Author: Ken Coman
•8:47 PM

There have been times in the past 12 months where I have felt that I would lose friendships over my political views because they have differed at times from the President’s. This is a very sad thing for me because, above all, I wish to always show myself to be a true friend to everyone – no matter their political ideology or theology.

I therefore wanted to take a moment and say, in all kindness and respect, that not only is it my right to disagree, it is my duty to not be supportive of everything a politician wishes to accomplish.

It is the ritual of governments of conquest and superstition to require submission to the ruler – not that of Democratic Republics. All of the popery of those governments with their jewels, parades, propaganda and wars is about the rulers and aligning the people with the One. Such governments are empty in their ability to protect and preserve the Rights of Man for their citizens and their posterity because they are contingent upon the imperfect, mortal men that lead them. There are times when there are just kings and leaders and the people are blessed. But there are more times when the leaders are not just and the people mourn.

Our Republican form of government, however, is a blessing to us because it is about the laws and the justness of them that we are to support – not the people we elect to write those laws. No matter how much we may love one leader, we should not entrust to him or her those powers we would not entrust to someone who would/could abuse them because our government rapidly changes hands and the future is permanently damaged when the short term is mistaken as what will always be.

Jefferson said, “Let no more be heard [the] talk of trust in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.”

I am no more an Obama supporter than I was a Bush supporter, a Reagan supporter or a Clinton supporter. I am an American and a supporter of Law, Liberty, Justice, and Freedom and all those measures intended to support such principles. Because this is the kind of person I am, I will disagree with the President and Congress. However, I will support every one of their policies that adhere to the principles of Freedom - regardless of the party and name of the politician.

No man deserves our full faith and support - to question is our duty and obligation as that is the last check on government power. Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism. We shouldn't be afraid to speak the truth and criticize our elected officials – even if we voted for them – especially when we voted for them. We the People cannot afford to be or do otherwise.

So, am I an Obama supporter? No, I am a Freedom, Justice and Liberty supporter. And when Obama supports Freedom, Justice and Liberty he and I are aligned.

Author: Ken Coman
•10:32 AM
I am a friend of immigration reform. I believe in the goodness of immigration and of the wealth that other cultures have brought to our great land and will continue to bring to it in the future. I also believe the best way to preserve the America we love is to let it be a land of liberty to all the world and to welcome with open arms all the good brothers and sisters of the human race our country can support.

I believe also that the future of America’s potential lies, in large part, on the issue of immigration reform. It is a fact that Americans are not keeping up with many parts of the world in education, engineering and the sciences. Immigration reform should make it much easier and inviting for educated, capable individuals to find their way to the United States to help carry us forward into the future. Both Alan Greenspan in the Age of Turbulence and Thomas Friedman in The World is Flat stress this obvious point: America will be unable to compete in the global economy unless immigration laws are reformed.

Additionally, besides the higher knowledge based jobs we are struggling to fill with home grown talent, our economy has a great need for low skilled labor – whether it be in the fields, kitchens, manufacturing or hospitality – there is a real need for all kinds of labor and jobs that many illegal aliens now fill. If there were not a need, there would not be a person filling that job.

My heart goes out to those good individuals who are here now but who cannot receive the protection of the laws of the land because they are not citizens of it. My heart goes out to their children because they will grow up in a country who has used their families, but not welcomed them. My heart goes out to the mothers and fathers who, to feed their families, have chosen to live under different names and under the constant threat of prosecution. Maintaining the status quo or imposing even harsher immigration laws and penalties is a recipe for economic, social and political turmoil - not to mention the decline of American influence in the world and our own standard of living.

Even our founding fathers knew the importance of immigration – and immigration “reform” in their own day. For on July 4th, 1776, the unanimous voice of congress assembled declared that King George had “endeavored to prevent the population of these states [by] obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; [and refused] to pass others to encourage their migrations hither…”

Congress has become the King George this time and it is up to you and I to stand by America and urge our representatives in 2010 to encourage the legal population of these states, broaden our laws for Naturalization of Foreigners and pass laws that encourage immigration to our great country. This reform will level the playing field between those who are here legally and those who weren’t, will allow the law to be applied to all equally, and will bring about the natural shift in the labor balance that is needed and long overdue.
Author: Ken Coman
•11:06 AM

This was another article I thought was telling about the security of the overall financial system at the present. It doesn't mean that things won't turn around - it just means that presently the insurance company that insures the banks needs some insuring itself...

From the New York Times

The government-administered insurance fund that protects depositors fell into the red for the first time since the fallout from the savings-and-loan crisis of the early 1990s as the pace of bank failures accelerated.

The fund had a negative balance of $8.2 billion at the end of the third quarter, federal regulators said Tuesday. Bank customers, however, should remain confident that their deposits would be protected since most of the amount reflects money that Federal Insurance Deposit Corporation has already set aside to cover the losses from future bank failures.

