Slashdot Mirror

This isn't new to America by any means. The only new part about it is that we learn about it quicker.

In the 1950's, J Edgar Hoover wanted to arrest over suspected of being disloyal.

Lincoln suspended habeus corpus (later to be found that it was done unconstitutionally) and arrested 1000's of newspaper writers, editors, political dissidents and even 2 congressmen.

do you not consider Quebec to be part of Canada?

Hell Quebec doesn't consider itself part of Canada so why should I?

John McCain knows how to use email. He doesn't because injuries he sustained as a POW in Vietnam make it painful for him to type.

"I don't e-mail, I've never felt the particular need to e-mail," Senator John McCain

Reference: here

...encapsulated in one, simplistic know-it-all sentence.

The so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) no longer exists, and hasn't since 17 January 2007.

All surveillance was happening under the guise of the Protect America Act, which was designed exclusively to allow foreign intelligence collection without a warrant when the traffic travelled through the United States, whether incidentally or by design. Foreign intelligence collection is always allowed without court oversight; the changes explicitly allowed such collection on US soil as long as the target was reasonably believed to be a non-US person physically outside of the United States, regardless of the other end of the conversation.

Now the Protect America Act has expired with its automatic sunset, and all surveillance must again happen only via FISA, as amended.

Also, TSP, in its entirety, was never as clear cut as being simply "legal" or "illegal" (court decisions on individual aspects aside). Those who claimed that it was "illegal" did so largely for political reasons. The other mistake is equating "traffic that *could be* listened to" with "traffic that *is* listened to" -- unfortunately, they are not at all the same. This also ignores that to even determine whether traffic is subject to legal collection, it must -- to be blunt -- actually be able to be collected. Thus the things like "secret rooms" at telecom facilities.

Having the capability to instantaneously examine traffic of international origin, where one or both endpoints of a communication are international, necessitates such wholesale monitoring capability. However, such capability being present does not imply its use for all traffic.

There are two issues here:

1. Monitoring the contents of a communication

2. Monitoring the metadata or "envelope" (source and destination information) of a communication

The first is allowable without a warrant or court oversight when one or both endpoints of the communication are international, and when the target of such monitoring is a non-US Person outside of the United States. Such foreign signals intelligence collection does not require a warrant or court oversight.

The second point above has multiple functions. One is using advanced data mining techniques to look for troubling patterns in communications.

Such collection has been found to be legal without a warrant or court oversight by the US Supreme Court:

The telephone company, at police request, installed at its central offices a pen register to record the numbers dialed from the telephone at petitioner's home. Prior to his robbery trial, petitioner moved to suppress "all fruits derived from" the pen register. The Maryland trial court denied this motion, holding that the warrantless installation of the pen register did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Petitioner was convicted, and the Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed.

Source: Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979)

Courts have subsequently found that pen register statutes apply similarly to computer network addresses known as IP addresses, lists of web sites visited, and the "envelope" of an email message -- its To: and From: addresses and related information. The NSA itself has long understood that while the capture of the "metadata" of communications is fair game, the capture of the *contents* of the conversations of US Persons is not, without a warrant:

A former senior NSA official said that the agency also worried that because these groups understood privacy laws so well, they knew how to avoi

No, that would be the US Department of Interior.

I think a very good article that demonstrates this fact is Obama's record as a law professor.

When Jaime Escuder, a University of Chicago law student, was searching for a professor to supervise an independent project on prisonersâ(TM) rights, he turned to Barack Obama, but not for his politics. As a student in Obamaâ(TM)s constitutional law class in 2001, Escuder was impressed by his teacherâ(TM)s ability to see both sides of an argument. âoeI figured Obama would respect the stance I took in the paper, whether or not he agreed with it,â Escuder, now a public defender in Illinois, told me. In the project, Escuder forcefully advocated for prisonersâ(TM) having the freedom to procreate. Obama gave him guidance on honing his argument â" but never told him if he agreed. When he did venture an opinion, it was to prod Escuder to consider real-world implications. On running into Escuder at the Hyde Park Co-op one weekend morning, Obama said: âoeI donâ(TM)t think that youâ(TM)re giving adequate consideration to how difficult it will be for prison officials to care for pregnant women. Iâ(TM)ve been dealing with this recently, and believe me, it isnâ(TM)t easy.â Escuder assumed Obama was talking about being a father.

