From: Rod Lockwood ..
To: Narcissa ..
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2009 8:33:29 PM
Subject: What happened?


It says that I have been banned from the forum. What happened?

--

From: Narcissa ..
To: Rod Lockwood ..
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:25 PM
Subject: What happened?


I'm really sorry about that.  You see, there was an episode on Chatzy, and parents became involved.  Some of the parents didn't feel comfortable having an adult on the site- some went as far as to ask for Ultiverse to be shut down.  At this moment, I'm unsure of whether or not it will be deleted.  Again, I'm really sorry; this wasn't my idea.  I wouldn't do it if I wasn't being forced to.

Thank you for everything,
Narcissa

--

October 24, 2008

Dear Mr. Lockwood:

            Thank you for contacting me with regard to the federal government's response to the meltdown of the U.S. financial system  I appreciate hearing from you.

            Recent declines on Wall Street and the larger economy have many causes.  It is clear now that housing prices were rising steadily this decade because of a speculative bubble, and when that bubble burst it caused home values to fall.  The recent decline on Wall Street is directly attributable to the fear that many large financial institutions were on the verge of failure because they had invested too heavily in risky mortgage backed securities and in the unregulated derivatives markets.  Due to government deregulation of the financial services industry, these new financial institutions were so large that their failure was simply not an option as it would have disastrous consequences for every American.  By mid-September 2008, the federal government, led by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve, felt it must intervene to stem the spillover of a full-blown crisis into our larger economy.  Unfortunately for the American people, eight years of failed Bush Administration economic policies coupled with over a decade of Republican-controlled Congresses that pushed for deregulation and little oversight of the financial system finally caught up with them.

            The Bush Administration came to Congress with an unacceptable $700 billion proposal to bailout Wall Street.  Congress responded by engaging with the Administration in negotiations that led to a bipartisan proposal that, while not perfect, would help stabilize the economy and help protect the pocketbooks of everyday Americans.  The result was H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.  Unlike the Bush Administration's initial proposal, this bill contains a number of provisions that will make it more effective, transparent, and grant important protections for the taxpayers who are footing the bill. 

            The Bush Administration's initial proposal would have given Secretary Paulson unfettered authority to purchase $700 billion in troubled assets with little or no oversight.  Democrats in Congress demanded that provisions be included to provide greater oversight and transparency, to limit the ability of participating companies to award their executives with golden parachutes, and to assist homeowners facing foreclosure.  Democrats also gave the Treasury optional authority to buy equity in the banks in addition to purchasing assets.  Most economist prefer this method of shoring up troubled banks because it avoids difficult questions of how to determine an appropriate price for undervalued assets, and gives the taxpayers greater opportunity to receive a return on their investment.  While the Bush Administration initially opposed the inclusion of this provision, I was happy to see that Secretary Paulson, along with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and FDIC Chairman Sheila C. Bair released a statement on October 14 announcing a plan to inject $250 billion of capital in a number of major U.S. financial institutions.  Because of the Democratic provision, if the banks recover within the next several years, American taxpayers stand to make a profit on this investment.   

In addition, this bill increases the maximum amount of FDIC deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000 per account and includes a tax extenders package that includes business and energy tax extenders, mental health parity legislation I supported earlier in the year, an alternative minimum tax patch to protect middle-class tax payers, and additional disaster assistance for states devastated by natural disasters.  I have attached my statement on this legislation for your perusal.

While Congressional action was a good beginning, we must also ensure that our financial institutions have more oversight and are more accountable so a crisis like this does not happen again.  The House Financial Services Committee announced that it would hold a hearing on October 21, 2008 to address the need for "broad regulatory restructuring and reform for the financial markets, including financial institution oversight and regulation, systemic risk, and housing finance."  In addition, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held hearing on the cause and effects of major bank failures and plans to hold a hearing on November 13 on hedge funds and their role in the financial crisis.  I encourage you to visit their respective websites for more information: http://financialservices.house.gov and http://oversight.house.gov.  I would also like to provide you with the Treasury Department's website which contains comprehensive and up-to-date information on this matter: http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/eesa/. 

           Again, thank you for being in touch.  For news on current federal legislative issues, please visit my website at www.house.gov/dingell; you can also sign up there to receive my e-newsletter.  In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact me again if I may be of assistance with this or any other matter of concern.

