Comments on: Americans for Financial Reform: Waste. Of. Time.

By: Jane Hamsher

Jane Hamsher — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:39:31 +0000

You can say that again.

By: eggroll

eggroll — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 06:34:47 +0000

Gotta love the name, though. That makes the other 310 million Americans not for Financial Reform. Want some simple measures that would clean up a lot of the mess? 1) a unitary credit card processor. Individuals would have an aggregate credit line no matter how many cards they hold and balances would have to be settled within 60 days. 2) a national interest reference rate, with limits of say, no more than 10% above that rate (a de facto usury rate). Above that courts would not enforce without specific contract language. 3) adoption of a VAT system and simplification of tax rules. As VAT is a pass through system, companies have less incentive to hide wealth. Lithuania, for example, has a modern tax code. 4) a national health care system. That would cut out half of the person bankruptcies. 5) Improved sex education. America is seriously over-populated, yet procreation remains a fundamental right under the US Constitution. If say the 4th Amendment protection against unlawful search and seizure attenuates, why doesn’t the right to procreate start to attenuate at a certain point? Right now the third-world strategy of having as many kids as possible (because there is poor or no education for women, poor property rights, and no pensions for anybody) is just as acceptable as the first world model on 2 kids per couple (high education for women, secure property rights, and a comprehensive pension scheme). Swedes certainly know which world they live in, the Chinese know which world they must live in, but the Americans can’t make up their minds if they are living in Denmark or Pakistan.

By: Larue

Larue — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 01:26:00 +0000

I dunno, if Liz Warren gets involved, I could see legitimacy . . . any group to oppose status quo is a better group than NO group or effort. IMHO.

After all, there are NO guns on board collectively at this time for finan reform (Krugman and the others are solo agents) and I think our present reality pretty well sums THAT shit up.

Oh, and THANKS President Obama.

Mz Hamsher, I can appreciate yer vexed point of view on this but hey, who knows, right? What’s to lose?

By: timbo

timbo — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:51:37 +0000

0% loans to the wealthy with no collateral for a year.

By: frandor55

frandor55 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:37:58 +0000

Chris Hayes piece put liberals in a Darth & Wayne “not worthy” mode in their relationship to the Serious Ones such as Summers etc.

By: spocko

spocko — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:34:29 +0000

But but but they are experts! They can get rich people to give them money! Money talks!
Thanks for this Jane. What pisses me off is that they are Not willing to hire some fighters with a proven track record. People who are ready to take on these people and not worry about going to the same cocktail parties and looking for their next job.

Imagine doing like that PR exec for the healthcare industry and actively testifing against the industry. Following the lobbyists around and busting their lies. Meeting with the representatives after the lobbyists and saying, “how much did they promise you? What did they say? Really!? Let me tell you why it isn’t true. “

But nobody wants to fight like that.

By: BooRadley

BooRadley — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:07:34 +0000

Thanks Jane.

By: Eureka Springs

Eureka Springs — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:49:31 +0000

Like the Third Way.. folks seem to be lining up in attempt to confuse (or outright belittle) the meaning of the word progressive.

By: Eureka Springs

Eureka Springs — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:44:37 +0000

Hi Jane