Misery Index

The House Democrats are discussing taking 401(k)s back to the value they were in August, 2008 before the stock market declined and restoring the 401(k) back to its full value.  Then they are discussing seizing those funds and putting it into a Social Security fund that will grow by 3% each year with government bonds, which will be adjusted for inflation.  The most one would be able to contribute to it each year would be 5%.  A company match will no longer happen.

A plan by a professor of economic-policy, Teresa Ghilarducci, states that, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration.  The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3% a year, adjusted for inflation. [Ghilarducci's Testamony to the House [PDF] on October 07, 2008]

"I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s," Ghilarducci said in an interview.  "401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won't have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break."  "I want to spend our nation's dollar for retirement security better.  Everybody would now be covered" if the plan were adopted.

John Belluardo, president of Stewardship Financial Services Inc. in Tarrytown, NY has said, "From where I sit that's just crazy."  "A lot of people contribute to their 401(k)s because of the match of the employer," he said.  "If the tax deferral goes away, the employers have no reason to do the matches, which primarily help people in the lower income brackets," said Belluardo.

Ed Ferrigno, vice president of the Washington office of The Profit Sharing/401(k) Council of America has said, "Some of the tenor [of the hearings last week] that the entire system should be based on the activities of the markets in the last 90 days is not the way to judge the system."

James Pethokoukis writing for the US News described the plan:

In place of 401(k) plans, she [Ghilarducci] would have workers transfer their dough into the government-created "guaranteed retirement accounts" for every worker.  The government would deposit $600 (inflation indexed) every year into the GRAs.  Each worker would also have to save 5% of pay into the accounts, to which the government would pay a measly 3% return.  Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, said that since "the savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."

The Carolina Journal and LGF reported:

Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers' personal retirement accounts - including 401(k)s and IRAs - and convert them to accounts manged by the Social Security Administration.

Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401)k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.

The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School of Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism.  Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers' retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.

This type of plan didn't work so well in Argentina.  In Argentina, private pensions are somewhat like 401(k) accounts in the United States.  Argentine lawmakers are considering a plan to nationalize about $26 billion in private pension funds.

Argentina announced last month on October 21, in what has been called a "surprise bill",  that it was taking over the pension system to protect workers from losses, thus nationalizing the pension system in a way to raise funds to avoid its second default in a decade.  Currently Argentina has about $150 billion in debt.

After the release of this announcement, the Merval index (the Argentina version of the NYSE) fell more than 10% the same day and the next day, and by Friday had dropped 28%.  The damage was worse in the local debt markets, where trading volume for a a key local bond market was practically zero the next day, Wednesday, compared to a normal day's turnover of about $1 billion.

A few days later, a U.S. judge ordered the freezing of more than $553 million in U.S. investments held by the Argentine pension funds that the government intends to nationalize.  The judge ordered the blocking of property in the US "including but not limited to cash, deposits, real property, instruments, securities, security entitlements, security accounts, equity interests, claims, and contractual rights and interest" maintained in the name of the Argentine pension funds. 

However, another judge has blocked Argentina from transferring any of the pension fund investment out of the US until he hears the complaints of bondholders.  Argentine officials saw this as "an attempt by vulture funds to take possession of these assets without considering whether it belongs to them."

It was announced just today, that the pension nationalization bill has passed in the Argentinian Lower House.  The Senate will vote on the bill later this month.

RANT ON

So lets talk about me/us for a minute.  We, meaning us.. you know what I mean, place 4% of our income into a 401(k) account which is matched by the company my other half works for.  (Yes I have my own, however its rather small, and basically is the same program that my other half has.)  This was placed into a 4.8% fixed interest account back in September before all this hoopla.  Before that, there was a hit of about 9% since the beginning of the year, which is acceptable considering many lost 40% or more.  That is the chance one takes when they invest and unfortunately, this can not be taken as a loss.  But moving forward, any money that is placed into this account is not taxed. 

In comparison to the Dem's idea, an additional 1% would be taken out of income, and additionally the entire 5% would be taxed and placed into a 3% fixed interest account, giving $600 bucks a year in addition.  Also by doing this, this means that if a loan is needed, it can not be done as the government has the money, and can use it as it sees fit via the Social Security Surplus Bill.

So lets look at the first year numbers under this new plan, with an income of say $50K, shall we?

So using the above example, who makes more money off of this?  Is all this worth a 1% return on your retirement?  The government does make more money off YOUR investment, a LOT more money, than you would under it being privatized, and you get a measly 1% return.....  how generous of them.  Or is this an example of "sharing the wealth?"

