Caught with fingers in the Cookie Jar

Mike Davis sent me these.  I had heard the one about Feinstein, she stepped down from her chair on that committee.  Do you honestly expect Pelosi to step down?  Do you think she will be punished for it?  And, do you believe our politicians are going to do anything to help us?  I bet they get reelected.

EXCLUSIVE:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed nearly $100,000 from her political action committee to her husband’s real estate and investment firm over the past decade, a practice of paying a spouse with political donations that she supported banning last year.

Financial Leasing Services Inc. (FLS), owned by Paul F. Pelosi, has received $99,000 in rent, utilities and accounting fees from the speaker’s “PAC to the Future” over the PAC’s nine-year history.

The payments have quadrupled since Mr. Pelosi took over as treasurer of his wife’s committee in 2007, Federal Election Commission records show. FLS is on track to take in $48,000 in payments this year alone – eight times as much as it received annually from 2000 to 2005, when the committee was run by another treasurer.

Lawmakers’ frequent use of campaign donations to pay relatives emerged as an issue in the 2006 election campaigns, when the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal gave Democrats fodder to criticize Republicans such as former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas and Rep. John T. Doolittle of California for putting their wives on their campaign and PAC payrolls for fundraising work.

Last year, Mrs. Pelosi supported a bill that would have banned members of Congress from putting spouses on their campaign staffs. The bill – which passed the House in a voice vote but did not get out of a Senate committee – banned not only direct payments by congressional campaign committees and PACs to spouses for services including consulting and fundraising, but also “indirect compensation,” such as payments to companies that employ spouses.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/oct/01/pelosis-pac-pays-bills-for-spouses-firm/

 

Army contract for Feinstein’s husband

Blum is a director of firm that will get up to $600 million

David R. Baker, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, April 22, 2003

URS Corp., a San Francisco planning and engineering firm partially owned by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s husband, landed an Army contract Monday worth up to $600 million.

The award to help with troop mobilization, weapons systems training and anti-terrorism efforts is the latest in a string of plum defense jobs snared by URS. In February, the firm won an army engineering and logistics contract that could bring in $3.1 billion during the next eight years.

Government contracting has come under increasing scrutiny by Congress and citizen groups, with critics decrying the political connections of firms winning lucrative jobs. Richard Blum, Feinstein’s husband, serves on the company’s board of directors and controls about 24 percent of the firm’s stock, according to Hoover’s Inc. research firm.

A Feinstein spokesman Monday declined to comment on the contract.

Blum and several URS representatives could not be reached for comment. A Pentagon spokesman said he was unfamiliar with the contract.

Announced in a company press release Monday, the contract calls for URS Corp.’s EG&G division and partner International Consultants Inc. to help with operations planning, troop mobilization, weapons system training and anti- terrorism assessment. The contract runs for five years.

“We are very pleased with this important win, which further expands our strong relationship with the Army and demonstrates our ability to provide a full spectrum of support services to ensure that our troops remain combat ready and capable of quickly mobilizing to address threats around the world,” said George R. Melton, president of the EG&G division, in a press release.

URS boasts some 25,000 employees working in more than 20 countries. Although the firm has a long history of government work, it has focused more on those activities since acquiring EG&G from the Carlyle Group investment firm last year for about $500 million.

EG&G works with the military, NASA, and several federal departments, according to Hoover’s. The company’s areas of expertise range from designing transportation infrastructure to training people to dismantle weapons of mass destruction.

URS brought in more than $2.4 billion in revenue during 2002.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/22/MN310531.DTL

The Tax System Explained

I found this in hunting for fair taxation.  I thought it was right on.

The Tax System – Explained With Beer

 Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would gosomething like this:

 The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3.  The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. 

 So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. “Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

 They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings).The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got a dollar out of the $20,”declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!” “Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!” “That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between  all of them for even half of the bill!

 And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our  tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

 David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics

 University of Georgia

 

*For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
**For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

The New World Order, Chinese Capitolism and it’s fixed Global Warming

I know these articles are from different areas, but please read them and digest from each one. 