the 'pea' is not under any of the cups. it's gone. greed, fear & ego are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities;_ylt=A0wNcyS6yNJIZBoBSxKs0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/28/what.matters.meltdown/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/18/voting.problems/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/

the 'pea' is not under any of the cups. it's gone. greed, fear & ego are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities;_ylt=A0wNcyS6yNJIZBoBSxKs0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/28/what.matters.meltdown/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/18/voting.problems/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/

the 'pea' is not under any of the cups. it's gone. greed, fear & ego are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities;_ylt=A0wNcyS6yNJIZBoBSxKs0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/28/what.matters.meltdown/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/18/voting.problems/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/

the 'pea' is not under any of the cups. it's gone. greed, fear & ego are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities;_ylt=A0wNcyS6yNJIZBoBSxKs0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/28/what.matters.meltdown/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/18/voting.problems/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/

the 'pea' is not under any of the cups. it's gone. greed, fear & ego are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities;_ylt=A0wNcyS6yNJIZBoBSxKs0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/28/what.matters.meltdown/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/18/voting.problems/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/

Yeah, it's not as though nuclear power or oil or coal companies have come to the Congress with their hands held out, is it?

Actually, the dollar is up as a result of this because the rest of the world is at least as badly affected by this, if not more.

Also, the major part of our debt is to the American taxpayer via borrowing from Social Security and Medicare. I think the US Gov owes the American taxpayer approximately 59.1 Trillion, whereas it had about 5.3 Trillion in public debt debt of which, not all is foreign (Citation).

It makes you wonder why we need a new plan to replace Social Security. One idea may be to pay back the money that Congress has been using to pad the budget. If you ask the average American taxpayer if they are upset about the deficit, they will say yes (Citation). Meanwhile, I'm willing to bet that if we had Congress start to cut away at government programs and spending, you'd soon realize that the population isn't willing to see government jobs and services get cut/downsized/made efficient.

/soapbox

Whatever happened to the naked singularities from a football theory?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05EFDB123FF93BA25754C0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

" ''They only get the cases when there has either been an arrest or an indictment,'' he said. ''Then they do DNA to confirm or exclude the person. In 25 percent of the cases where they can get a result, they exclude the primary suspect.''

Think about that. In one out of four of those cases, the wrong person gets arrested. These are cases that carry extraordinary prison sentences, and in some cases the death penalty.

Said Mr. Scheck: ''How many of those people would have been convicted had there been no DNA testing?'' "

now-- think more--
once we had DNA testing, we are able to disqualify 25% of those arrested or indicted where DNA is available.
if 50% (a made up %) of rape cases have DNA available to compare to- and 25% of those so charged are disqualified as the guilty party

and you think only the strong cases go to trial?

Plenty of blame to go around:
Pressured to Take More Risk, Fannie Reached a Tipping Point
SEC's 2004 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt
The Roots of the Crisis

And after all the fear mongering to push the bailout plan, which caused the stock market to crater, the plan probably won't work anyway; what's happening is a natural correction to the credit bubble:
Can the bailout work? Fat chance
Are we headed for an epic bear market?

The debate over the bailout is missing the big picture - we risk destroying the credibility of our currency, and when that happens, China and other countries with trade surpluses will stop taking our debt and things will really get tough:
The Chinese have been ready to treat U.S. Treasuries as a rock-hard store of value and loan us the dollars they accumulate at a very low interest rate. But what if they start to doubt the U.S. government will repay its debt?
"We are getting closer to a tipping-point," said Benn Steil, an economist. "People are asking: can we really trust the dollar as a store of value?"

Plenty of blame to go around:
Pressured to Take More Risk, Fannie Reached a Tipping Point
SEC's 2004 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt
The Roots of the Crisis

And after all the fear mongering to push the bailout plan, which caused the stock market to crater, the plan probably won't work anyway; what's happening is a natural correction to the credit bubble:
Can the bailout work? Fat chance
Are we headed for an epic bear market?