This also means that all the money that is in the stock market would disappear.  What does one think happens when there is a mass sale of stock?  First the market drops like a bomb, and then secondly, what bank or investment company has the funds to cash up for those sales.  Oh yea, the $700 billion, or rather $1.7 trillion, or rather, whatever number it has grown to today.

Additionally, what would happen if everyone decided to cash out their 401(k)s at one time, thus a "run on 401(k)s"?  First one would have to pay a 10% penalty tax for early withdrawal if one is not 59 1/2 years old, thus the government makes money.  Secondly, you are taxed just like your income tax as pulling out a 401(k) is seen as income.  So thus, the government takes part of your money.  Basically it comes out to right around a 25% loss for early withdrawal on the average overall.  Then of course, is the scenario above where everyone is selling on the market, companies don't have the funds to back up their stock, and around and around we go on the merry-go-round again.  That is, if the Democrats who want your money, don't immediately put restrictions on early withdraws on 401(k)s before this bill ever makes it to the floor.  So if you think companies falling, banks falling and unemployment is bad now.... what do you think will happen if the Democrats seize your 401(k)s?

Also in the discussions, there is the elimination of the 401(k) tax break which has been stated to be around $80 billion.  This means that any money you place into a retirement account is taxable, where as it is now not taxable.  This increases your tax liability and thus your income tax raises.  Additionally, this increases the government's income.

And meanwhile, the government can use your money via the Social Security surplus bill for their own purpose via the Social Security Surplus Bill.

If you ever wondered how the government was going to pay for the bank bailouts, well now you don't have to wonder.

SOURCES:

• Marketplace
• Breitbart
• Financial Times
• Bloomberg

THE PAST

Rahm's father is an Israeli-born doctor who was once a member of the Irgun, a group which fought for Israeli independence until 1948 and was branded as a terrorist organization by the British colonial authorities.  His mother meanwhile, worked as an X-ray technician and was the daughter of a local Chicago union organizer.  She was a civil rights activist but is now a psychiatric social worker.  The two met in Chicago in the 1950s.

Rahm was born in 1959 and attended Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School, a Jewish day school.  After his family moved to Wilmette, he attended public school.  He and his brothers attended summer cap in Israel. 

He graduated from Sarah Lawrence College in 1981, and went on to receive a master's degree in Speech and Communication from Northwestern University in 1985.

In 1991, Rahm volunteered to serve in Israel's army during the first Gulf War of 1991 - rust-proofing brakes in northern military bases, Israeli media reports (via the BBC, Ynetnews).

Back in the US, Rahm became the director of finance for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 continuing on as a senior advisor to President Clinton from 1993 to 1998.  He has stated that one of his proudest moments during the Clinton administration "was an event that touched his political sensibilities and his personal ties to Israel:  the 1993 Rose Garden signing ceremony after the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).  Emanuel directed the details of the ceremony, down to the choreography of the famous handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzahk Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Arafat."

Emanuel has also said to have "mailed a two-and-a-half foot rotting fish to a former coworker (pollster) after the two parted ways."  On the night of the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Nat Landow!  Dead! Cliff Jackson!  Dead!  Bill Schaefer!  Dead!' and plunging the knife into the table after every name." (Additional source:  NYT)  BTW, this is the same man who stated that "the bottom line is Clinton did not have sex with Lewinsky and did not ask her to lie."

After Clinton's Presidency was over, Rahm joined Wasserstein Perella & Co as a partner in the firm's Chicago office, focusing on merchant banking, strategic advisory, and mergers & acquisitions.  During his time working for Wasserstein, he reportedly earned $18 million from 1999 to 2002.

Emanuel was also on the Board of Directors for the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation aka "Freddie Mac" in 2000, which puts him right in the middle of the Freddie Mac scandal when Freddie Mac misreported profits by billions of dollars in order to deceive investors between the years of 2000 and 2002.  Emanuel was not named in the SEC complaint however, the entire board was later accused [PDF] by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) of having "failed in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention."  During this time, Rahm was paid $231,655 in directors fees in 2001 and $31,060 in 2000.

He resigned from the board in 2001 when he ran for congress.  He has been a member of the House of Reps since 2003. 

Since 2002, Rahm has  reportedly been the beneficiary of campaign cash from Freddie Mac and its sister organization Fannie Mae - $51,750 according to the Center for Responsive Politics Web site, OpenSecrets.org.