           With every good wish,

Sincerely yours,
John D. Dingell
Member of Congress

Well, Sen. Levin wrote pretty much the same thing. Read his letter and my response at: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=299528786

While reversing the deregulation of the financial industry is a good thing it is not the only thing that should be done. Nor does it completely invalidate many of the conditions I had listed as compensation to the people of the United States who have been forced to raise the national debt even higher. The people who are benefiting from this got into this mess from greed, incompetence, and ignorance. Maybe you can throw in gullibility for the people who blindly do the 'patriotic' thing and spent money they didn't have, even to the point of running up huge debts, and mortgaging their houses. The problem that I see is that even if the mortgages are restructured these people will just resume spending as they had before and be right back at not being able to pay there mortgages. These people need to be forced to learn to live on a budget and >gasp< save money in a savings account.

Many other things are needed to change the status quo. The first thing is to acknowledge that the things that we have been doing for the past thirty to forty years are not working. The money to pay back the national debt has to come from those that benefit the most by it. If that means taxing the wealthiest of this country fifty percent of their income (including bonuses, stock options, and fringe benefits) without loopholes, so be it. It will still be better than what happened to many financiers when the stock market crashed in '29. Independent entrepreneurs need to be supported and encouraged. Bigger is not better. What happened to our laws about monopolies? Hasbro is now virtually the only toy company in the U.S. GameStop no longer has any viable competition. Barnes and Noble has bought them all out. Even Toys 'R' Us stores now feature a GameStop inside. (I have yet to find out, but my guess is B&N merged with TRU.)

on Oct. 16, 2008 senator_levin@levin.senate.gov wrote:

Dear Mr. Lockwood:

Thank you for contacting me with your views regarding the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, which was passed by the Senate on October 1, 2008. This bill was subsequently passed by the House of Representatives and signed into law on October 3, 2008. I appreciate the extraordinary amount of input I have received on this issue "much frustration and angst, as well as expert opinions" and I used this valuable input as I worked with my colleagues to improve this bill. The original bill sent to Congress by the Bush Administration was unacceptable.

Our nation's economy is in crisis, the likes of which we haven't seen since the 1930s. For years, we have traveled a disturbing path: foreclosures and unemployment are up while median income and purchasing power are down. CEO pay has skyrocketed while regular Americans are suffering. Economic growth has slowed because tight credit has forced businesses large and small to put investments for the future on hold while they focus on making sure they have capital to buy inventory or even make payroll. But in just the last few weeks, we have seen that this path is leading to a cliff, and we needed to act quickly to prevent our economy from sliding over the edge.

The reasons we are near this cliff are many. The path we have traveled has been marked by an appalling lack of oversight by the regulators of the marketplace. Wall Street has run amok with greed while the Bush Administration and others urged them on in the name of deregulation. As in the run-up to the Great Depression, our free markets are running wild. We have reduced capital requirements, removed the authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate swaps, and speculators took over the majority of some commodity trading, like oil. Cops have been taken off the beat in our financial markets; stoplights to put a hold on free markets running wild have been dismantled; and now, regular Americans are suffering, and face even more dire consequences. There is plenty of blame to go around, and the excesses that continue to surface as this unfolds will no doubt be shocking. In the immediate term, however, the most pressing issue is how we turn our unstable economic situation around to avoid an even more dire result.

Without this swift Congressional action, pensions and savings could quickly be decimated by a wrecked stock market, and Americans could suffer through significant job losses and have less ability to buy everything from groceries to a new car or house. Small businesses and even large ones could see their access to capital further reduced, home mortgages could become even more difficult to acquire or refinance, foreclosures could further skyrocket, and auto and student loans could be much more difficult to obtain. Construction jobs would likely disappear, automakers would cut back even further on production and lay off workers, and retail and service jobs would be cut. Retirees who are counting on a 401(k) or other type of pension could see their nest eggs shattered. If the stock market crashes, investments "even those made years or decades ago in supposedly 'safe' assets" would be drowned.

It is clear to me that we cannot allow our nation's economy to fall off this cliff. Doing nothing was not an option. I reluctantly voted for this rescue plan, because it is not entirely clear that it will unlock enough credit and stop enough foreclosures to turn things around. It is also evident that this plan only includes the first steps toward getting regulatory cops back on the beat to make sure our markets are not allowed to continue running wild. But there also was no better alternative at this time. I voted for this plan with the hope that getting capital into faltering financial institutions will restore flexibility and credit to businesses and consumers before Americans suffer even greater consequences. In addition, if done right, the government can use this plan to purchase, modify, refinance, and re-sell mortgages that are based on accurate home values, have fair, longer-term repayment terms that homeowners can meet, and return mortgage repayment rates to their historic high levels of dependability and profitability. If that's how this program is carried out, it can avert a disaster. Unlocking credit and restructuring mortgages will also help soothe investor concerns, and therefore, protect pensions, savings and investments.