The debate over the bailout is missing the big picture - we risk destroying the credibility of our currency, and when that happens, China and other countries with trade surpluses will stop taking our debt and things will really get tough:
The Chinese have been ready to treat U.S. Treasuries as a rock-hard store of value and loan us the dollars they accumulate at a very low interest rate. But what if they start to doubt the U.S. government will repay its debt?
"We are getting closer to a tipping-point," said Benn Steil, an economist. "People are asking: can we really trust the dollar as a store of value?"

Plenty of blame to go around:
Pressured to Take More Risk, Fannie Reached a Tipping Point
SEC's 2004 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt
The Roots of the Crisis

And after all the fear mongering to push the bailout plan, which caused the stock market to crater, the plan probably won't work anyway; what's happening is a natural correction to the credit bubble:
Can the bailout work? Fat chance
Are we headed for an epic bear market?

The debate over the bailout is missing the big picture - we risk destroying the credibility of our currency, and when that happens, China and other countries with trade surpluses will stop taking our debt and things will really get tough:
The Chinese have been ready to treat U.S. Treasuries as a rock-hard store of value and loan us the dollars they accumulate at a very low interest rate. But what if they start to doubt the U.S. government will repay its debt?
"We are getting closer to a tipping-point," said Benn Steil, an economist. "People are asking: can we really trust the dollar as a store of value?"

A link to the full article is here.

"The majority of the "fakes" are misapplied trademarks."

You ignored the stories linked in the grandparent post.

Here's another link, about deliberate poisoning of food to make more money: Filler in Animal Feed Is Open Secret in China.

And another: Melamine in pet food may not be accidental.

"Expect to see more Sorny goods if this goes ahead!"

Maybe not. Maybe: "Expect to see a lot of counterfeit products labeled Sony, in the same kind of packaging Sony uses."

Ever since the days of the DOS operating system, when it was only the Taiwanese who supplied computer parts, the Chinese have been extremely dishonest. They would deliver computer parts until a distributor got established. They would get paid when a load was delivered to a ship in Taiwan. But, the would eventually deliver a huge load of junk, stuff that had failed testing but had been saved for that purpose. That would put the U.S. distributor out of business.

At the same time, there would be a Chinese distributor in town that just began doing business, selling the same items.

Now that everyone has paid to build factories and complicated procedures in China, they are very vulnerable to Chinese control.

Here are a few stories, chosen from thousands. The Chinese governments, in Taiwan and mainland China, have always pretended to be interested in stopping counterfeiting:

FBI and Chinese seize $500 million of counterfeit software.

Dangerous Fakes: How counterfeit, defective computer components from China are getting into U.S. warplanes and ships.

YouTube videos about Chinese counterfeiting

The World's Greatest Fakes: Chinese Copies Are Making Their Way Back To U.S.

Heparin Find May Point to Chinese Counterfeiting

Chinese Product Counterfeiting Causes US Job Layoffs

pretty much... the rich get richer

Supposedly the top .5% of the rich list in the USA, got richer by $670 Billion USD in the 8 years Bush has been President... yet, the US Taxpayer is expected to bail out the rich...

Shoulda gone with the Swedish model http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/business/worldbusiness/23krona.html?em

There were plenty of alternatives proposed that were less intrusive, safer, and better targeted to unfreeze liquidity to buy us time to fix the real problem of reckless, unregulated trading in fraudulently valued housing derivatives.

All were all rounded rejected by Paulson and taken off the table without further debate. If you doubt this, do some research. The rush to pass this via fear-mongering is typical administration bullying at its worst.

The Paulson plan is a naked power grab. Stop trying to sugar-coat it. It's a last ditch effort to save investment bank cronies from getting crushed from the upcoming recession by buying their junk at prices way above market value.