In 2008 Contributions, Emanuel "was the top House recipient in the 2008 election cycle of contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the larger securities/investment industry."  Since Emanuel's election to Congress in 2002, Emanuel has received more money from individuals and PAC's in the securities and investment business than any other industry.

In a November 6, 2008 article, it was stated that Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has an active FBI counter-intelligence file maintained on him, and it may pose a significant security problem for Obama if the FBI insists on conducting the full background security investigation normally required for senior White House officials.  Questions about Emanuel's links to the Israeli intelligence service, the Mossad [Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations, the national intelligence agency of Israel], were allegedly so great that President Bill Clinton was forced to dismiss Emanuel from the White House staff in 1998.

AMERICA SERVES, RHAM'S 2006 VIEW

Rahm supports a plan to send 18-25 years olds into compulsory service which goes along with Obamas "Change.Gov" website plans for "America Serves".   This is an excerpt from Bruce Reed and Rahm Emanuel's 2006 book, The Plan:  Big Ideas for America.  You can read some of this yourself via Google's Book Search. 

In the introduction to the book it is stated:

"This book is a first draft of the new conditions, new requirements, and new terms that our new era will demand."

Chapter 4:  What's The Plan?, pg. 54

"THE PLAN

A NEW SOCIAL CONTRACT, OR WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY AND WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU

The economy of the twenty-first century demands new skills and will require all of us to live up to new responsibilities.  We believe that four mutual obligations that follow should represent the first terms of a new contract between the people and their country.

Universal Citizen Service

If you forget everything else you read in these pages, please remember this:  The Plan starts with you.  If your leaders aren't challenging you to do your part, they aren't doing theirs.  We need a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us by establishing, for the first time, an ethic of universal citizen service.  All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five should be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic civil defense training and community service.  This is not a draft - nor is it military.  Young people will be trained not as soldiers, but simply as citizens who understand their responsibilities...."

From Chapter 5, "ASKED NOT:  Universal Citizen Service" , pg. 60

"THE CASE FOR UNIVERSAL CITIZEN SERVICE

Every citizen needs to understand and accept the essence of the American bargain:  Each of us has to do his or her part.  While the rights of citizenship are explicit in our Constitution, the implicit responsibilities are every bit as crucial.

From our radical experiement in freedom to work, we must prize responsibilities as well as rights, and never presume to do for people what they can do for themselves.

After 9/11, both parties in Washington spent countless hours debating a law called the Patriot Act, which gave federal authorities new powers to police terrorism.  We're all for giving law enforcement the tools to do its job; the two of us helped write legislation to do just that (which the Republican Congress largely rejected) after domestic terrorists blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995.  We have no problem spying on terrorists, here or elsewhere.  Indeed, as we'll explain later, we believe the U.S. should strengthen its domestic counterterrorism capacity in a way that also safeguards our freedoms.

Our problem with the Patriot Act is simpler:  It doesn't have much to do wtih patriotism.  We want the government to be aggressive in protecting us from terrorists.  But we want a government that's just as serious about challenging us as citizens.  Americans' role in the war on terror is not simply to be waving flags on the sidelines.

It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us.  We propose universal civilian service for every young American.  Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation, and community service. 

This is not a draft.  We repeat:  This is not a draft.  It's not military either.  We're not asking young people to be soldiers, but to be citizens - ready to respond to the nation's needs here at home.

The idea of universal civilian service may not be popular everywhere in our party.  Some Republicans will squeal about individual freedom, forgetting their own rhetoric that freedom isn't being free.  But universal service is the right thing to do, and our country will be stronger for it.

Here's how it would work.  Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear, or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster.  These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs.

In the 1990s, Bill Clinton and the late Eli Segal launched AmeriCorps, which has given more than 400,000 young people the chance to serve their community. ...

By asking every young American to serve, universal civilian service will strengthen America in three vital ways.

First, it will provide real, lasting security benefits. ...

Second, universal civilian service may be just what we need to save the volunteer army and avoid a draft. ...

Third, and most important, universal service will give young people a chance early in their lives to look past differences of race, class, creed, and region, and to see themselves and one another first and foremost as Americans.

