The McCain-Clinton gas holiday proposal is a perfect example of what energy expert Peter Schwartz of Global Business Network describes as the true American energy policy today: “Maximize demand, minimize supply and buy the rest from the people who hate us the most.”

Good for Barack Obama for resisting this shameful pandering.

Dumb as We Wanna Be

Every one of the facts stated here are verifiable from multiple sources and are NOT disputed. The only policy question that is relevant is WHETHER WE PUT PEOPLE OR BIG BUSINESS FIRST in our priorities. The rest is obvious. HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES:

1. HEALTHCARE: (AT LEAST $1 TRILLION IN DIRECT AND HIDDEN FAT IN THE SYSTEM). The U.S. health care system is a wealth transfer scheme, which takes money from the pockets of ordinary citizens and puts it in the hands of a few people who do nothing to earn it. This is a PRIVATE TAX that only exists because the government has interfered on behalf of big business starting with Keiser Permanente.

          a. We spend, on average anywhere from 5 to 40 times what other countries spend on drugs for two reasons (1) we are prescribed too many drugs and (2) we pay much higher prices from the same companies that sell the same drugs in other countries.

Instead of the money going through the government to the insurers, pharmaceutical companies and medical service providers, the government mandates the money go directly to these cartels.

These companies have applied a substantial portion of their excess profits towards placement of “news stories”, advertisements and other propaganda that have convinced most Americans that the U.S. health care system, while faulty, is still better than other countries. THIS IS A LIE. Check it out using any statistic you like.

• THE U.S. SPENDS 15.4% OF ITS GDP on heath care plus capital expenditures for equipment and buildings which brings it to around 18.5%. The amount of money spent is therefore $2,400,000,000 ($2.4 trillion dollars).
• U.S. patients take 65% more medication than any other country on earth because only our system allows access and payment for INTERVENTION and allows nothing for for PREVENTION and MAINTENANCE. Most of these medications eventually increase the risk of death and/or other diseases. The Food and Drug Administration is staffed by and funded by Pharmaceutical company employees (either past, present or future). Access to PREVENTATIVE protocols is denied by the FDA, insurance company and the propaganda disseminated by the medical industrial cartel.
• Not only is there sufficient funding already in the system to provide health care to every man, woman and child, along with social services that would reduce living stress and increase productivity, hope and innovation in the U.S. economy, there is actually about $400 billion dollars left over to contribute to other social programs (education, police, fire) that would make it possible for every man, woman and child at any age to be educated and trained to be competitive in the global economy. 
• NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD SPENDS MORE THAN 11% OF ITS GDP ON HEALTHCARE. 
• ALMOST EVERY OTHER WESTERN COUNTRY (INCLUDING THOSE WITH NATIONAL UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE) HAS MORE PHYSICIANS AND MORE HOSPITAL BEDS PER PATIENT THAN THE U.S.
• THE DEATH RATE, INFANT MORTALITY RATE, “UNNECESSARY” DEATH RATE, AND EVEN HEIGHT IS WORSE IN THE U.S. THAN, ON AVERAGE, 40 OTHER MODERN WESTERN COUNTRIES. (we have lost three years of longevity in the last 50 years and we have lost one inch of height).
• NO OTHER COUNTRY ALLOWS PRIVATE INSURANCE AS THE MIDDLE MAN BECAUSE INSURANCE AND MANAGED HEALTHCARE PLANS ADD NO VALUE.
• EVERY OTHER COUNTRY EMPHASIZES PREVENTATIVE HEALTHCARE AND GIVES BONUSES TO HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS WHO IMPROVE THE HEALTH OF THEIR PATIENTS.
• The only rational conclusion is that by deleting private insurance as the middle man in providing access to a public need (like education, police, public libraries and fire) and enabling a single payer to negotiate reasonable prices, the problem, and the deficit caused by healthcare spending would be eliminated. 

