data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/69877/69877ef17172a39f9c89dbe6114bbb1433c96238" alt="https://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Video/081121/n_todd_mitchell_081121.standard.jpg"
Geithner has been a key player in the current economic crisis -- helping Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and his team manage the wall street bailout. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has agreed to stay on under President-elect Barack Obama, according to officials in both parties.
So we will still have the same old foxes guarding our fiscal hens house, and the same hawks over the fields.
I find it especially troubling that, in this time of nationalizing businesses and socializing their bad debts we are not nationalizing the one business that is capitalizing on this and that stands to make trillions in interest in servicing these tax payer backed loans.
We should not be using tax payer money to buy interests in failing businesses, we should be using it to end our relationship with the federal reserve banking system. But no, our new president has chosen the leader of the most powerful of the privately ruled " federal " reserve banks to be directly in charge of " saving " our economy.
Whatever you want to think about the federal reserve system, at least understand what it is, how it may benefit from this bailout in terms of interest paid on these borrowed trillions.
Get this, when you hear of the government giving billions to companies and banks dig it that they say they will use these same " toxic assets " to back up as collateral the money the are borrowing from the federal reserve. Meaning many of us, or our parents will end up with new lardlords, or mortgage paper holders. But then last week Paulson said we weren't going to do that...wtf.
So my question; what is being used as security for these trillions in loans, other than toxic assets [ mortgage securities } or future tax revenues? What happens to the programs that were sheduled to go broke before this all happened like social security?
I'd like an answer other than long term fucked. Because that's how I see it.
See, it is against the law, specically TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 3 > SUBCHAPTER VII > § 301 for banks to make unsound loans. There are specific federal reserve mandates to prevent asset bubbles.
All of which has happened, and in a bad way under the management of the federal reserve system and especially the george bush administration.
While my hope was that president Obama wwould breed change it has been resoundingly squashed before he has been sworn in.
Some say the federal reserve bank is owned by foreign entities, specifically the rothchildes, This essay examines the accuracy of these claims.Specifically, it investigates the charge that the New York Federal Reserve Bank is owned, directly or indirectly, by foreign elements, whether the New York Fed in effect runs the whole Federal Reserve System, and whether its enormous annual profits accrue primarily to foreigners or to the U.S government.