Other Rham Articles:

Emanuel Attended A Meeting With Clinton Campaign Advisers Following The 1992 Campaign To Discuss Which Politicians And Members Of The Press They Would Seek Revenge Upon:

“It was there that Emanuel, then Clinton’s chief fund-raiser, repaired with George Stephanopoulos, Mandy Grunwald and other aides to Doe’s, the campaign hangout. Revenge was heavy in the air as the group discussed the enemies — Democrats, Republicans, members of the press — who wronged them during the 1992 campaign. Clifford Jackson, the ex-friend of the President and peddler of the Clinton draft-dodging stories, was high on the list. So was William Donald Schaefer, then the Governor of Maryland and a Democrat who endorsed George Bush. Nathan Landow, the fund-raiser who backed the candidacy of Paul Tsongas, made it, too.” (Elisabeth Bumiller, “The Brothers Emanuel,” The New York Times, 6/15/97)

Emanuel Told His Staff That Republicans Could “Go F— Themselves!”

“‘I’ll tell you this,’ Emanuel shouted out to his staff. ‘The Republicans may have the 72-hour program. But they have not seen the 22-month program! … Since my kids are gone, I can say it: They can go —- themselves!’”(Naftali Bendavid, “The House That Rahm Built,” Chicago Tribune, 11/12/06)

Emanuel’s Political Style Was “Honed In Chicago” And Has A “Reputation As A Political Street Fighter.”

“But his political style — honed in Chicago and on the presidential campaign trail with Clinton — isn’t gentle or uncertain. His reputation as a political street fighter inspires respect and more than a little fear.”(Naftali Bendavid, “The House That Rahm Built,” Chicago Tribune, 11/12/06)

“[Emanuel] Was Also Zealously Partisan. He Had Once Owned A Consulting Business Devoted To Finding Skeletons In Republican Closets.” (Edward McClelland, “The Legend Of Rahm,” Salon.Com, 5/8/07)

And Emanuel Made Millions As An Investment Banker Off Insider Connections With High-Profile Democrat Donors Influential In The Clinton Administration:
After Leaving His Position With The Clinton White House, Emanuel Worked For Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, An Investment Bank, From 1999 To 2002.

“[A]fter leaving the Clinton White House, [Emanuel] had taken a position at the investment bank Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein in Chicago, where he worked from 1999 to 2002 and reportedly earned $18 million…” (Tony Blankley, “‘Cowboy Capitalism,’” The Washington Times, 10/1/08)

“Congressional Disclosures Filed This Year Show Emanuel Earned $16.2 Million As An Investment Banker, Largely By Brokering High-Profile Mergers And Acquisitions.” (Mike Dorning, “Rahm Emanuel: From Clinton Aide To Money Maker,” Chicago Tribune, 11/9/03)

“Deftly Tapping The Contacts He Made As A Senior Adviser To Former President Bill Clinton, Emanuel Went To Work For One Of Clinton’s Most Active Fundraisers After Leaving The White House In Late 1998.” (Mike Dorning, “Rahm Emanuel: From Clinton Aide To Money Maker,” Chicago Tribune, 11/9/03)

“Emanuel Owes His Investment Banking Job To Bruce Wasserstein, A High-Rolling Wall Street Dealmaker Who Was One Of Clinton’s Most Active Fundraisers In The Financial Community.” (Mike Dorning, “Rahm Emanuel: From Clinton Aide To Money Maker,” Chicago Tribune, 11/9/03)

“Emanuel’s Two Biggest Deals Involved Politically Connected Utilities: One Representing Commonwealth Edison’s Corporate Parent In A Merger And The Other Representing A Buyer In The Purchase Of A Home Security Business From Telecom Giant SBC Communications.”(Mike Dorning, “Rahm Emanuel: From Clinton Aide To Money Maker,” Chicago Tribune, 11/9/03)

“Shortly Afterward, SBC Hired As Its President William Daley, The Commerce Secretary Of The Former Clinton Administration And The Brother Of Chicago’s Mayor.” (Mike Dorning, “Rahm Emanuel: From Clinton Aide To Money Maker,” Chicago Tribune, 11/9/03)

In Philadelphia a video blogger went to the streets to capture the madness cheers for Obama.  In the video cars are honking all over, people are walking in the street and cheers can be heard everywhere.  Meanwhile down at City Hall, people are just plain going crazy with excitement over the announcement that Obama has won the election, and streets are crowded with people. 

But what the man didn't plan on was this;  finding one man who was wearing a McCain t-shirt with police surrounding him.  One officer states to the man "Come back here with me please", leading him away from the crowd.  There doesn't seem to be a riot against the man, he doesn't seem to be in a fight with anyone, he's just simply there.

What the police officer says next to the man is inaudible however, the man says he's not there to cause trouble.  The police officer says to the man "I'm not going to tell you again."  The man replies pointing to his McCain t-shirt that its called "freedom of speech." 