I could not have supported the original plan sent to Congress by the Bush Administration. It did nothing to protect taxpayers or to provide any oversight. It also did nothing to address the core of the problem, which is the foreclosure crisis. I think, however, that we in Congress have decided that if taxpayer dollars are used to clean up the financial mess, the Administration is going to have to accept taxpayer safeguards and taxpayer oversight.

Congress has done significant work to add in some of the needed taxpayer protections, and to make sure that this plan is grounded in helping regular Americans. Among other safeguards, this rescue bill will provide the government, and thus the taxpayers, with options to acquire an equity stake in companies that take advantage of the program.

The bill also includes limits on executive compensation for entities that take advantage of government assistance, though, like other provisions, the effectiveness of these provisions will depend upon how well they are implemented.

The bill also imposes needed controls and oversight provisions to make sure this unprecedented power and amount of money is used responsibly. These controls include immediate public reporting of the assets purchased, including the price paid; GAO audits of those financial reports; and Inspector General oversight to prevent fraud, favoritism, waste of taxpayer dollars, and abuse of power. In addition, a special House-Senate oversight panel will be established to track this program and to ensure that taxpayer interests are protected. These protections are important. Still more important is that Congress revamp oversight and regulation of our financial markets to prevent future financial disasters like this one.

I am also pleased that this bill includes provisions to maximize assistance for homeowners and minimize foreclosures to keep families in their homes. Rampant foreclosures are at the core of this economic crisis, and a recovery can only come when the housing market turns around. As the owner of loans that are at risk to be foreclosed upon, the government will be able to consent to modifications and rework mortgages so that the homeowner can continue to make payments. Homeowners, communities and taxpayers generally would be better off than if these mortgages go into foreclosure.

The financial mess we are in is the result of eight years of inadequate regulation of U.S. financial markets by the Bush Administration. It is long past time to strengthen market oversight. The regulatory gaps are everywhere. Unfortunately, due to the urgency of adopting this legislation, many much-needed reforms were simply not included in the rescue plan.

I voted for this rescue package with many concerns, but with the hope that it will prevent even greater harm to our economy and hard working American families. It is clear that a financial regulatory overhaul should be one of the first priorities of the next President and the new Congress.

Again, thank you for contacting me.

Sincerely,
Carl Levin

Senator Levin,

Inadequate regulation of the stock markets was only a part of the problem. The other problem was giving out credit to individuals who could not afford it. Or simply put, as a nation we need to stop living on credit and start living on what income we have. Unlocking credit was absolutely the worst thing to be done. The debt should have been cleared and the homeowners relieved of any further need to pay on these mortgages. Then these families should have had no further access to credit which would then force them to live within their means. Also, as I stated earlier, the banking rules governing credit, loans and mortgages should be tightened. Credit card companies should be forbidden to advertise on television, radio and perhaps other media. Likewise banks and other financial institutions should be forbidden to place ads encouraging people to mortgage their homes to pay off debt. Retail stores should also be prevented from encouraging their customers from applying for credit cards. The interest rates should rise to discourage loans and to encourage savings. This will also mean that people who have savings accounts will be receiving an equitable compensation for allowing banks and other financial institutions to loan out their hard earned savings.

I did not really expect any of the things that I listed to be included in a package deal for the bail-out. Rather I think these should be put through eventually to reimburse the citizens of the United States who are not part of the privileged class for allowing the incompetent financiers to be rescued from a life of poverty and disgrace. I also believe that if the federal lawmakers are unable or unwilling to make changes that will create a level playing field and quite favoring the chosen few then the state and local lawmakers should step in and see that justice is done.

And just to be fair, this crisis started long before George W. Bush took office, but is the result of many decades of the greed, indifference and complacency of our society.

--
Sincerely,
Rod Lockwood
My website

Support your local and online small businesses!
Feed the Pig

This was sent to Representative Dingell and Senator Stabenaw, 2008.10.03:

The alternative is for Wall Street to do what the United States would have to do—borrow the money from the world's banks. It isn't so much a matter of what is happening in Michigan. The whole thing is bad for people in general.

Whether they get the bail out or not, maybe some of these ideas should be worked on anyway, to not reward greed and encourage true entrepreneurs who have real innovative ideas and people who wish to enter certain job markets, but are unable to make headway because of barriers to entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barriers_to_entry). Breaking down these barriers would help promote true competition and help improve the economy by helping people regain control over their own destiny. Unfair copyright and patent laws, and other laws that favor large global corporations over small local businesses do not really encourage economic growth and independence for the families of the United States.