2. CREDIT AND DEBT: The U.S. credit and monetary system is a wealth transfer scheme, which takes money from the pockets of ordinary citizens and puts it in the hands of a few people who do nothing to earn it. This is a PRIVATE TAX that only exists because the government has interfered on behalf of big business starting with the credit card associations and companies that provide network access to credit imposing interest rates that have been known and understood for centuries to result in permanent debt.

It was once called USURY. Now it is called liquidity. The laws that made it illegal to charge rates of 35% on credit cards and 400% on payday advances were changed. So now it is still a crime under natural law but not under our legislative system. It’s government backed and therefore it is a PRIVATE TAX.

• Government spending, government subsidies to big business, and government laws allowing big business, large unregulated, to charge exorbitant interest rates has resulted in unprecedented consumer and government debt — Federal, State, local and individual — requiring SOMEBODY (either us or our children, grandchildren and great children) to pay interest amounting currently to more than $3 trillion dollars per year plus the loss of social services and safety nets that have existed for more than 50 years. 
• All of this debt has been funded by issuing U.S. currency equivalents that are now held in foreign investment vehicles, foreign exchange reserve accounts in central banks concentrated in the hands of China, South Korea and other countries whose commitment to the sovereignty and nationals security of the United States is best questionable.
• At least $1 trillion of interest, fees and costs associated with excess interest and/or excess debt could be eliminated from the expenditures of U.S. spenders, producing substantial capital for improvements to infrastructure, jobs, increased revenues from income taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes,etc., without raising the rate of taxation on any of these sources of revenue.
• The Mortgage Meltdown could be stopped by a commitment to keep people in their homes, preventing abandonment of homes that are not maintained. This would stop an ever-decreasing spiral of housing prices caused by REO homes coming onto the market at rates that demand could not possibly meet, reinstate the balance sheet of lenders and thus improve their capital position, and reinstate the balance sheet of investors who were tricked into buying junk securities which, with a little help and cooperation from business, government and people could be converted into ratable securities. 
• Devaluation of the dollar and inflation caused by devaluation would be slowed, stopped or even reversed if the U..> showed its resolve to responsible economic policies and responsible monetary management and responsible regulation of “securitization” which is merely a unregulated method of increasing monetary supply despite declining demand for the U.S. dollar.
• Reducing the debt service BY LAW to sustainable levels that would enable debtors to eliminate their debt. Banning advertisements that encourage consumers to buy goods and services they don’t need, or could wait to buy through savings, would convert a debt economy to a solid foundation of  savings economy. like many other countries in the world.

---

April 27, 2008

3 Candidates With 3 Financial Plans, but One Deficit

By LARRY ROHTER and MICHAEL COOPER

The Republican and Democratic presidential candidates differ strikingly in their approaches to taxes and spending, but their fiscal plans have at least one thing in common: each could significantly swell the budget deficit and increase the national debt by trillions of dollars, according to tax and budget experts.

The reasons reflect the ideological leanings of the candidates, with Senator John McCain proposing tax cuts that go beyond President Bush’s and the Democrats advocating programs costing hundreds of billions of dollars. But for fiscal experts concerned with the deficit, both approaches are worrisome.

With the national debt soaring to $9.1 trillion from $5.6 trillion at the start of 2001, in part because of the Iraq war and Mr. Bush’s tax cuts, a crucial question about the candidates to succeed him is “whether they are helping to fill the hole or make it deeper,” said Robert L. Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan organization that advocates deficit reduction. “With the proposals they have on the table, it looks to me like all three would make it deeper.”

Representatives of all three campaigns disputed such assessments, questioning the accounting methods analysts used to calculate the growing debt and saying they could enact their plans without making matters worse.

Mr. McCain’s plan would appear to result in the biggest jump in the deficit, independent analyses based on Congressional Budget Office figures suggest. A calculation done by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington found that his tax and budget plans, if enacted as proposed, would add at least $5.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

Fiscal monitors say it is harder to compute the effect of the Democratic candidates’ measures because they are more intricate. They estimate that, even taking into account that there are some differences between the proposals by Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, the impact of either on the deficit would be less than one-third that of the McCain plan.