A separate officer attempts to grab the man's arm and he turns to face the other officer and the man finds himself surrounded by now three officers who are forcibly removing him from the street.  What is interesting to note at this moment is that "Boos" and thumbs down are heard and seen from the Obama crowd at this action.

Once the man is on the sidewalk, he is told by the police to just "walk away".  Another officer is heard saying "You know what, don't tell him no more, don't tell him no more, just lock him up."  The man initially stands there and walks over to the man with the camera starting to talk to him, he is grabbed forcefully by the police, [hearing now the crowd behind the scene chanting "Obama.. Obama.. Obama..." while watching the police arrest the man and obviously realizing that the man was wearing a McCain shirt and not an Obama supporter], the man is handcuffed and led away to a police vehicle.

When the man is placed in the police vehicle, cheers can be heard in the background.

One thing to note, the man does have a styrofoam sword in his shirt.  If this were the issue, then when the sword is taken by an Obama fan, then the police would have gone after that person, the the McCain shirt man.

Welcome to Socialism people and the end of your Constitutional Rights aka Martial Law.

Prosperity Bank of El Campo, Texas will acquire all the deposits of Franklin Bank, the FDIC announced.  All deposits have been transferred and are available immediately.

Franklin Bank's 46 offices will reopen as branches of Prosperity Bank under their normal hours, including those with Saturday hours.

As of September 30, Franklin Bank had total assets of $5.1 billion and total deposits of $3.7 billion, the FDIC said.  Prosperity Bank agreed to assume all the deposits, including brokered deposits, for a premium of 1.7 percent.  In addition to assuming all of the failed bank's deposits, Prosperity will purchase approximately $850 million in assets.  The FDIC will retain the remaining assets for later disposition.

The FDIC estimates that the cost of today's transaction to its Deposit Insurance Fund will be between $1.4 billion and $1.6 billion. 

Franklin's stock (FBTX) closed today at $0.26, down 33.33% from yesterday.  Overall the return for FBTX is -93.94% YTD, -96.01% 1 Year, and -98.47% for 3 year.

Franklin Bank is the eighteenth bank to fail in the nation this year, and the first in Texas since Bank of Sierra Blanca, Sierra Blanca, Texas, on January 18, 2008.  The 18 bank failures so far this year compare with three for all of 2007 and are more than in the previous five years combined.

In an interesting side note, Lewis S. Ranieri who founded the Franklin Bank Corporation, spent the last few years warning anyone who would listen that the housing market was about to collapse.  Obviously, he didn't listen to his own words.

The Mortgage Lender "Implode-O-Meter" has an article listing a dozen outstanding law suits against Franklin Bank in June.

And back in July, 2008 Franklin Bank Corp received a notice from the NASDAQ stock market stating it no longer met listing requirements because its share prices had been below the required minimum price of $1 for 30 consecutive days.

ADDITIONAL SOURCES:

• FDIC Press Release 113-2008
• Wall Street Journal, Market Watch
• Forbes
• Corporate Profile via Franklin Bank Web site.

Obama Quote:

"Your own story and the American story are not separate - they are shared.  And they will both be enriched if we stand up together, and answer a new call to service to meet the challenges of our new century... I won't ask for your vote as a candidate; I will ask for your service and your active citizenship when I am president of the United States.  This will not be a call issued in one speech or program; this will be a cause of my presidency." - Obama, December 5, 2007

More from the "Service" part of "Change.gov"

■  Expand Corporation for National and Community Service:  Obama and Binden will expand AmeriCorps from 75,000 today to 250,000...   They will establish a Classroom Corps to help teachers and students, with a priority placed on underserved schools; a Health Corps to improve public health outreach; a Clean Energy Corps to conduct weatherization and renewable energy projects; a Veterans Corp to assist veterans at hospitals, nursing homes and homeless shelters; and a Homeland Security Corps to help communities plan, prepare for and respond to emergencies.

■  Engaging Retiring Americans in Service on a Large Scale:  Older Americans have a wide range of skills and knowledge to contribute.  Obama and Biden will expand and improve programs that connect individuals over the age of 55 to quality volunteer opportunities.

Other details; 

■  For the 100 hours of service while in college, there will be a new American Opportunity Tax Credit worth $4,000 a year (That's $40 bucks an hour).  Obviously not available for "regular" taxpaying Americans and obviously no perks for middle or high school students other than the below YouthBuild.

■  50,000 low-income young people will be part of the YouthBuild program, using them to build affordable housing in their communities while giving them a chance to learn construction job skills thus if you are in construction, say bye bye to possible new projects.