1.  WFO says a New World Order is necessary to fight the financial crisis:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/-New-World-Order.4573452.jp

2. WORLD Financial Chiefs headed to Washington to discuss financial crisis:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081009060122.8tk2vw73&show_article=1

3. Austrialians joke that China may be the answer to saving Capitolism:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081009081613.i24wpu2h&show_article=1

4. Economic woes may help Global Warming:

http://www.reuters.com/article/GlobalEnvironment08/idUSTRE4966A220081007

Gimme a break, quit worrying about the world.  Let’s fix us…then they will look to us for help just like they always have…well, at least until we got ourselves overly pc.

Steve

The Economy and Glenn Beck

I love to watch Glenn Beck.  He finally got there with what we’ve been talking about for years.  He finally got it that the goofs in Washington were sending us to heck in a handbasket with the economy, the New World Order, and ignoring the Constitution.  Now, he writes big articles about the economy, and that there’s nothing that can be done.  Please read them here:

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/16171/?ck=1

While Glenn is absolutely on about the economy and what they’re doing, and what they can do…he fails the test in real Reagonomics.  The answer is not them, it’s us.  We can fix this economy, if only they’ll quit trying to fix it and restore us back to the values of the constitution and patriotism.  Put policework into the gluttony of Wall Street, the NYMEX, the congress, Corporate America and the White House and get them back to working for America and not the world and watch how quick America gets back on her feet.   It ain’t gonna happen with our leaders heading to the world financial markets for advice…they don’t give a flying flip about American strength.  Now that’s what makes blood shoot outta my eyes.  Glenn, let us buy cheap gas again, get the folks a deal for decent priced products on a decent wage and watch what happens.  If you think this is Washingtons priority…think again.  What about the AIG party after the bail-out?  Oh, don’t know about that…let me give you a little taste of that…notice the arrogance in the reasoning behind the retreat!

If you’d just gotten a government bailout, you might be tempted to hold a retreat at a nice California hotel — and that’s exactly what American International Group (AIG: 2.33, -0.06, -2.51%) employees did.

 

The committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on Tuesday at 10:00 a.m. Eastern time. to address and examine downfall of AIG, the world’s largest insurance company. The committee planned to discuss the financial excesses and regulatory mistakes that led to AIG’s government bailout.

One of the items discussed was AIG’s expenditure of $440,000 for a corporate retreat at the St. Regis Monarch Beach resort in Dana Point, Calif., about midway between Los Angeles and San Diego. These funds were spent on Sept. 22, a week after the Federal Reserve extended an $85 billion emergency loan to AIG to keep it from going bankrupt due to insurance liabilities.

Click here to see the full hotel bill

According to the receipt from the St. Regis, the eight-day company retreat was a lavish one – $139,000 was spent on hotel rooms, while even more money — $147,301 — was spent on banquets. Another $23,380 was spent on undisclosed spa treatments and another $6,939 was spent on golf. A full $9,980 was spent on room service and food and cocktails at the hotel lounge.

AIG issued a statement saying that “This type of gathering is standard practice in the industry and was planned a year advance of the Federal Reserve’s loan to AIG.  We recognize, however, that even activities that have long been considered standard practice may be perceived negatively.  As a result, we are reevaluating various aspects of our operations in light of the new times in which we operate.” 

 

Standard practice…hey Glenn, why not get these guys on the show and ask em the hard questions about whether or not our taxes should pay for their debauchery.

 

Steve

Aww, The Sheiks may lose a dollar…

It never ceases to amaze me.  If this market had not been over inflated, and the dollar manipulated, we wouldn’t be watching our government frightfully bailling out everyone right now.  Did they not ask us to wean ourselves from oil…and now they’re blaming this on us for doing it.  Awww, the poor friggin fools from oil rich countries are worried their revenues will dry up.  I hope they do.  I hope they feel what our amazing government has done to us for a while.  If we survive the idiots who will vote in Barack Obama or John McCain, we deserve what we get.  Did you note the article in CNN about people still buying?  They were stating didn’t the people know there was an economic problem?  See, if it were in our hands, it could get fixed….

The following article is from Time…does it make you shed a tear for the bloated oil barons and sheiks?  See, I guess they think we’re all stupid and don’t realize that they’ve got it inflated to the point that we don’t remember whether or not it’s our fault that THEY’RE losing money?  Screw them, let their Audis and Mercedes start rusting.