The centerpiece of Mr. McCain’s economic plan is a series of tax cuts that would largely benefit corporations and the wealthy. He is calling for cutting corporate taxes by $100 billion a year. Eliminating the alternative minimum tax, which was created to apply to wealthy taxpayers but now also affects some in the middle class, would reduce revenues by $60 billion annually. He also would double the exemption that can be claimed for dependents, which would cost the government $65 billion.

“High tax rates are driving many businesses and jobs overseas — and, of course, our foreign competitors wouldn’t mind if we kept it that way,” Mr. McCain said, laying out his economic plan this month in Pittsburgh. “We’re going to get rid of that drag on growth and job creation.”

On the expenditure side, Mr. McCain has called not only for continuing an open-ended deployment of troops in Iraq, but also for spending $15 billion annually to expand the Army and the Marine Corps and to improve health care for veterans, among other programs.

Mr. McCain’s advisers have said the new tax cuts would be paid for by eliminating earmarks and making large spending cuts, but they have not identified specifics. And they have spoken vaguely about making entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare less costly for the government. Mr. McCain’s chief economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said the campaign had simply presented its vision of what the tax code should look like and noted that some of the proposals would be phased in.

“I think what they ought to do is remember that the proposals are going to engender economic growth, which is the best thing you can do for near-term budget improvement,” Mr. Holtz-Eakin said, adding that Mr. McCain believed spending restraint was possible.

That vision for the tax code includes making permanent the Bush tax cuts, set to expire in 2010, which Mr. McCain once opposed in part because they were not accompanied by sufficient spending cuts.

“I voted against the tax cuts because of the disproportionate amount that went to the wealthiest Americans,” Mr. McCain said in 2004. “I would clearly support not extending these tax cuts in order to help address the deficit.”

In 2001 and 2003, Mr. Bush pushed through Congress tax cuts totaling nearly $2 trillion. The first set lowered income and estate taxes, and the second focused mostly on capital gains and dividends.

The McCain campaign does not figure the costs of extending the tax cuts into its deficit projections, although the Congressional Budget Office estimates that it would cost an extra $2.2 trillion over the next decade.

When Mr. McCain outlined his tax cut plan, he backed away from his pledge to balance the budget during his first term, but said that he would do so by the end of his second term. And in an interview last Sunday on “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” on ABC, Mr. McCain said he would push ahead with his tax cuts even if Congress did not approve his spending cuts.

Some conservative economists say that increased deficits in the short run are an acceptable tradeoff for tax cuts that they say will promote economic growth in the long run. And many liberal economists say that some of the Democratic spending proposals, like addressing the affordability of health care or improving education, are long-overdue investments that pay off handsomely even if they entail more red ink.

Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton have acknowledged that their various new programs would be costly but have outlined how to pay for them. But some fiscal monitors say they may be relying on overly rosy projections of how much savings their proposals would actually yield.

Mrs. Clinton has calculated that her universal health care plan would cost about $110 billion a year, while Mr. Obama’s somewhat more modest proposal would cost up to $65 billion annually, his advisers say. Both candidates have also talked of new government incentives and investment to encourage the development of alternative sources of energy, which would cost about $15 billion a year.

The Democratic candidates have suggested that they could finance these and other programs by allowing parts of the Bush tax cuts to expire. That, however, ignores projections of the Congressional Budget Office, which has already assigned those savings to deficit reduction.

In other words, unlike Mr. McCain, both Democrats say they would revoke the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. “At a time of war and economic hardship, the last thing we need is a permanent tax cut for Americans who don’t need them and weren’t even asking for them,” Mr. Obama said.

But they would retain those reductions meant to benefit poor and “middle-class” families, which they defined as the 97 percent or so of the population that lives on less than $250,000 a year, and they would count the estimated $50 billion generated by higher taxes on the wealthy as new revenue.

