mention much of the leadership of so-called ‘progressives, and the opportunistic black bourgeoisie (and its aspirants) in this nation, have overwhelmingly demonstrated that when it comes to principles and integrity they are virtually no different from their supposed foes of the so-called right wing. They outright support, or are complicit in supporting, U.S. wars, military incursions, U.S. occupations of sovereign nations, and the economic emaciation of the poor (at home and abroad) as long as these actions are carried out by their perceived team – the Democrats. And the opportunistic and relatively small black bourgeoisie (adored by the U.S. corporate-stream media) is absolutely no different. They rationalize these abominations abroad and at home in the name of the allegedly sacred name of supporting a “black” head of the U.S. Empire. Massive hypocrisy notwithstanding, they have shown, in real terms, in the words of Albert Camus, that they are “on the side of the executioners.” Indeed, in the words of Malcolm X, they are on the side of “those who want to continue the system of exploitation.” They have joined the blood suckers of humankind at home and abroad. They too, are the ‘carpetbaggers’ of humanity and their betrayal is utterly repugnant and unacceptable.

What Next for the Everyday People?

Everyday ordinary people in the United States and throughout Mother Earth must understand that they – and only they – are the ones who can best and most effectively and collectively protect their own interests and human rights. This national and global corporate system of thieves, liars, and blood suckers will never do such a thing no matter what their obfuscated rhetoric implies. Their rhetoric is nothing more than a distraction and a trap for the undiscerning.

In this 21st century, we- the people – have the opportunity and obligation to relentlessly and collectively pursue what is in our own best political, economic, and social interests. At stake is literally everything – the very existence of Mother Earth, and of we, her stewards.

In the words of Lucy Parsons, “Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth.” That “wealth” was, and continues to be, stolen and ill gotten wealth. Mother Earth belongs collectively to all the everyday ordinary women and men who are her stewards – NOT to the blood suckers of humanity and their corporate-owned, war mongering political pawns.

-###-

Each one, reach one. Each one, teach one. Onward then, my sisters and brothers. Onward…!

Published in Issue 512 of The Black Commentator http://www.blackcommentator.com/512/512_kir_obama_carpetbagger_share.html
http://www.blackactivistwg.org/blog/embrace-the-everyday-peoples-stories-reject-the-top-down-narrative-of-history/

BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board member and Columnist, Larry Pinkney is a veteran of the Black Panther Party, the former Minister of Interior of the Republic of New Africa, a former political prisoner and the only American to have successfully self-authored his civil / political rights case to the United Nations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In connection with his political organizing activities, Pinkney was interviewed in 1988 on the nationally televised PBS News Hour, formerly known as The MacNeil / Lehrer News Hour. Pinkney is a former university instructor of political science and international relations, and his writings have been published in various places, including The Boston Globe, the San Francisco BayView newspaper, the Black Commentator, Global Research (Canada), LINKE ZEITUNG (Germany), and Mayihlome News (Azania/South Africa). For more about Larry Pinkney see the book, Saying No to Power: Autobiography of a 20th Century Activist and Thinker, by William Mandel [Introduction by Howard Zinn]. (Click here to read excerpts from the book.)