How far can it fall? People have been anxiously wondering as they watch the plunging stock market. But increasingly the same question is being asked about another crucial figure: the price of oil. It has plummeted nearly 40% in just three months, from about $147 a barrel in July to below $83 on Friday, with no obvious bottom in sight. If that sounds good, you are probably a driver who winces these days at filling your gas tank. But the downward spiral could mean trouble for oil-rich countries and for the environment.

Oil analysts admit that most of them failed to predict how fast oil prices would drop. Just a few months ago, some were saying oil might reach $200 a barrel by year’s end. “The analysts have been quite surprised by the pace and volatility of the decline,” says David Fyfe, senior oil analyst for the International Energy Agency in Paris, which as a rule does not predict oil prices. “The volatility has been quite marked.”

This year’s sky-high oil prices are partly responsible for the drop. Since oil hit $100 a barrel for the first time early this year, Americans (who consume one-quarter of the world’s energy) began cutting back. When gas began selling above $4 a gallon, American consumers made “a psychological shift into the sense of crisis and a sense of permanence,” says Greg Priddy, oil analyst for the Eurasia Group in Washington. Instead of believing that gas prices would finally fall again, many began changing their daily habits — they started driving the smaller car in a two-car garage or consolidating shopping trips. That has meant a huge slump in Americans’ gas use. Even before the market meltdown, Americans consumed 800,000 barrels of oil a day less during the first half of this year than the same period last year. As demand fell, so did prices, and as prices have fallen, investors have begun pulling money out of the oil market, fearing a collapse, says Leila Benali, an expert on Middle East oil for the Cambridge Energy Research Associates in Paris, adding: “People are getting nervous about demand next year. There is talk of a global recession.”

For oil-rich countries the slump has come at a bad time. As the oil price began rising during the past few years, governments and big oil companies plowed billions into exploring and developing new fields in Russia, Angola, Mexico, Brazil and Saudi Arabia — projects whose costs have more than doubled in the past few years, in part because soaring steel prices drove up drilling equipment costs and oil-rig rentals. Just as global demand has begun to slow, millions more barrels of oil a day from new fields have hit the world market.

The big oil producers have good reason to be nervous. Many are still haunted by a disastrous error made at an Opec meeting in Jakarta in 1999, when the cartel — which produces more than a third of the world’s oil — opted to raise its production levels. Within weeks Asian stock markets tumbled, driving world oil prices down to $11 a barrel. Oil officials in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere have cited that price crash as the reason they’ve rebuffed pleas from President Bush to pump more oil. Says Benali: “Countries have learned the lessons of the past.”

Though oil-producers and environmentalists rarely agree about anything, both groups have done extremely well from sky-high oil prices during the past year. The high price at U.S. gas pumps has pushed both Barack Obama and John McCain into making the development of alternative fuels and electric cars key elements of their campaign platforms. But if gas prices continue to drop, those initiatives might begin to seem unnecessarily costly to many Americans. (Time’s Bryan Walsh reported this week that some countries are already reviewing environmental initiatives as gas prices fall.) “If gas prices drop under $3 a gallon, it will be interesting to see whether it saps the political will,” says Priddy. “Americans like their sprawl and generally don’t like to give those things up.”

If oil producers have their way, oil prices could start rising again. Their growing anxiety erupted early this week, when Iranian and Venezuelan officials warned that if Opec waited much longer before cutting its output, it could face another massive price collapse. On Thursday, Opec officials scheduled an emergency meeting in Vienna for Nov. 18 rather than wait until the cartel’s scheduled summit in Algiers in early December. In the meantime, the world’s biggest oil producer, Saudi Arabia — which increased production in the summer — has already begun loading less oil on its tankers, according to global oil figures.

For some countries there is a fear far greater than an economic recession: political turmoil. Iran, which earns 80% of its revenues from oil exports, set this year’s budget on the assumption that oil would trade at $90 a barrel — a figure which seemed conservatively low until recently, but which is now above the world price. “If the price stays there a while Iran would cut spending,” Priddy says. That might include cutting heavy gas subsidies for Iranian drivers, who have rioted in the past when the government tried to ration gas or raise the price at the pump. Hugo Chavez could face similar problems in Venezuela if oil prices drop below $75 a barrel — the rate at which the country calculated this year’s budget. The problems lower prices could cause in those countries could be more visceral than those posed so far by the current financial upheaval.