So basically in summary, once the economy stabilizes, taxes will go up, there will be free opportunities for the younger crowd, with expectations of Veterans who have already served their country to "volunteer" , and we the average taxpayer will foot the bill for all of Obama's new programs since there are tax breaks for those in college and those who are retired. 

Oh yes, and lets not forget, that you can say bye by to your 401(k) funds too.  Giving a $500 break per year per person in exchange for $80K+ in 401(k) money is a good deal... if you don't have a 401(k) otherwise, you need to live past 176 to get the same in return ($80K / 500 = 160 years + 16 years (legal age) = 176 years).  Even at $40K, that's 96 years of age.  At 20K, that's 56 years of age.

And don't forget that Obama also plans to use the IRS information it gets from banks to automate your income taxes via pre-filled forms that all you need to do is verify, sign and return.

I would fully expect the Obama Administration to focus on and manipulate that if you don't do your part in the service, then you are not American while I will continue to  support the Constitution of the United States, while it lasts.

Welcome to Socialism folks.

The "Office of the President-Elect" is something that Obama and his campaign has invented.  Basically they just transferred Obama's campaign website over to a dot-gov domain using the Official Seal of the President.  The .gov domain is a sponsored top-level domain restricted for use by government entities in the United States of America.  The .gov domain is administered by the General Services Administration (GSA), an independent agency of the federal government.  All governments in the U.S. are allowed to apply for use of .gov such as atlanta.gov for the city of Atlanta, for example. 

Upon looking up domain information for change.gov, the IP comes back to Internap Network Services Corporation out of Atlanta, GA.  The actual IP location comes back to District of Columbia, Washington with the customer being Blue State Digital in Washington, DC, the same company that hosted his campaign website.  BSD describes themselves as a "leader in online fundraising, advocacy, social networking and constituency development programs for nonprofit organizations, political candidates and causes, and corporations."

So how is Obama using a .gov domain?  Well, there's a sneaky way around it based on the Presidential Transition Act of 1963:

SERVICES AND FACILITIES AUTHORIZED TO BE PROVIDED TO PRESIDENTS-ELECT AND VICE PRESIDENTS-ELECT

Sec. 3 (a) The Administrator of General Services, referred to hereafter in this Act as "the Administrator," is authorized to provide, upon request, to each President-elect and each Vice President-elect, for use in connection with his preparations for the assumption of official duties as President or Vice President necessary services and facilities, including -

(1) Suitable office space appropriately equipped with furniture, furnishings, office machines and equipment, and office supplies as determined by the Administrator, after consultation with the President-elect, the Vice-President elect, or their designee provided for in subsection (e) of this section, at such place or places within the United States as the President-elect or Vice-President-elect shall designate;

(2) Payment of the compensation of members of office staffs designated by the President-elect or vice-President-elect at rates determined by them not to exceed the rate provided by the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, for grade GS-18: Provided, That any employee of any agency of any branch of the Government may be detailed to such staffs on a reimbursable or non reimbursable basis with the consent of the head of the agency; and while so detailed such employee shall be responsible only to the President or Vice-President-elect for the performance of his duties: Provided further, That any employee so detailed shall continue to receive the compensation provided pursuant to law for his regular employment, and shall retain the rights and privileges of such employment without interruption. Notwithstanding any other law, persons receiving compensation as members of office staffs under this subsection, other than those detailed from agencies, shall not be held or considered to be employees of the Federal Government except for purposes of the Civil Service Retirement Act, the Federal Employee’s Compensation Act, the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Act of 1954, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act of 1959;

(3) Payment of expenses for the procurement of services of experts or consultants or organizations thereof for the President-elect or Vice-President-elect, as authorized for the head of any department by section 15 of the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946, as amended (5 U.S.C. 55a), at rates not to exceed $100 per diem for individuals;

(4) Payment of travel expenses and subsistence allowances, including rental of Government or hired motor vehicles, found necessary by the President-elect or Vice-President-elect, as authorized for persons employed intermittently or for persons serving without compensation by section 5 of the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946, as amended (5 U.S.C. 73b-2), as may be appropriate;

(5) Communications services found necessary by the President-elect or Vice-President-elect;

(6) Payment of expenses for necessary printing and binding, notwithstanding the Act of January 12th, 1895, and the Act of March 1, 1919, as amended (44 U.S.C. 111);

(7) Reimbursement to the postal revenues in amounts equivalent to the postage that would otherwise be payable on mail matter referred to in subsection (d) of this section.

