Eager not to be limited by legislative gridlock, Obama is also expected to announce executive actions on job training, retirement security and help for the long-term unemployed in finding work.
Among those actions is a new retirement savings plan geared toward workers whose employers don’t currently offer such plans.
The program would allow first-time savers to start building up savings in Treasury bonds that eventually could be converted into a traditional IRAs, according to two people who have discussed the proposal with the administration. Those people weren’t authorized to discuss it ahead of the announcement and insisted on anonymity.
Of course, this is not what the CFPB suggested a year ago… We’re sure the government is just trying to protect your retirement account from terrorists. From Bloomberg:
The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is weighing whether it should take on a role in helping Americans manage the $ 19.4 trillion they have put into retirement savings, a move that would be the agency’s first foray into consumer investments.
That’s one of the things we’ve been exploring and are interested in in terms of whether and what authority we have,” bureau director Richard Cordray said in an interview. He didn’t provide additional details.
The bureau’s core concern is that many Americans, notably those from the retiring Baby Boom generation, may fall prey to financial scams, according to three people briefed on the CFPB’s deliberations who asked not to be named because the matter is still under discussion.
Treasury nominee says bank regulations won"t work for insurance firms http://currenteconomictrendsandnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/f856b__p-89EKCgBk8MZdE.gif
Federal Reserve Board Governor Sarah Bloom Raskin delivers a speech entitled ”Mortgage Servicing Issues” before the National Consumer Law Center conference in Boston, Massachusetts November 12, 2010.
Outgoing U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner arrives for the presidential inauguration on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington January 21, 2013.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew speaks about the economy at an event hosted by the Commonwealth Club of California at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California, August 22, 2013.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew testifies before a Senate Banking hearing on ”The Financial Stability Oversight Council Annual Report to Congress.” on Capitol Hill in Washington May 21, 2013.
It was five years ago that the president of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvilli, who was installed in power by the Washington supported “Rose Revolution,” launched a military invasion of South Ossetia, a break-away province under its own government. The Georgian attack killed Russian peace-keeping troops and numerous Ossetians.
The Russian military response overwhelmed the US trained and equipped Georgian army in 5 days to the embarrassment of Saakashvilli and his Washington sponsors.
Washington began the training and equipping of the Georgian military in 2002, and continues to conduct joint military exercises with Georgia. In March and April of this year the US again conducted joint military exercises with Georgia. Washington is pushing to have Georgia admitted as a member of NATO.
Most analysts regard it as unlikely that Saakashvilli on his own would violate the peace agreement and attack Russian troops. Certainly Saakashvilli would have cleared the aggression with his Washington sponsor.
Saakashvilli’s attempt to recover the territories was an opportunity for Washington to test Russia. Washington saw the attack as a way of embarrassing the Russian government and as a way of testing Russia’s response and military in action. If Russia did not respond, the government would be embarrassed by its failure to protect its interests and the lives of those Russia regards as citizens. If Russia did respond, Russia could be denounced, as it was by President George Bush, as a bully that invaded a “democratic country” with a Washington-installed president. Especially interesting to Washington was the ability to observe the Russian military’s tactics and operational capabilities.
North Ossetia is part of Russia. South Ossetia extends into Georgia. In 1801 Ossetia and Georgia became part of Russia and subsequently were part of the Soviet Union. Under Russian law former Soviet citizens have the right to be Russian citizens. Russia permitted Georgia to become independent, but South Ossetia and Abkhazia broke away from Georgia in the 1990s.
If Washington succeeds in installing Georgia into NATO, then an attempt by Georgia to recover what it regards as lost territories would escalate the conflict. An attack by Georgia would comprise an attack by the US and NATO against Russia. Despite the risk to Europe of being pulled into a war with Russia, this month the chief of Denmark’s Home Guard was in Georgia on Washington’s mission discussing cooperation between the defense ministries of Denmark and Georgia on regional security issues.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Georgia lies to the East of the Black Sea. What “regional security issues” does Georgia have with Denmark and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization? NATO was established to defend Western Europe against Soviet attack.