Officials of the F.D.I.C. said in October that the deposit insurance fund had been depleted, but the third-quarter report card on the banking industry issued on Tuesday was the first time that hard numbers had been released. Even amid early signs that the economy is recovering, the report suggested that the country’s 8,100 lenders remain in fragile condition.

In its state of the industry report, the F.D.I.C. reported that banks posted a $2.8 billion gain in the third quarter, after a $4.3 billion loss in the previous period. Meanwhile, the number of “problem banks” that run the biggest risk of collapse increased to 552, from 416 in the second quarter. The number of bad loans of nearly every stripe — credit cards, mortgages, small business and commercial real estate — continue to grow, albeit at a slower pace.

“The credit adversity we have been discussing for some time remains with us, and we expect it will be a couple of more quarters before we see a meaningful improvement in that trend,” said Sheila C. Bair, the F.D.I.C. chairwoman. “I am optimistic that if we address these problems head on, we will see clear signs of improvement in bank earnings and lending in 2010.

Even so, the number of bank failures will probably keep climbing. So far, the F.D.I.C. has seized and sold 124 banks in 2009, and analysts expect hundreds more to collapse in the months ahead. That has put significant pressure on the F.D.I.C. fund, which posted a negative balance for the first time since 1992 when regulators cleaned up the carnage from hundreds of failed thrifts and other commercial lenders.

Federal officials have also taken action to replenish the fund. The agency recently approved plans calling for industry to lend money to the insurance fund by ordering banks to prepay annual assessments that would otherwise have been due through 2012.

That move is expected to add about $45 billion to the fund, which stood at $34.6 billion a year ago, but should avoid straining bank earnings because of favorable accounting treatment. It also averts the political risk of tapping an emergency credit line from the Treasury Department, although some banking experts say they believe that such action may still be necessary.

The industry report card also showed how the banks’ troubles have spread. Two years ago, the problems seemed to be contained to a handful of big banks, which took large markdowns on the value of complex mortgage assets and other securities.

But as the big banks have regained their swagger from big trading profits over the last three quarters, the problems afflicting the bulk of the industry’s lenders — soured loans made to consumers and property developers — have grown considerably worse. Over all, banks charged off $50.8 billion in the third quarter, or 2.71 percent of assets. And lending dropped by the largest percentage since the government began collecting data in 1984.

More banks have also collapsed because of the bad debts. Federal regulators seized 50 banks in the third quarter, including regional ones like Colonial Bank of Alabama, Guaranty Financial of Texas and Corus Bankshares of Chicago. That was approximately the twice the total number of banks that failed in 2008.

The high cost of the failures has strained the deposit insurance fund, which thousand of banks support by paying quarterly premiums. As of the end of the third quarter, its balance stood at negative $8.2 billion. The bulk of the fund’s losses stem from money that regulators set aside to cover future failures, allowing it to operate in the red.

F.D.I.C. officials expect that bank failures will cost the insurance fund $100 billion over the next five years. More than half of that cost has already been accounted for, while the new prepayment plan is expected to cover the rest. If losses grew considerably worse, officials might have to impose additional special assessments on banks or draw on the Treasury’s backup credit lines.

In late August, Ms. Bair said she did not anticipate having to immediately tap that line of credit, although she did not rule it out. “I never say never,” Ms. Bair said at the time.

A version of this article appeared in print on November 25, 2009, on page B4 of the New York edition.

Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/business/economy/25fdic.html?sudsredirect=true on December 14, 2009
Author: Ken Coman
•6:04 PM
I saw this today:

"COLUMBIA, S.C. – South Carolina lawmakers recommended a formal rebuke on Wednesday for Gov. Mark Sanford for his summertime tryst and travel, opting to censure the Republican after nixing an impeachment measure.

A panel considering impeachment called his trip to see his Argentine mistress embarrassing and said his use of state planes was poor judgment, but they mostly agreed it was not serious misconduct that merited removal from office. Instead, the seven lawmakers unanimously sent a full legislative committee a measure that would censure Sanford."

Can someone please help me understand how committing adultery, stealing state tax payer money in the form of fuel and transportation (and who knows what else) to pursue this affair, disappearing for 7 days in Buenos Aires and lying to the public about it not serious misconduct?! I must have missed something.

The duplicity in politics is truly sickening...

Accessed at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091209/ap_on_re_us/us_sc_governor on December 9, 2009
Author: Ken Coman
•2:46 PM
Published: November 22, 2009

WASHINGTON — The United States government is financing its more than trillion-dollar-a-year borrowing with i.o.u.’s on terms that seem too good to be true.

The Debt Buildup

But that happy situation, aided by ultralow interest rates, may not last much longer.

Treasury officials now face a trifecta of headaches: a mountain of new debt, a balloon of short-term borrowings that come due in the months ahead, and interest rates that are sure to climb back to normal as soon as the Federal Reserve decides that the emergency has passed.

Even as Treasury officials are racing to lock in today’s low rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent legions of overstretched homeowners into default on their mortgages.

With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher.

In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The potential for rapidly escalating interest payouts is just one of the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means.