“Remember, you can only use this money once,” said Mr. Bixby of the Concord Coalition, “and with all the Bush tax cuts scheduled to expire, that money is already scheduled to come into the Treasury. But on the campaign trail, this has become a source of new spending.”

Mrs. Clinton’s aides have been perhaps the most specific in explaining how they would offset the costs of their proposals, and her campaign speaks of moving toward balanced budgets. “We’re not going into debt for the war in Iraq and tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans,” Mrs. Clinton has said, “but instead we are taking care of the needs of our people at home.”

Regarding gas taxes, Mr. McCain has proposed a one-time “tax holiday” for the summer. Mrs. Clinton also calls for suspending it in a new advertisement in Indiana, while Mr. Obama says that is a “bad idea” but opposes any increase in the tax.

On the spending side, Mr. Obama has argued that ending the Iraq war is one way to pay for some of the new programs, including creating a national infrastructure investment bank and increasing the foreign aid budget. But such savings, which Mrs. Clinton does not count on, would not immediately make their way into the Treasury, and some experts say it is not clear whether they would be sufficient to finance all the programs Mr. Obama has enumerated.

Mr. Obama has talked of spending that money on a variety of initiatives whose costs amount to about one-third of the war’s estimated annual cost of $150 billion. “It is clear that there ought to be some distinction between a candidate who says a withdrawal should start immediately and a candidate who says let’s maintain the war at the highest level,” said Austan Goolsbee, Mr. Obama’s senior economic adviser.

The fiscal outlook has been made even murkier by the explicit “no new taxes for the middle class” pledge that both Democratic candidates made at their debate in Philadelphia this month, exempting taxpayers making $250,000 a year or less from new levies.

Hearing such a promise “makes you very sad,” said Len Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center. “First of all, we don’t have enough revenue coming in to pay our bills.” In addition, he said, the notion that all the revenue that would be lost in a middle-class tax freeze can be made up by higher taxes on the wealthy “is not tenable.”

I would give credit for the term “moral constipation” but I can’t remember where I heard it. I invite all who read this to give me the creator’s name so I can correct this blog and give him the attribution he deserves. 

It appears that we can all agree on one thing regardless of which candidate, party or ideology we subscribe to — The United States of America is on a path of moral bankruptcy, where ethical concerns and choices between right and wrong have been shoved off the table and instead convenience and self-aggrandizement is accepted by “we the people” with far more tolerance than is acceptable to me.

There is practically nothing so dear to me as my own opinion of my own intelligence. And yet I am dumfounded by the lack of outrage as corporate America and Government join hands in our pockets, in our lives, in our families, and in our minds. Protests erupt about the Olympic flame — but where is the outrage, the “I’m mad as hell and I won’t take it anymore” about the following:

1. Diesel fuel is $4 per gallon here but across the border in Mexico it is $2. Anyone care?
2. Real inflation for the Average American is in excess of 15% and climbing. Anyone interested?
3. Exxon made $11 billion last quarter. The rest of us made less at the end of the month because the money went to Exxon. Is there any connection between that fact and the Presence of an Oil man in the White House/ How about a vice President that headed up the very company that profited the most from the Iraq war? Is this so boring that MSM should be ignoring it just because nobody seems to want to anything about it?
4. By 2009, 1 person in 10 will be on food stamps in the United States. Shouldn’t that be interesting to both sides of the “Aisle?”
5. The average person in the United States is in debt on credit cards and other consumer and real estate loans in an amount that they can never repay, whereas no other modern country has that problem. Why?
6. Interest on debt accounts for more expenditure by government and individuals than anything else in the United States. Trillions of dollars of transfered wealth from those who now can’t eat to those who don’t know what to do with the money. What is being done about interests rates that guarantee non-payment and assure financial enslavement? (By the way medical care is second is now touted to be the “employer of last resort”).
7. Houses were appraised at $500,000 and within days were revealed to have values of less than 70% of that. People were prompted, tricked and coerced into signing mortgage documents they didn’t understand, in violation of law (not that anyone has been prosecuted), and now the borrowers are blamed for a scheme they still don’t understand. Now millions of American citizens are or will be broke, homeless and jobless. We know who did it and how it happened but MSM doesn’t care about that.
8. All of MSM (Main Street Media) is now controlled by a handful of people who let us hear only the things they want us to hear and only in the ways they want us to hear it. If you want news, go to the Internet, if you want infotainment watch TV or listen to radio. 
9. How many flag draped coffins can be hidden from view to keep the Iraq war “sanitary” and keep the public distanced from the gruesome reality of war, death, disfigurement, famine, disease and moral decrepitude? And why is MSM going along with  the ban on pictures of coffins? Isn’t the death of young loved members of families who made the ultimate sacrifice worth reporting?
10. How many veterans need to be homeless and wandering through the streets with head injuries before we think to ourselves “you know, there is something not quite right about this.”
11. We have outsourced the most sensitive manufacturing of top secret defense components to China which just happens to be the only real military threat to our national security. And we have financed their military expansion by encouraging their economic growth to the point where they now have a  stranglehold on our country — they own most of our debt, they manufacture most of our goods, they process most of our food, and they are the most prolific source of spying in the United States. Thus whatever they don’t get legally, they get illegally. 
12. MSM (main Street Media) has virtually eliminated their staff of reporters, because they get everything off the newswires and they make up the rest. Most of the time spent on “news” channels consists of opinions about gossip. Interesting, perhaps, but useless for those of us who would like to evaluate our options on voting on issues and candidates.
13. It is illegal to counterfeit money unless you are a foreign country (North Korea for example) or you are a Wall Street investment banking firm that creates money supply by calling them “derivatives, collateralized debt obligations” and such. Between North Korea’s supernote and and the $500 trillion (yes with a “T”) in derivatives, credit swaps etc. out there it can be no surprise that no government can control the effects on world monetary supply —- that has been outsourced to the private sector as well. 
14. MSM (Main Street Media) now presents us with pretty faces, some nice looking legs, a tempting bust line, and a teleprompter written by people who have not researched the validity of the reports in 10 years.
15. Prescription medications are “so dangerous” that you can’t get them without seeing a doctor, but they are advertised directly to consumers. Is this what we want our children to hear and see? You can get a Bud Lite or a Absolute martini without a doctor’s prescription and drink all you want. It’s only when you kill or main people with your driving or other physical abuse that you are held accountable. 
16. MSM (Main Stream Media) provides us with pundits and moderators who are undereducated, and inculcated with the sole core value of saying something that will increase the ratings and thus revenues of the media in which their comments appear. 
17. Prescription medications cost $20 per pill here and as little as $0.50 in other countries easily accessible from the U.S.
18. The total expenditures for medical care, drugs, products and associated services is around 2-3 times the amount spent by any other country or group of countries. The average U.S. Citizen is in constant danger of dying for lack of medical care because he/she is probably not covered entirely for the medical event, because he/she was never given a preventative regimen that is regularly followed in other countries, or because they are simply barred from access to medical system. 
19. Despite the amount we spend per person, we get less care, and suffer from shorter longevity, higher infant mortality, shorter height, than at least a dozen other countries and sometimes as high as 40 other countries depending upon which metric you are interested in. To say we lost our “lead” is not the point. 
20. The average person educated in the U.S. has slipped from 1st in world ranking to around 20th. Does that bother anyone?
21. Bullying has spread through every school, public and private and is spreading into the marketplace. Hello? Anyone there?
22. We have lost our way. We worship money in all its forms more than we worship God. Every day we perform acts that involve our worship, use and belief in money. Most of us spend at best one day per week for a couple hours worshipping God.
23. MSM (Main Street Media) thrives on conflict over minutia (bullets in Bosnia, a flag pin probably made with lead in China, and statements of “associates” that are made into controversial “positions”) rather than actual issues and characteristics about the candidates themselves. We allow this by talking about that the pundits tell us to talk about. And what we talk about causes us to vote against our own interests.  
24. When we tried importing from China and India the prescription drugs at a fraction of the cost that the drug companies were charging us, the government stepped in and said it was unsafe and  could result in tainted drugs. Now the drug companies have eliminated American jobs and outsourced the manufacture of the drugs to where? — India and China — and we have what — tainted, deadly drugs of dubious value to begin with and with side effects that include anal leakage and death. 
25. How many times do we need to hear that pharmaceutical companies spend $5,000 on every man or woman doctor in the U.S. to push their stuff before we make THAT an issue?
26. The war on drugs is making a fortune for people on both sides of the law, including the privatization of prisons and huge profits from private ownership of prisons, 75% of the inmates of which are there because of minor drug charges. There is no war on drug use and there is no war on drug supply. That is why we have drugs in America.
27. How many times do we need to be disappointed in a politician, whom we knew was taking money from the medical- pharma complex, insurance companies, oil companies and credit card companies? What makes us vote for these people?
28. Where is MSM “keeping them honest” by reporting discrepancies between promises and action?
29. How many dogs need to die before we accept that they are the canary in the mine shaft and that the rest of us are just as much at risk because the tainted, poisoned food is all coming from the same place now?

