Fed refuses to identify recipients of $2 Trillion

Bloomberg via Ron Paul News ^ | 2008-11-10

[rabscuttle385]

Link only due to FR policy.

[SunkenCiv]

Circuit City Files for Bankruptcy
CNN | 11/10/08 | Parija B. Kavilanz
Posted on 11/10/2008 6:13:04 AM PST by marshmallow
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2129345/posts

[henkster]

“Rumors can be very destructive in the financial markets, actually bringing important intermediaries to insolvency with frightening speed. Raw information about who is taking larger than expected Fed loans could quickly become fuel for such rumors,”

That’s just tuff S***. They put their hands out for it. If these financial institutions went to another bank and wanted to keep it private, fine. This is MY money and I want to know where it’s going. If you hide this from the American people on the theory of a “security interest,” then what’s next? When do people simply start “disappearing?”

[Sunnyflorida]

Why do you think it is a bad idea to disclose where the money is going?

[Sunnyflorida]

Any change to the balance sheet at this scale of public companies is a material event and needs to be disclosed. Besides the fact that this is public money.

[GovernmentShrinker]

The SEC — not Bloomberg — determines what events need to be disclosed and when.

[Kimberly GG]

We are well on our way. Toward a North American Union at least.


"In February 2001, Fox and Bush jointly endorsed the Guanajuato Proposal, which read, “After consultation with our Canadian partners, we will strive to consolidate a North American economic community whose benefits reach the lesser-developed areas of the region and extend to the most vulnerable social groups in our countries.” Unfortunately, they never translated that sentiment into policy (with the exception of the symbolic but substantively trivial $40 million Partnership for Prosperity).

All three governments share the blame for this failure. President Bush’s primary goal seemed at first to open the Mexican oil sector to U.S. investors, while then-Canadian Prime Minister Chrétien showed no interest in working with Mexico. President Fox, for his part, put forth too ambitious an agenda with too much emphasis on radical reform of U.S. immigration policy. Bush’s initial response was polite, but he soon realized he could not deliver and postponed consideration. The illegal immigration issue remains thorny and unsolved. Ultimately, however, it is more symptom than cause: the way to reduce illegal immigration is to make Mexico’s economy grow faster than that of the U.S.


[BEARS REPEATING: ...the way to reduce illegal immigration is to make Mexico’s economy grow faster than that of the U.S.]


The Council on Foreign Relations Task Force Report spells out such a vision. Let me summarize and amplify some of its recommendations.

NAFTA has failed to create a partnership because North American governments have not changed the way they deal with one another. Dual bilateralism, driven by U.S. power, continue to govern and irritate. Adding a third party to bilateral disputes vastly increases the chance that rules, not power, will resolve problems.

This trilateral approach should be institutionalized in a new North American Advisory Council. Unlike the sprawling and intrusive European Commission, the Commission or Council should be lean, independent, and advisory, composed of 15 distinguished individuals, 5 from each nation. Its principal purpose should be to prepare a North American agenda for leaders to consider at biannual summits and to monitor the implementation of the resulting agreements. It should be an advisor to the three leaders but also a public voice and symbol of North America. It should evaluate ways to facilitate economic integration, producing specific proposals on continental issues such as harmonizing environmental and labor standards and forging a competition policy.

The U.S. Congress should also merge the U.S.-Mexican and U.S.-Canadian interparliamentary groups into a single “North American Parliamentary Group.” A third institution should be a “Permanent Tribunal on Trade and Investment.” NAFTA established ad hoc dispute panels, but it has become difficult to find experts who do not have a conflict of interest to arbitrate conflicts. A permanent court would permit the accumulation of precedent and lay the groundwork for North American business law.

Canada and Mexico have long organized their governments to give priority to their bilateral relationships with the United States. Washington alone is poorly organized to address North American issues. To balance U.S. domestic interests with those in the continent, President Bush should appoint a White House adviser for North American affairs. Such a figure would chair a cabinet-level interagency task force on North America. No president can forge a coherent U.S. policy toward North America without such a wholesale reorganization.