Ooook... time for some ranting:
This has long since become much more than an attempt to save Investment bankers and corrupt mortgage banks. This crisis is now threatening banks that are quite solid, never behaved irresponsibly, were not exposed to the sub-prime mess and that are essential to the proper functioning of the USA's, Europe's, Asia's and generally the rest of the worlds economies. The banks this 'bail out' is meant to help are the ones that provide the capital for small and medium size businesses on Main Street America to function, the ones that pay people's salaries. One can only hope that it succeeds in protecting them, and the rest of us, fro what m the screw-ups of the Investment banks, the mortgage industry, the risk assessment companies and politicians (both Dems. and Reps.) who made some very poor decisions, failed to properly monitor the investment banks and the mortgage industry and didn't pull the emergency brake in time. The reason that people like you can make comments like the one above is that you yourself haven't felt the effects of is happening... YET! It will take a while for the this infection to eat it's way through the rest of the banking community, through the businesses and eventually to you yourself (think layoffs on a hitherto unknown scale) and by the time it finally does and you finally start to get it it will be to late to stop it. I think Frederic Mishkin (via NYT reporter David Leonhardt) summed this up rather nicely with his Meyer Mishkin story. Do I think it sucks that the profits of players on Wall Street always get privatized while their mistakes always get Nationalized? Yes! Do I think it sucks that these bozos get a golden... no, these days it's more like a jewel encrusted, gold engraved, platinum parachute even if they have totally screwed up? Yes! Do I want a rerun of 1929? NO! If this is the price to pay to prevent a rerun of 1929 then I'll pay it, very, very, grudgingly. One thing is for sure, I will do my best to support anybody willing to see to it that the people responsible for this mess pay for it. That being said I have no high hopes that more than a few of them will ever be punished.

And that concludes my rant...

Not so dumb. The government magically found $810 billons just now ...

I should point out that many investors are currently fleeing to safety. In many cases this means lending to the government. Thus in the short term the bailout will move money in a circle.

the FDIC increase eases my fears, I think I'll go uot Monday and get fill my gas tank, or possibaly buy another ex-wife, as far as the plan working AIG got $85B two weeks ago and already rissed away $61B http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/business/04insure.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

it's just the market leveling itself out

wait for the market to recover

The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is past the ocean is flat again.
--John Maynard Keynes

I tend to like Paul Krugman's analysis of the situation: the government needs to step in, but unfortunately Paulson's initially proposed plan was terrible. Extensive modifications produced something barely acceptable as a stopgap, and then sweetened it up to get it passed.

The original plan was vague about how it would work, but it appears to have been based on the assumption that troubled financial institutions were merely suffering from a liquidity problem. Krugman has argued in his blog that these troubled banks may have an insolvency problem. In this case for the original Paulson plan to work, the government would have to buy up junk assets for more than their fair market value. This would amount to a handout.

The modified plan calls for the government to receive an equity stake in the banks that are bailed out. After the banks recover, the government could sell its stake, and recover its the money spent. If it works in this way the plan would be more of a $700B investment, rather than an outright handout.

Krugman has argued that, as in past crises the government has successfully responded by taking temporary ownership of financial institutions, the action here should be similar.

it's just the market leveling itself out

wait for the market to recover

The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is past the ocean is flat again.
--John Maynard Keynes

I tend to like Paul Krugman's analysis of the situation: the government needs to step in, but unfortunately Paulson's initially proposed plan was terrible. Extensive modifications produced something barely acceptable as a stopgap, and then sweetened it up to get it passed.

The original plan was vague about how it would work, but it appears to have been based on the assumption that troubled financial institutions were merely suffering from a liquidity problem. Krugman has argued in his blog that these troubled banks may have an insolvency problem. In this case for the original Paulson plan to work, the government would have to buy up junk assets for more than their fair market value. This would amount to a handout.

The modified plan calls for the government to receive an equity stake in the banks that are bailed out. After the banks recover, the government could sell its stake, and recover its the money spent. If it works in this way the plan would be more of a $700B investment, rather than an outright handout.

Krugman has argued that, as in past crises the government has successfully responded by taking temporary ownership of financial institutions, the action here should be similar.

it's just the market leveling itself out

wait for the market to recover

The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is past the ocean is flat again.
--John Maynard Keynes

I tend to like Paul Krugman's analysis of the situation: the government needs to step in, but unfortunately Paulson's initially proposed plan was terrible. Extensive modifications produced something barely acceptable as a stopgap, and then sweetened it up to get it passed.

The original plan was vague about how it would work, but it appears to have been based on the assumption that troubled financial institutions were merely suffering from a liquidity problem. Krugman has argued in his blog that these troubled banks may have an insolvency problem. In this case for the original Paulson plan to work, the government would have to buy up junk assets for more than their fair market value. This would amount to a handout.