The surge in borrowing over the last year or two is widely judged to have been a necessary response to the financial crisis and the deep recession, and there is still a raging debate over how aggressively to bring down deficits over the next few years. But there is little doubt that the United States’ long-term budget crisis is becoming too big to postpone.

Americans now have to climb out of two deep holes: as debt-loaded consumers, whose personal wealth sank along with housing and stock prices; and as taxpayers, whose government debt has almost doubled in the last two years alone, just as costs tied to benefits for retiring baby boomers are set to explode.

The competing demands could deepen political battles over the size and role of the government, the trade-offs between taxes and spending, the choices between helping older generations versus younger ones, and the bottom-line questions about who should ultimately shoulder the burden.

“The government is on teaser rates,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that advocates lower deficits. “We’re taking out a huge mortgage right now, but we won’t feel the pain until later.”

So far, the demand for Treasury securities from investors and other governments around the world has remained strong enough to hold down the interest rates that the United States must offer to sell them. Indeed, the government paid less interest on its debt this year than in 2008, even though it added almost $2 trillion in debt.

The government’s average interest rate on new borrowing last year fell below 1 percent. For short-term i.o.u.’s like one-month Treasury bills, its average rate was only sixteen-hundredths of a percent.

“All of the auction results have been solid,” said Matthew Rutherford, the Treasury’s deputy assistant secretary in charge of finance operations. “Investor demand has been very broad, and it’s been increasing in the last couple of years.”

The problem, many analysts say, is that record government deficits have arrived just as the long-feared explosion begins in spending on benefits under Medicare and Social Security. The nation’s oldest baby boomers are approaching 65, setting off what experts have warned for years will be a fiscal nightmare for the government.

“What a good country or a good squirrel should be doing is stashing away nuts for the winter,” said William H. Gross, managing director of the Pimco Group, the giant bond-management firm. “The United States is not only not saving nuts, it’s eating the ones left over from the last winter.”

The current low rates on the country’s debt were caused by temporary factors that are already beginning to fade. One factor was the economic crisis itself, which caused panicked investors around the world to plow their money into the comparative safety of Treasury bills and notes. Even though the United States was the epicenter of the global crisis, investors viewed Treasury securities as the least dangerous place to park their money.

On top of that, the Fed used almost every tool in its arsenal to push interest rates down even further. It cut the overnight federal funds rate, the rate at which banks lend reserves to one another, to almost zero. And to reduce longer-term rates, it bought more than $1.5 trillion worth of Treasury bonds and government-guaranteed securities linked to mortgages.

Those conditions are already beginning to change. Global investors are shifting money into riskier investments like stocks and corporate bonds, and they have been pouring money into fast-growing countries like Brazil and China.

The Fed, meanwhile, is already halting its efforts at tamping down long-term interest rates. Fed officials ended their $300 billion program to buy up Treasury bonds last month, and they have announced plans to stop buying mortgage-backed securities by the end of next March.

Eventually, though probably not until at least mid-2010, the Fed will also start raising its benchmark interest rate back to more historically normal levels.

The United States will not be the only government competing to refinance huge debt. Japan, Germany, Britain and other industrialized countries have even higher government debt loads, measured as a share of their gross domestic product, and they too borrowed heavily to combat the financial crisis and economic downturn. As the global economy recovers and businesses raise capital to finance their growth, all that new government debt is likely to put more upward pressure on interest rates.

Even a small increase in interest rates has a big impact. An increase of one percentage point in the Treasury’s average cost of borrowing would cost American taxpayers an extra $80 billion this year — about equal to the combined budgets of the Department of Energy and the Department of Education.

But that could seem like a relatively modest pinch. Alan Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price, estimated that the Treasury’s tab for debt service this year would have been $221 billion higher if it had faced the same interest rates as it did last year.

The White House estimates that the government will have to borrow about $3.5 trillion more over the next three years. On top of that, the Treasury has to refinance, or roll over, a huge amount of short-term debt that was issued during the financial crisis. Treasury officials estimate that about 36 percent of the government’s marketable debt — about $1.6 trillion — is coming due in the months ahead.

To lock in low interest rates in the years ahead, Treasury officials are trying to replace one-month and three-month bills with 10-year and 30-year Treasury securities. That strategy will save taxpayers money in the long run. But it pushes up costs drastically in the short run, because interest rates are higher for long-term debt.

Adding to the pressure, the Fed is set to begin reversing some of the policies it has been using to prop up the economy. Wall Street firms advising the Treasury recently estimated that the Fed’s purchases of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities pushed down long-term interest rates by about one-half of a percentage point. Removing that support could in itself add $40 billion to the government’s annual tab for debt service.

This month, the Treasury Department’s private-sector advisory committee on debt management warned of the risks ahead.

“Inflation, higher interest rate and rollover risk should be the primary concerns,” declared the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, a group of market experts that provide guidance to the government, on Nov. 4.

“Clever debt management strategy,” the group said, “can’t completely substitute for prudent fiscal policy.”

__________________________

Accessed on December 5th at http://s.nyt.com/u/C9O