This was written by a 21 year old female who gets it. It’s her future she’s worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she’s being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.

This was in the Waco Tribune Herald, Waco, TX, Nov 18, 2011

PUT ME IN CHARGE . . .

Put me in charge of food stamps. I’d get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho’s, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I’d do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal legations. Then, we’ll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks?

You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your “home” will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a “government” job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the “common good..”

Before you write that I’ve violated someone’s rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be “demeaning” and ruin their “self- esteem,” consider that it wasn’t that long ago that taking someone else’s money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self-esteem.

If we are expected to pay for other people’s mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

AND While you are on Gov’t subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov’t welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.

LIBTARDS OF THE WEEK – THE UNWASHED WALL STREET IMOOCHER PROTESTERS, THIS ONE NAILS IT! 

Thursday, October 17, 2011  The Circus Maximus of Useless Waste-oids is in full force on Wall Street. The Soros engineered, made-for-MSM tv event has recently gained strength by the called-up labor union thugs. The union thugs have plenty of time on their hands since their “leaders” have killed the goose that laid the golden egg that was once called US manufacturing. Now, the formerly overpaid wrench-turners can rub shoulders with Generation iMoocher idjits armed with iPhones, iPads and iPods from the iBank Accounts of their iParents. What an insult all these iMoochers are to Steve Jobs! He was a man of genius and production who worked and sacrificed to create products that made life more efficient and enjoyable.   This protest has created an unholy alliance of the unemployed union laborers that once worked for exorbitant, unsustainable wages and the Gen X moochers who are more than willing to do nothing in return for exorbitant, unsustainable welfare. Only in what was once America!  What is laughable is none of the protesters really know what they’re protesting. They know it has to do with corporations, or banks, or the rich….or something….or somebody. That these unemployed, college graduates would join in cries to take wealth from the rich with a whale-like movie producer with a net worth of $50 million just adds to the entertainment! This is a parade of life’s losers. Not the pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps types of Americans who built wealth rather than expecting it.

These are the results of years of destruction of traditional American values. These kids grew up playing soccer where no team was allowed to lose, else someone’s feelings may be hurt. They were schooled on leftist doctrine that told them America was evil and corrupt. They were not allowed to fail or, again, their wittle self-esteems may be damaged. They were given cars, fine clothes, fancy electronics, etc. because their parents wanted them to have everything they didn’t have growing up. They went to expensive colleges and selected majors such as poetry and African-American Studies that have zero value in the real world. Now that they realize they are worthless bands of pathetic parasites, their only recourse is to steal more money from the dwindling producers in America.  These douche bag losers call themselves the 99%. They’re more like the 48% of Americans who have received some sort of government (i.e. taxpayer) benefits in the first quarter of 2010. While not 99%, they are still a significant percentage. Who would ever thought that half of America would become moochers on the other half? The unwashed, middle-class, socialist brats who blocked the Brooklyn Bridge the other day certainly have no problem with the concept. They didn’t block themselves. They have nowhere to be. They blocked the working producers on their way home from work to care for their families. You know, responsibility. The welfare moochers blocked those who pay their welfare benefits! A simple “thank you” might have sufficed.

-

Did you read that commie bitch Kathleen Parker last week? She referred to Rick Perry as “George W. Perry”  …  She was cancelled on an MSNBC (or was it CNN, or who cares?) show with Elliot Spitzer … What does that tell ya?   

Why is Fox News beating the crap out of CNN and MSNBC? Simple - It’s because the illiterate morons that elected obama watch Captain Kangaroo in their pajamas all day, eating Coco Puffs and Fruit Loops  …  They don’t watch news and do not even know what the issues of any campaign are.  During Howard Stern’s 2009  street interviews, obama supporters claimed to support him in part because Sarah Palin was his running mate.  Ah, don’t get me started …

Someone had to do it. Tea Party or the Whig Party, at some point, someone has to take a stand and start trying to reel in this leviathan of the sea.   

“What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound.”

Note: This update came some 24 hours after our longtime Washington D.C. Insider first outlined shocking details of an Obama administration having been “overruled” by senior military and intelligence officials leading up to the successful attack against terrorist Osama Bin Laden.  What follows is further clarification of Insider’s insights surrounding that event.
_______

Panetta admitted that possibility, but felt the opportunity to get Bin Laden outweighed that risk.  During that meeting, Hillary Clinton was first to pledge her full support for Panetta, indicating she would defend him if necessary.  Similar support was then followed by Gates.  The following day, and with Panetta’s permission, Clinton met in private with Bill Daley and urged him to get the president’s full and open approval of the Panetta plan.  Daley agreed such approval would be of great benefit to the action, and instructed Clinton to delay proceeding until he had secured that approval.  Daley contacted Clinton within hours of their meeting indicating Jarrett refused to allow the president to give that approval.  Daley then informed Clinton that he too would fully support Panetta in his actions, even if it meant disclosing the president’s indecision to the American public should that action fail to produce a successful conclusion.  Clinton took that message back to Panetta and the CIA director initiated the 48 hour engagement order.  At this point, the President of the United States was not informed of the engagement order – it did not originate from him, and for several hours after the order had been given and the special ops forces were preparing for action into Pakistan from their position in Afghanistan, Daley successfully kept Obama and Jarrett insulated from that order.