I could go on, but I invite you to add your own comments to the list. And while you are at it, why not answer this question: What specifically are you going to say to your friends and family about these issues and how will you vote?

Strategies for Living in a Failing Economy: Break the Bond of Mortgage and Note

While You Deal with Foreclosure and Eviction: Buy time and Make Money

Time for States and People to Act Now — Don’t Wait for Federal Government

Even while the Bush administration and bell ringers on Wall Street attempt to maintain the appearance of business as usual, the underpinnings of the entire U.S. economy are coming unglued and taking the Euro Union with it. Oil prices are up in U.S. dollars by 350%, up in Euros by 200%, and up in gold by 0% — that’s right. If you held gold when the price of oil started its meteoric climb in dollars, you would be sitting in the same position as before (no loss of purchasing power, oil would cost the same as before). If you held Euro’s, you would have lost ground, but only about half the ground lost by 300 million Americans who perform commercial transactions in dollars.

Besides the obvious importance of this to investment strategies, the consequence for every day American lives has been bad and is now turning catastrophic. The net buying power of the average American has been going down persistently for more than 20 years and the loss is likely to accelerate to hyper inflation levels that were unheard of in the lifetimes of most people living today.

The CDO (free money) scheme hatched on Wall Street where they created money and moved the risk away from those who were granting loans, opened the barn door and all the horses left. The scheme probably worked far better than they ever imagined it would — and far worse. The net effect is that tens of trillions of dollars have been moved like the water moving out from the beach before the tsunami hits. And now, like everything else, the pendulum starts swinging the other way. When the wave hits, it will bury some of the best companies along with the worst, and it will forever shake-up the way we conduct our commerce, monetary policy and political regulation of financial markets. Firing a bunch of CEOs isn’t going to cut it. Neither will sending them to jail, although they certainly deserve it.

And attempting to hold back the forces of change by avoiding the benefit to undeserving buyers/borrowers falls flat in view of the enormity of this worldwide fraud. Frankly, I don’t care if some people get an undeserved benefit and I don’t care if whether some people get fired or go to jail. What I care about is finding a way out of this mess — a solution that works, even if it means getting the people involved who created the mess or who should have known better. 

Current estimates now show a $10,000 decrease in the value of all homes that are near areas with high rates of foreclosures. So if you live in an area where there are 10,000 homes and 1500 of them are foreclosed, the 8500 other homes will sustain an $85 million loss. But the government and Wall Street reports only the loss in the foreclosures which is only part of the value of the 1500 homes that were foreclosed. So the government and Wall Street might report a loss of $5 million when in fact the direct economic effect is $85 million and the indirect economic effect caused by loss of consumer purchasing power is over $400 million. Multiply that times tens of thousands of communities all over the country and the world and you get a picture of how big this REALLY is.