The modified plan calls for the government to receive an equity stake in the banks that are bailed out. After the banks recover, the government could sell its stake, and recover its the money spent. If it works in this way the plan would be more of a $700B investment, rather than an outright handout.

Krugman has argued that, as in past crises the government has successfully responded by taking temporary ownership of financial institutions, the action here should be similar.

Henry Paulson, the CEO of Goldman Sachs until 2006 and current U.S. Treasury Secretary succeeded in scaring the public and Congress into giving him a $700B blank check to bail out his friends. If you think that money will "trickle down" to you or small business owners, or anyone other than the people it's directly going to, you are mistaken.

Not only that, this article (sorry, NYTimes reg required) details how Henry Paulson, back in 2004, asked the SEC to deregulate Goldman Sachs and other banks to allow them to take on this toxic mortgage debt in the first place.

We have just been ripped off by the most elaborate con in the history of the world. We let a banker tell us "let us break the rules so we can make more money", then when he did and the bottom fell out, we gave him even more money to keep him from going out of business.

My only hope is that the voters check for who is voting for this and get rid of them next election.

No, they've threatened to do so, but as of yet haven't resigned.

I doubt they ever will. ISO is about a lot more than just the OOXML. Consider the number of standards a company like IBM needs to deal with on a daily basis. Giving up their rights to influence what goes into said standards because of one failed process wouldn't make any sense from a business point of view.

Frank proposed the FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE REFORM ACT OF 2005 which was before the housing crisis had manifested.

Are you sure that's the right bill? He's not on the list of sponsors (who are all Republicans), and he voted against it. While we're at it, McCain authored a similar regulation in the Senate in 2005, yet he's somehow being blamed for the lack of regulations that caused the mortgage failures.

Furthermore, the housing crisis was largely a product of subprime lending. By law, F&F were prohibited from engaging in subprime lending. F&F didn't create the problem they fell victim to. F&F were engaging in legitimate lending, but they were not setup to be resilient against a national wide decline in home values.

Were prohibited. A 1999 New York Times article states:

I In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

You're so full of misinformation. Barney Frank was the one who passed regulations on Freddie & Fannie. In July 2007 Frank became chairman and he and the Democrats passed regulations within two months. These regulations had been blocked by the house Republicans since 1994.

It's incredible that the Republicans claim the big mean Democrats prevented them from instituting a proper regulatory framework despite over a decade of Republican majorities in the House and Senate.

You mean this Barney Frank?

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.'' - Barney Frank, 2003, speaking in opposition to a White House proposal to increase regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Truth is both parties share blame for this. Republicans liked loosening credit for housing because they felt fewer regulations and more liquidity = good. Democrats liked it because they felt more houses for lower income people = good.

By July 2007 (when the credit crunch first began) it was obvious housing was a bubble set to burst, so both sides were rapidly backtracking from their previous positions. Democrats were disavowing having ever advocated housing for those with less than mediocre credit. Republicans however couldn't disavow their core belief that less government regulation is better, so ended up taking most of the blame. I give Barney Frank credit for recognizing his mistake and acting to rectify it in 2007, but that does not absolve him of blame for having helped originally cause the problem in the first half of the decade.

The ultra-tiny Smart ForTwo earned top marks in side and front crash tests, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said Wednesday. The two-seat car did not earn the Institute's Top Safety Pick designation, however, because it didn't earn top marks for whiplash protection. But even if the ForTwo improved its whiplash protection, it would not be named a Top Safety Pick, said IIHS spokesman Russ Rader. The institute does not have a specific size requirement, but the ForTwo is simply too small to be considered safe under all conditions, including highway driving, he said

http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/14/autos/smart_fortwo_iihs_crash_test/?postversion=2008051410

It's Science. It can't stand up to another vehicle larger then it hitting it. http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/another-smart-crash-test-same-result/ This article mentions how the door can come open in a side impact.

The ultra-tiny Smart ForTwo earned top marks in side and front crash tests, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said Wednesday. The two-seat car did not earn the Institute's Top Safety Pick designation, however, because it didn't earn top marks for whiplash protection. But even if the ForTwo improved its whiplash protection, it would not be named a Top Safety Pick, said IIHS spokesman Russ Rader. The institute does not have a specific size requirement, but the ForTwo is simply too small to be considered safe under all conditions, including highway driving, he said

http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/14/autos/smart_fortwo_iihs_crash_test/?postversion=2008051410

It's Science. It can't stand up to another vehicle larger then it hitting it. http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/another-smart-crash-test-same-result/ This article mentions how the door can come open in a side impact.