(b) The Administrator shall expend no funds for the provision of services and facilities under this Act in connection with any obligations incurred by the President-elect or Vice-President-elect before the day following the date of the general elections held to determine the electors of the President and Vice President in accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections 1 and 2, or after the inauguration of the President-elect as President and the inauguration of the Vice-President-elect as Vice President.

(c) The terms “President-elect” and “Vice-President-elect” as used in this Act shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful candidates for the office of the President and Vice President, respectively, as ascertained by the Administrator following the general elections held to determine the electors of the President and Vice-President in accordance with title 3, United States code, sections 1 and 2.

(d) Each President-elect shall be entitled to conveyance within the United States and its territories and possessions of all mail matter, including airmail, sent by him in connection with his preparations for the assumption of official duties as President, and such mail matter shall be transmitted as penalty mail as provided n title 39, United States Code, section 4152. Each Vice-President-elect shall be entitled to conveyance within the United States and its territories and possession of all mail matter, including airmail, sent by him under his written autograph signature in connection with his preparations for the assumption of official duties as Vice President.

(e) Each President-elect and Vice-President-elect may designate to the Administrator an assistant authorized to make on his behalf such designations or findings of necessity as may be required in connection with the services and facilities to be provided under this Act. Not more than 10 per centum of the total expenditures under this Act for any President-elect or Vice-President-elect may be made upon the basis of a certificate by him or the assistant designated by him pursuant to this section that such expenditures are classified and are essential to the national security, and that they accord with the provisions of subsections (a), (b), and (d) of this section.

(f) In the case where the President-elect is the incumbent President or in the case where the Vice-President-elect is the incumbent Vice President, there shall be no expenditures or funds for the provisions of services and facilities to such incumbent under this Act, and any funds appropriated for such purposes shall be returned to the general funds of the Treasury.

SERVICES AND FACILITIES AUTHORIZED TO BE PROVIDED TO FORMER PRESIDENTS AND FORMER VICE PRESIDENTS

Sec. 4. The Administrator is authorized to provide, upon request, to each former President and each former Vice President, for a period not to exceed six months from the date of the expiration of his term of office as President or Vice President, for use in connection with winding up the affairs of his office, necessary services and facilities of the same general character as authorized by this act to be provided to Presidents-elect and Vice Presidents-elect. Any person appointed or detailed to serve a former President or former Vice President under authority of this section shall be appointed or detailed in accordance with, and shall be subject to, all of the provisions of section 3 of this Act applicable to persons appointed or detailed under authority of that section. The provisions of the Act of August 25, 1958 (72 Stat. 838 3; U.S.C. 102, note), other than subsections (a) and (e) shall not become effective with respect to a former President until six months after the expiration of his term of office as President.

AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 5. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator such funds as may be necessary for carrying out the purposes of this Act but not to exceed $900,000 for any one Presidential transition, to remain available during the fiscal year in which the transition occurs and the next succeeding fiscal year. The President shall include in the budget transmitted to the Congress, for each fiscal year in which his regular term of office will expire, a proposed appropriation for carrying out the purposes of this Act.

Approved March 7, 1964

There's one small problem.  Obama IS NOT THE PRESIDENT-ELECT UNTIL JANUARY 6th, 2009.

And obviously, the Obama morons haven't realized the campaign is over, since they still continue to attack McCain on the Office of the President-Elect Web site.

And this is really funny.  On Obama's website, you will find a rss icon for news feeds.  Go ahead and click on it.  You will get a message that the feed does not exist although there are news articles listed.

 

And a week ago, AIG said it would be able to access up to an additional $20.9 billion under the new commercial-paper-funding-facility program.  In total, the government has put about $144 billion at AIG's disposal.

By using the commercial-paper program from the Feds, AIG has been able to reduce the amount it had borrowed under the original $85 billion line of credit.

AIG officials hope these factors will help persuade the government to change it's loan terms, since the government would have the most to lose as both AIG's creditor and controlling shareholder although AIG has managed to pay back about $2.3 billion of their loan.  A week ago the Federal Reserve showed that AIG had loaned AIG $83.5 billion, this week, that number is $81.2 billion.

If you remember, AIG agreed to the government's terms under duress in mid-September, with the expectation that it would be a short-term bridge until AIG could sell assets to meet its obligations.  AIG counterparties have demanded billions of dollars in collateral to ensure AIG stands behind its commitments to make payments in the event of defaults.  If it were unable to meet those obligations, it would prove a risk to the global economy.  This has become a concern for foreign governments, who are pressuring U.S. officials to find a solution.