So if you read the previous posts on strategies for dealing with eviction and foreclosure, here are a few pointers about why you should fight and why you will win if you take the fight to them.

IF THEY HAVE NO LIEN, THEY CAN’T EVICT AND THEY CAN’T FORECLOSE: A legal objective would be to separate the mortgage lien from the note in the transaction that you signed. This can be done in state court, bankruptcy court or by local government enforcement filing an action to help everyone stuck with this mess. By alleging fraud and other torts relating to the execution of the original documents, you form the basis of a “quiet title” action that can result in extinguishing the mortgage lien. This will still leave the note, but the note can then be adjusted downward either by negotiation, mediation judicial declaration or cram-down in bankruptcy. By separating the lien from the note, the right to foreclose and evict is permanently removed. They can’t evict and they can’t foreclose. Yes you probably need a lawyer to accomplish this, but you can probably find considerable help from a city, county or state attorney who is looking at state revenues dropping like a rock.

Reverse Negative ARM With Equity Kicker is Answer

Your only hedge against the massive inflation that is in process is the house you were cheated into buying. And the only hedge that CDO investors have against total or near total loss is to maintain a deal where recovery in full or nearly in full is possible. And this is the only hope for the intermediaries — developers, mortgage brokers, appraisers,  “lenders”, investment bankers, and retail securities brokers and institutional sales agents. The entire transaction must be recast to (1) stop the tide from coming back in caused by defaults and losses to CDO holders, (2) provide a reasonable period of time for recovery (sell-out of housing inventories), (3) provide a reasonable period of time for growth (normal demand-pull inflation), (4) provide a reasonable probability for recovery of investment in CDO securities and (5) provide a low but acceptable return to CDO holders while this mess gets cleaned up.

In order to make this happen, all the players — including culprits and ne’er do wells — must cooperate and will cooperate because they have everything to gain and nothing to lose. Lower mortgage payments to teaser rates or keep them there if they have not been reset. Keep it simple and gradually adjust it upward on a very slow schedule spanning 10 years. Eliminate negative amortization — except if the house is sold for more than the price paid. Provide an equity kicker to CDO holders that allows participation in the proceeds of sale over the adjusted principal borrowed. Adjust the original principal borrowed downward by 15% of the price of the house. 

Meanwhile, holders of gold reserves should be paid a fee for allowing issuance of gold redemption certificates that are issued as currency in the areas hardest hit by the meltdown. The spread of the new currency(ies) might occur in areas not directly impacted by the meltdown. Dollars will trade freely, but after some wild gyrations will find an equilibrium in parity with gold. Eventually a complete return to fiat money is possible but more likely, parallel currencies are likely to continue for quite some time. Hyper inflation will be mitigated, and the dollar, now headed for extinction might be saved. No guarantees, mind you, but it is worth a try. 

This writer, under the sponsorship of General Transfer Corporation has offered a prospectus to government leaders all over the country for the creation of two new entities immediately: The Interstate Finance Commission for regulation and the Interstate Currency Network, that will (a) make arrangements for issuance of gold redemption certificates as currency and (b) regulate the electronic funds networks who until now have operated as quasi-governmental entities with no accountability to the government, merchants taking electronic payments (credit, debit, ATM) or the consumers. 

The Federal government has demonstrated its lack of relevance and lack of power to do anything about this mess. By the time the next president and the next congress is sworn in, the damage will be irreversible. The people an the states must act immediately under the powers vested in them by the U.S. Constitution, forming regional coalitions and cooperating groups to facilitate and if necessary coerce the parties in cooperating with these remedies.

If you agree, send a copy of this email to your local government officials and newspapers.