So? None of his links justify his claim that Barney Frank "stopped many legislation attempts to regulate Fannie Mae." That's an baseless argument he got from god-knows-where. Barney Frank did institute legislation. Here's your link

"Next, Electricity is not limited to a supply based market. Any company anywhere can put up a power plant (or bgetter yet, a wind farm, the cheapest investment / MWHr). Electricity supply is nearly limitless."

Do a google search using: us new power plants

The first link is a PDF to an report titled "Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants"
Look at the graph on page 4. That shows that lots of companies propose making new power plants, but remarkably few actually do.

And this article makes me laugh and sick at the same time:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/us/27solar.html?_r=1&oref=login
(registration required to read)
The articles title: "Citing Need for Assessments, U.S. Freezes Solar Energy Projects"

Yes, coal generation could be a great method to generate electricity, and the gov't and private sector could work hand-in-hand to make sure it is done efficiently, safely and in a responsible manner. But historically, gov't oversite, such as the EPA, hasn't done a great job at making sure it's efficient, safe and done responsibly.

And the Senate and Congress seem fairly eager to start creating new holes offshore and in various other protected area's (but not within sight of any wealthy landowners).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/business/03sec.html

the issue is basically that there was too much regulation in 2004, and the banks were chomping at the bit to deregulate even more, to free them from rules about having enough assets on hand. by freeing them from this government regulation, this decision in 2004 paved the way for all the recent failures

i don't understand your thinking, where excesses obviously related to free market ebullience has led us into the debacle we're at today. in the 1800s, with far less government regulation, there were regular painful and crippling booms and busts related to little oversight and regulation

its kind of a weird, wishful desperate magical thinking on your part: that, in this moment that most disproves the stupidity of free market fundamentalism, free market fundamentalists blame the government and regulation for the failures of the free market

free market fundamentalists: the free market is best when it is in a sandbox. meaning, within certain parameters, the market should allowed to do their thing. however, when it ranges too far out of the sandbox, into regions of manic greed bubbles and crippling fearful busts, the government should step in and either slow things down, or keep things on life support

you can't have a healthy economy without regulation and governemtn invovlement. i'll repeat, as the howls of libertarian fools and blind market fundamentalists is too loud: you can't have a healthy economy without regulation and government invovlement

the mess we are in today is strictly and 100% explainable in terms of natural human failures in terms of greed and poor foresight. nothing the government or regulation rules are responsible for

the error in the thinking of free market fundamentalists is that everything is self-correcting. no, a free market can boom and bust itself right of existence if it is not regulated. just study the financial history of the 1800s if you don't believe me. regulation simply smooths out the hard corners, and it is absolutely necessary for a healthy economy: save us from the scarier regions of the nadir and pinnacle of natural boom and bust cycles due to simple human failures that cascade and build on each other were the market completely free

free market fundamentalism is just as stupid as communism, for equal although inverse reasons: sometimes, you need to save people from themselves, or their excesses destroy way more than their own set of mistakes. in other words, those who choose wrongly in a free market can make mistakes which hurt way more than just themselves. meaning, the free market must be protected, via government involvement, from extreme conditions that damage way more than just those who make the bad decisions

if people made decisions in free markets which alwas and exclusively hurt only themselves, free markets shouls proceed unfettered by government oversight. but they don't. so government oversight is necessary for a healthy economy

free market fundamentalists and libertarians: september 2008 is your comeuppance. the excesses we see crashing today is NOT the faul tof the government, in spite of the magical thinking of the post i am replying to. take a hard gulp, and revisit your ideology. it is flawed, your thinking and your assumptions are wrong

It's called a blowout - think Red Adair (played by John Wayne in that hilarious film)

"Hellfighters" is one of my favorite movies.

Lusi mud volcano

Yea, I heard about that a couple of years ago. Mud keeps oozing out.

Coal reserves:
Reserve estimates of "hundreds of years" are not ones that their proponents defend when challenged. But like I said, this is an area of active research ; my understanding and reporting may be wrong, but I'd like to see the figure you're basing your estimate on.