The Market Ticker <http://market-ticker.denninger.net/>
Posted by Karl Denninger

 <http://market-ticker.denninger.net/authors/2-Karl-Denninger> 

I am constantly amused by those people who claim there is some vast “conspiracy” in this country when it comes to banks, balance sheets, and fraudulent lending and accounting. There is no conspiracy.

The FDIC does us the courtesy of explaining it virtually every Friday night, right on their web page. <http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2010/index.html>I am simply going to take last night’s bank closures, which numbered four.  One of them has no “deposit insurance fund” estimated loss available, because they didn’t find someone to take the assets - they’re just mailing checks.  But the other three do.Waterford Bank, Germantown MD <http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2010/pr10045.html> : $155.6 million in assets, $156.4 in insured deposits.  They were “underwater” by $800,000, right?  Wrong:  Estimated loss, $51 million.  That is, the assets of $155.6 million were overvalued by approximately 30% at the time of seizure.Bank of Illinois, Normal IL <http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2010/pr10044.html> : $211.7 million in assets, $198.5 million in deposits.  They were “underwater” by $13.2 million (which is why they were seized), right?  Wrong: Estimated loss $53.7 million.  That is, the the assets of $211.7 million were overvalued by more than 25% at the time of seizure.Sun American Bank, Boca Raton FL <

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2010/pr10043.html> :  $535.7 million in assets (so they claimed anyway), $443.5 million in total deposits.  Heh, why did you seize them - they have more assets than liabilities?  Oh wait: Estimated loss: $103.8 million, so the actual assets are worth $443.5 - $103.8, or $339.7 million.  That is, the assets of $535.7 million were overvalued by a whopping 37% at the time of seizure.This isn’t new, by the way.  In August of 2009 <http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1352-We-Need-RTC-II-NOW.html>  I went through Colonial Bank’s failure based on BB&T’s presentation to its shareholders on the “merger” - and gift it was given by the FDIC.  It too showed that Colonial had been carrying assets on their books at a ridiculous 37% above where BB&T ultimately marked them as a whole.
Folks, your bank is being assessed deposit insurance premiums to pay for these losses.  You are paying these losses through increased fees and interest expense on your credit cards and all other manner of borrowing.You are paying for outrageous, pernicious and endemic balance sheet fraud.
There is no conspiracy.  It is right under your nose.  One of these three banks, based on their balance sheet, wasn’t even underwater - it was “to the good” by nearly $100 million dollars.The balance sheet was a flat, bald-faced lie.
You want to sit for this?
Why should you?
Now let’s ask the inconvenient question:

Are the big banks - specifically, Citibank, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and JP Morgan - all similarly overvaluing their assets?
Why should we believe they are not?  You can go through more than a year’s worth of FDIC bank seizure information and in essentially every single case you will find that overvaluations of somewhere from 20-50% have in fact occurred, yet not one indictment for book-cooking has issued.
So let’s be generous and assume that the “big banks” are over-valuing their assets by 25% - the lower end of the range of what the FDIC says is, through actual experience, what’s going on, and add it all up.
Bank of America <http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6877358-19747-27030&type=sect&dcn=0001193125-09-227720>  shows $2.25 trillion in assets.
Citibank <http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6877451-520470-529580&type=sect&dcn=0001047469-09-009754>  shows $1.89 trillion in assets.
JP Morgan/Chase <http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6879652-404464-409199&type=sect&dcn=0000950123-09-060099>  shows $2.04 trillion in assets.
And Wells Fargo <http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6443748-615551-618684&type=sect&dcn=0000950134-09-003967>  shows $1.31 trillion in assets.
This totals $7.49 trillion smackers.The FDIC’s experience with seizing banks thus far suggests quite strongly that all four of these entities are lying about these valuations, and that were they to be seized the loss embedded in them (and for which you, the taxpayer would be responsible) is somewhere between $1.49 and $2.99 trillion dollars.Incidentally, neither the FDIC or Treasury happens to have either $1.49 or $2.99 trillion laying around, and it is highly questionable if they could raise it, should that become necessary.

FHLB Seattle recently filed suit <http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/2005-Clap-Clap-Weil-and-The-Mark-To-Market-Scam.html>  against the bundlers of this trash, claiming, surprise-surprise, that the real loss is not $12 million, not $300 million, but $311 million - on that bundle of trash alone.  In all they are seeking $2 billion in damages.We have now learned, a year into this “experiment” with mark-to-model promulgated at gunpoint by Congress that:
The banks indeed have been lying about asset valuation and the proof comes in the form of the FDIC seizures, which in essentially case have documented massive and outrageous overvaluation of assets on bank balance sheets.The claimed “mark to model” losses, which were tiny compared to the market-price losses, were in fact fictions, to the point that the poster child of the “mark to model” argument is now suing the purveyors of the instruments supposedly not to be marked to the market for losses that exceed what the market-based loss was back in March of 2009.