Sincerely,
Rod Lockwood

This is a follow-up message that went to the previous law-makers and Sen. Obama and then posted as a comment on Lee Iaccoca's blog, 2008.09.28:

Dear Mr. Iaccoca,

This is the closest and most recent post of yours that is related to the bail-out proposal currently being discussed in Washington. I am sending the message below to the lawmakers that represent me in both the House and the Senate.

Comments are welcome.

OK, you want a bail-out? Fine. These are the only acceptable terms.

1. The homeowners and credit card holders will have their debts written off. The homeowners will receive the deeds to their homes free and clear.

2. Credit card holders will have their debts written off.

3. All of the credit card accounts of all of these people will be closed and these people will not be allowed to have credit for a minimum of ten years.

4. Banks must tighten their policies of who can receive credit. They must also stop advertising credit cards and mortgages the same way advertisement for alcohol and tobacco is banned. Retailers will be forbidden to offer credit cards.

5. Interest rates must be raised to the same level it was in the 70s.

6. Advertising for pharmaceuticals will also be banned.

7. All U.S. citizens who make over $500,000 per year in annual salary and benefits (including stock) will be taxed 50% with absolutely no deductions.

8. The laws of incorporation will be re-written so that they no longer protect the corporate executives or stock holders of large corporations. In the case of bankruptcy or failure any owners, stock holders or corporate executives must relinquish all dividends, salaries, stock options, returns on investments and benefits from the past two fiscal years of the existence of the corporation. This comes from any assets outside of their main residence and one vehicle. This does not include any assets of value which may be inside their main residence.

9. The copyright laws will be changed to the following:
The copyright shall last for fifty years or until the death of the creator, whichever comes first. Any years of the fifty left over after the death of the creator shall pass to his estate. If a copyright is sold to a corporation or any other non-living entity, the copyright shall not exceed fifty years from the original date of the copyright. No corporation may file for a copyright. Businesses are not human beings and therefore do not have the capacity to be creative. Only humans can create and therefore only humans may file for copyrights. Any work abandoned by the corporation for more than five years from the last sale the copyright will be terminated and shall pass immediately into public domain. No extensions of any kind may be issued for a copyright. This is to take effect retroactively to all copyrights.
Congress wanted to make it easier for the average person to copyright their works. That is fine, they can do that also. Just as long as corporations are forbidden to file for copyrights. They may purchase them from the original owner or their estate, just not file for the initial right.
Perhaps some exception could be made for non-profit, apolitical institutions.

10. Patent laws also would be changed so that there is no longer an indefinite time limit for patents to be pending. Once the initial application for a patent is filed, the person filing for the patent has six months to complete the process. After that, if the patent is still pending the patent is put straight into public domain. There will be no appeal, no extension or re-application.

****

The fact is that the United States does not need Wall Street. What happens in the stock markets should not be affecting nor influencing our economic policy. What should have been influencing our economic policy is things like what the incomes of the people who work for a living are and what the unemployment rate is. Wall Street has always enjoyed making money whenever the unemployment rate went up or people were laid off. Now its pay-back time. Let's see how they like it when a few CEOs loose their jobs and cannot find work. How ever rough it might be for them, it would still beat jumping out a window.

The argument that any changes to protect the copyrights and patents beyond a reasonable length of time will discourage entrepreneurs and technological growth is a false one. Entrepreneurs do not have that kind of money. And how much technology in the past twenty-five years has been developed that has really been useful or needed? How many of the original artists were really able to make even a living from their copyrighted materials. Or has it been only the corporations making the profits? If anything protecting the interests of large corporations and wealthy investors discourages entrepreneurs from competing against them. Ask yourself this, if the Wright brothers were just starting out today, would they have been able to invent the process for controlled flight that led to the development of the airplane?

I really resent the fact that my savings is being given to someone who has no business borrowing money. The bank risks loosing my money and what do I get? A lousy one or two percent interest? Absolutely not! I want at least five percent and I really think today it should be more like at least ten percent.

Sincerely,
Rod Lockwood

Support your local and online small businesses!
Feed the pig. (http://feedthepig.org)

The following message was emailed to Representative Dingell, Senator Levin, and Senator Stabenaw 2008.09.22:

Do not bail out anyone from loosing their home. They were stupid to allow themselves to keep spending when they didn't have any money to spend. These people need to learn how to live on their incomes. They also have to learn there are no easy ways out of debt.

The investors also need to take some financial losses. They thought they could make easy money without working for it. It is time for them to pay the piper. Maybe this will cause some tough times for everyone in the near future, but maybe we deserved it for letting the CEOs, investors and stock brokers take over as we did.