PERSONAL RANT

AIG took the money, although at the time they state under duress, and now they want to change the terms of the loan because they are having problems paying back the money, that obviously the needed?  Does the word NO mean anything to them?  AIG has played the Feds more than they will ever know, and the Feds have bitten off more than they can chew.  AIG is reminding me of what I call a "bug" that you loan a quarter to because they want a drink at work and are short.  Then a few days later, they ask to borrow fifty cents.  Then a few days later they ask for a dollar.  Then they want to borrow five dollars so they can buy lunch for themselves.....

Seriously, forget it.  Fix your business or let it die because if we keep giving AIG handouts, or changing loan terms, we the taxpayers are going to end up paying for it for the next fifty years.  Especially since Obama has stated only a day after he won the election, that after the economy stabilizes, our taxes are going up.

PREVIOUS POSTS:

• AIG Liddy Demands Apology from Cramer. [And my personal letter to Liddy.]  (10/21)
• AIG Says Goodbye To More Wicked Ways.. [Until They Are Out Of The Spotlight]  (10/20)
• Waxman Request Details of AIG Spending & AIG Wants $10 Billion MORE! [An official WTF moment....]  (10/17)
• AIG Turns From Wicked Ways, Just Like Paris Hilton... [Yeah Right]  (10/17)
• U.S. Representative Paul E. Kanjorski Wants AIG To Reimburse Money  (10/16)
• New York Attorney General Cuomo Warns AIG On Spending Taxpayers Dollars.  (10/16)
• Wanna Know Why AIG Went Bankrupt?  (10/10)
• AIG Cancels Corporate "Convention" in Half Moon Bay and Paulson fires AIG consultant and Other AIG News.  (10/10)
• AIG's $440K "retreat" is "normal" and they are having another one.  (10/08)
• AIG Execs use $440,000 of taxpayers money to take retreat after bailout.  (10/07)

ADDITIONAL SOURCES:

• International Herald Tribune
• Reuters, Reuters

CCS Headline News - Superintendent's Response to YouTube

I was shocked when I saw the clip of an interaction between a Cumberland County Schools teacher and her students as posted on YouTube.  While neutral discussion of the political process is appropriate, at no time, particularly with elementary students, should a teacher infuse his/her political views into the discussion.  Most disconcerting was the military slant that made its way into this discussion.  We are a military community, serving over 15,000 military students and their families.  We value the sacrifices, not only of the military parents but also those of their families.

We believe that military children are our children, military spouses are many of our employees, and military service men and women are our heroes.  We proudly serve our military children and have received national awards for our support of military families.

I was particularly disturbed to see the uncomfortable position in which our children were placed due to the inappropriate actions of one of our teachers.  Please be assured that the actions exhibited in this video are not consistent with the vision of the CCS.  Moreover, the actions of one teacher do not represent the 7000 employees in our organization.

Once the video was brought to my attention, I immediately launched an investigation.  Personnel laws prevent me from releasing information regarding individual employees and personnel action taken.  I can assure you that upon completion of the investigation, I will take appropriate action.

Dr. William Harrison
CCS' Superintendent

Let us just hope that sensitivity training with a slap on the wrist isn't what Harrison is planning for Harris.  This monster of a woman should be terminated, and her teaching certification revoked based upon abusive behavior.

What also disturbs me with her video, is the way she speaks.  First she does not speak proper English, and no I am not talking about her accent.  Remember my family is from the south since the early 1700s.  She does not speak clearly, she uses slang words, and does not use proper formations of sentences.  This "class" is not about learning education, it is about learning to "conform" through intimidation, ridicule, belittling, alienation and abuse.  Education is not about forcing a child to change what they believe, it is about encouraging a child to form an educated opinion about something.

Secondly, it disturbs me for a teacher to use words such as "lord" and "Jesus" in a school environment.  School is not a church, and this is defined by Federal Law.  If you wish to use the defense of she is a Christian woman, well, her actions show anything but being a Christian woman.

But what disturbs me most of all is not Harris' actions, its the lack of reaction in the news.  Searching via Yahoo or Google results in very very few hits on this topic, mostly by bloggers, but no news hits.

I am interested in seeing how the teachers' union reacts also.

Personally this is what I would be saying to Harris:

"Woah Woman, oh woman, don't treat me so mean,
You're the meanest old woman that I've ever seen.

Hit the road Diatha and don't you come back no more, no more, no more, no more....."