It's not my estimate, just what I've heard. Ok, I found this, which backs you up: "Science Panel Finds Fault With Estimates of Coal Supply". It was the first result googling "coal reserves" science.

Falcon

57% of Prius buyers cited "Makes a statement about me", as the top reason for their purchase.

NY Times did a blind taste test of higher end vodkas and threw in a bottle of Smirnoff. Yup, it came out on top. 'Course, I've been drinking this, ever since I made the move up from Albersons' brand vodka. That stuff is paint thinner.

Oh, and if it's a "beyond-top-secret classified government program", why does everyone and it's brother know it exists?

The reason people know of the existence of the classified warrantless surveillance program is, as every fool knows, because several concerned whistle-blowers came forward and disclosed illegal details of the program to the NYTimes. The NYTimes then wrote a famous article describing the known details of the lawless surveillance program. You should consider reading it. You might learn something, especially with your A in "Reading Comprehension".

The senate voted to bail our Big Jew. The Senate should adopt the motto: "Shalom! Fuck the people!".

Dude, what have you been smoking? 90% of real economics think Paulson's plan is horrendous, and they are right... it's kleptocracy.

I'm fascinated to see the source of your statistic. What's a "real economic [sic]"? Are they polled?

Paulson's plan is horrendous, but that's not what came to the floor of the House. The bill that was rejected yesterday added two crucial provisions (1: the taxpayers/government taking an equity share in any banks that they bail out, allowing the taxpayers to recoup some, all, or more than all of the $700bn investment, and 2: judicial and Congressional oversight of the Treasury Secretary's actions) and one substantively-meaningless-but-fun-stick-it-to-the-CEOs-who-f*cked-up provision (the limit on golden parachutes for CEOs).

No one thinks this bill is great or even good, but most (not all) of the economists I've read or heard from in the last week agree that a) the short term loans and lines of credit that are fundamental to the day-to-day workings of the economy (primarily small businesses and small banks) are at risk if we don't do something to free up the flow of capital, b) this is the only plan that's likely to pass before January 21 in the current political environment, and c) given the political reality, passing this plan (with the improvements I noted above) is better than not passing this plan.

If a better bill is politically possible (which means bipartisan support: neither governing party, for good reason, is going to put out a rescue package of this size without substantial support from the other), that's miles better. I'm no economist, so I'm not going to try to summarize the many better options out there. Again, my favorite is Paul Krugman, but there are many others.

All that said, the main point of my comment above, re the importance and effectiveness of talking to your representatives, stands.

I've been involved both in lobbying and in a Congressional (House) office (as an unpaid intern). Constituent contacts really do matter: a significant fraction of the staff's time is spent reading and distilling these letters for the Congress(wo)man. On this issue, the letters are nearly universally against the rescue package, which is the only reason Congress went against the opinions of the vast majority of economists (my favorite is Paul Krugman) to vote down this bill. If you think your voice doesn't matter to your Congressman, you're crazy, even though (s)he won't always agree.

I know this is hard to believe, but direct bribes don't work. Organizing large numbers of constituents to call/email a Congressman does often work, largely because it demonstrates that you could also organize voters to challenge the Congressman at the ballot box. (That kind of organization takes money, so if anyone wants to consider that a bribe, fine; I consider it democracy.) However, an office will get tens or hundreds of copies of the same form letter from large numbers of constituents; those identical letters count less (though not hugely less) than personally written letters or phone calls.

(As of 4 years ago, when I interned in DC, phone calls, emails, faxes, and snail-mail letters count equally, but snail-mail letters take multiple weeks to get to the DC office because of anthrax-related security. Letters from in-state but out-of-district are read but carry less weight than contacts from constituents and are unlikely to get a response; letters from out-of-state or without a name and mailing address go straight to the recycling bin.)

o my....story time...
The phrase of the day is "superuser"
This data was given to many professional online poker players who analyzed the data in late 2007 (see 1 year ago, 10/16/07 to be exact) when they requested the data from the online site "Absolute Poker".

Instead of the site giving them the usual data which hid the opponents cards unless they had shown them during the hand, they sent all the raw data which included the opponents hole cards, and specifically every player and spectators player number. One of the spectators was player number "363" I believe which was incredibly low (one of the first ever to register on the site).