For North America’s second decade, there is no higher priority than reducing the economic divide between Mexico and the rest of NAFTA. A true community or even a partnership is simply not possible when the people of one nation earn, on average, one-sixth as much as do people across the border. Mexico’s underdevelopment is a threat to its stability, to its neighbors, and to the future of integration.

Europe demonstrated that the gap could be narrowed significantly in a relatively short period with good policies and significant aid. The Council Task Force proposed serious reforms by Mexico coupled with a North American Investment Fund, which was also proposed by Senator John Cornyn. This is a far-sighted initiative that deserves the support of this Committee and Congress. I have written a report explaining the need for such a Fund and the way it could work. (See www.american.edu/cnas/publications)

North American governments can learn from the EU’s efforts to establish EU Educational and Research Centers in the United States. Centers for North American Studies in the United States, Canada, and Mexico would help people in all three countries to understand the problems and the potential of an integrated North America— and to think of themselves as North Americans. Scholarships should encourage North American students to study in each other’s country. Until a new consciousness of North America’s promise takes root, many of these proposals will remain impractical."......


Our northern and southern borders will NEVER be effectively secured. NEVER.


....."At the same time, our Task Force recommends that all three governments define and defend a continental perimeter. This means that all three governments have to have confidence that a terrorist has no more chance of entering their own country as their neighbors. A common exclusion list, better intelligence-sharing, and combined training are needed. The three governments should establish a “North American Customs and Immigration Force,” composed of officials trained together in a single professional school, and they should fashion procedures to streamline border-crossing documentation. The Department of Homeland Security should expand its mission to include continental security— a shift best achieved by incorporating Mexican and Canadian perspectives and personnel into its design and operation."


http://www.cfr.org/publication/8173/north_american_community_approach_to_security.html

[rwfromkansas]

Wow.

[American in Israel]

This is winding up into civil war at this rate. When this all comes out in the open, I want to see a lot of people in prison for fraud and corruption.

They are all great at drinking from the fountain, but not a one of them will pump the well.

[Free Vulcan]

And I know there's alot of kook stuff out there, but the not being a govt agency is true. You can read it from the one who broke it, Naked Capitalism :

"Bloomberg has asked nicely for some of this information, and is now being forced to sue under to the Freedom of Information Act, and the Fed intends to fight! This ought to be a scandal, but after the TARP, the electorate is seems resigned to taxpayer money being thrown at floundering financial enterprises with little in the way of checks or prudence. If the Fed indeed was taking conservatively valued collateral as it has always claimed it was, there would be no reason for it to attempt to squash this request. The Fed's argument, as I infer, is the loans were made by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which isn't a federal agency and thus not subject to the FOIA."

[Feiny]

I think Ron Paul is a smart honorable man and he was right about many things.....especially the Fed.

[Gondring]

I fear that many would rather sell out their country than admit that Ron Paul was right.

[newzjunkey]

I’ll take it!

[DAVEY CROCKETT]

ping

Blackmail?

[LouisianaJoanof Arc]

And this is under the Bush administration! Imagine how “transparent” things are going to be under 0bama!

The real question is why is this happening under the Bush administration?

[Sunnyflorida]

“The SEC — not Bloomberg — determines what events need to be disclosed and when.”

Idiotic reply to my post.

Go back and read my post. Maybe you will learn something, ahole.

[Sunnyflorida]

“The SEC — not Bloomberg — determines what events need to be disclosed and when.”

Idiotic reply to my post.

Go back and read my post. Maybe you will learn something, ahole.

[piasa]

Where’s El-ahrairah when we need him to go steal back all that greenstuff?

[thetru]

Most of the money has to gone to China

[publiusF27]

Thanks for a moment of sanity in this thread. When to release what financial information, and how to release it, is not a good question to be decided by internet forums, it seems...

I share Ron Paul’s views on the Fed - a bad idea through and through. But if we’re going to have a Fed, I agree that their actions need to be reported in proper context.

[GaryLee1990]

You just got to wonder how it all came down to this. So tragic.

RightWingIt.com