When designing the software they must have used several "superuser" accounts to make sure that it was working correctly, so they let it see all the cards on the table. Someone inside Absolute Bet discovered(or knew they entire time) that the loophole was still open and used multiple accounts to siphon hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars off of their high stakes users. This was used also over other websites running the same backend software.

What made this so obvious, simply put, to the high stakes players was that these players were playing perfectly over thousands of hands which isn't possible unless you know all the cards on the table.

For more reading see:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/the-absolute-poker-cheating-scandal-blown-wide-open/
or for more poker talk:
http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=12523924&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1

It seems that it is in vogue to blame Bush for the crisis, which is an rather simplistic argument. Obama is repeating over and over that the crisis is due to "8 years of failed Bush policies", which, not too surprisingly, is being eaten up by a populace eager to blame someone for the state we're in. Unfortunately for Obama, this argument ignores the fact that elements of this crisis were set in motion long before the Bush administration existed.

For example, the passing of the IBBEA under Clinton in '94. Also around the same time, Clinton passed the Community Reinvestment Act (probably what you're referring to re: "racist" ... etc.). Record-low interest rates under Clinton/Greenspan helped propel our economy out of the doldrums of the early 90's, while contributing to enormous levels of home sales and construction. After the dot-com bubble, rates were continually held low to stave off economic troubles. That helped spur skyrocketing home prices even while the economy sputtered. Combine disproportionally high housing costs with 1) low/no money down loans, 2) interest-only payments, and 3) natural market cycles in real estate, you ended up with a lot of people upside-down on their home value, unable to make the rising payments, and unable to get out from under the loan by selling the house, not unlike what the mid-to-late-eighties was like, especially here in the northeast.

Also, Shortsightedness in the private sector was critical to this meltdown, and began before Bush even took office, and therefore before he did any deregulation. Some deregulation did occur under Bush, but that's a side show compared to the other sources of the problems.

Go ahead and blame Bush for the stuff he's actually involved in (entering Iraq without a proper exit strategy, for example), but scapegoating him for this whole crisis is nothing but convenient political rhetoric for the Dems. You'll never really get to the bottom of it that way.

You mean sociopaths like Barney Frank? And all the other mostly-DEMOCRAT pols who prevented regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Because this meltdown wasn't caused by corporate greed, but by government incompetence:

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

Not before XKCD develops such as huge following that Randall Munroe can quit his day job and publish a book of collected strips.

NYT reports XKCD is self-sufficient. A book is also reportedly in the works.

The number of women in the ancestral population that have living descendants today is twice that of men. (So my paraphrasing is wrong. I cant say two thirds of men did not leave any living descendants. Just only half as many men as women left living descendants) Most anthropologists and scientists shy away from describing the difference in standard deviation and mean between men and women. There is a history of politicians and non-scientists with vested interests misinterpreting the research to their benefit.

For example a very well respected scientist/authors like Jared Diamond, who published studies comparing the testicle sizes between different races early in his career is largely silent about it in his more popular books, Guns..., Collapse, The Third Chimpanzee, why sex is fun .

I wish I had mod points. The McCain Torture Ban, as written, is an absolute ban on torture. The "legalization" you refer to comes from a "signing statement" by President Bush. A signing statement is when the President signs a bill into law and says "Part X of the law is unclear, so I'm going to interpret it to mean Y." In this case, President Bush said "The part of the Torture Ban about whether torture is banned is unclear, so I'm going to interpret it to mean 'Torture is NOT banned.'" John McCain waved the bullshit flag. A day or so after the signing statement was made public, McCain was asked about it and said, "If Bush didn't like the bill, he should have vetoed it" and then promised that if he was elected, he wouldn't make any signing statements at all. John McCain is NOT in favor of torture.

You may be correct with regards to the "McCain Torture Ban" legislation, however, McCain has shown his support of torture in other ways since then. For example:

Senator John McCain voted against a bill to curtail the C.I.A.'s use of harsh interrogation tactics... The bill, which the Senate passed Wednesday by 51 to 45, would force the C.I.A. to abide by the rules set out in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation, which prohibits physical force and lists approved interrogation methods.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/us/politics/17torture.html