Finland and Sweden remained neutral during the Cold War, but both are now being recruited by NATO. NATO lost its purpose with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Yet, it has been greatly expanded and now includes former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire. NATO has become a cover for US military aggression and supplies troops for Washington’s wars. Georgia’s troops are fighting for Washington in Afghanistan and fought for Washington in Iraq.
Washington kept NATO alive and made it into a mercenary army that serves Washington’s world empire.
In a provocation to both Russia and China, the US is currently conducting military exercises in Mongolia. Troops from Korea and Tajikistan, formerly part of the Soviet Union, are also participating. Washington calls such operations “building interoperability between peacekeeping nations.” Obviously, foreign military forces are being incorporated into the Empire’s army.
Are Americans aware that Washington is conducting military exercises all over the world, is surrounding Russia and China with military bases, and now has an Africa Command? Have Congress and the American people signed off on Amerika Uber Alles? Shouldn’t Washington and the military/security complex be reined in before Washington’s aggression triggers a nuclear war?
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is the father of Reaganomics and the former head of policy at the Department of Treasury. He is a columnist and was previously the editor of the Wall Street Journal. His latest book, “How the Economy Was Lost: The War of the Worlds,” details why America is disintegrating.
This article was posted: Friday, August 9, 2013 at 5:32 am
Taxpayer will foot the bill for George Osborne’s expenses at secret meeting
Steve Watson Infowars.com June 21, 2013
The British government has officially responded to a Freedom of Information Act request regarding the Chancellor of The Exchequer’s presence at the 2013 Bilderberg Group meeting.
In a letter penned by the Treasury, James Underwood of the Rights Unit, provides answers to three questions penned by Alexander Baron of the Digital Journal.
In his May 7th letter, Baron asked whether George Osborne, Britain’s head finance minister, would attend the Bilderberg meeting held in Watford from 6-9 June. He also asked in what capacity Osborne would be attending and who would be paying for his expenses.
The Treasury responded AFTER the conclusion of the conference to confirm that Osborne did indeed attend, and that his expenses would be paid for by the Treasury – ie the taxpayer.
While the government’s response claims that the Chancellor attended as a private individual, it also states that “For discussions in the periphery of the Bilderberg meeting, on issues of concern to the UK, the Chancellor acts in an official capacity.”
The letter also states that the Bilderberg meeting “affords the opportunity to meet other Finance Ministers and senior members of International Organisations,” and compares it to EU, IMF and G7 and G20 meetings.
Of course, the difference is that all of those meetings are on the record, where as Bilderberg takes place in total secrecy behind closed doors. The admission that George Osborne held secret discussions at Bilderberg in an official capacity with other finance leaders and the heads of international banking, at the expense of the taxpayer, represents a direct violation of the Ministerial code.
MP’s are not authorised to attend private meetings without disclosing details to the public, and they are also supposed to have a secretary on hand making minutes, which is not the case at Bilderberg. Even if Osborne held some discussions in a personal capacity, rather than an official one, that can still be classed as a conflict of interest given that he is an elected official.
This is not the first time that Osborne has been caught in the act. In 2011, The London Guardian reported that according to the Treasury, Osborne was attending the Bilderberg meeting in Switzerland in an official capacity as the British Chancellor. Despite the fact that this violates the Ministerial code, Osborne faced no repercussions.
Both Osborne and his opposition counterpart, Ed Balls (as well as Prime Minister David Cameron) attended the elite meeting this year. The two are often painted up as bitter political rivals in the British media, yet they have attended several of the secret confabs together in recent years.
Both Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson of Infowars confronted Mr Balls, the shadow Chancellor, when they ran into him at the BBC in London during a live broadcast that Alex was invited to appear on.
Balls refused to discuss his Bilderberg attendance and even denied that he had sworn to uphold the Ministerial code:
Taxpayer will foot the bill for George Osborne’s expenses at secret meeting
Steve Watson Infowars.com June 21, 2013
The British government has officially responded to a Freedom of Information Act request regarding the Chancellor of The Exchequer’s presence at the 2013 Bilderberg Group meeting.
In a letter penned by the Treasury, James Underwood of the Rights Unit, provides answers to three questions penned by Alexander Baron of the Digital Journal.
In his May 7th letter, Baron asked whether George Osborne, Britain’s head finance minister, would attend the Bilderberg meeting held in Watford from 6-9 June. He also asked in what capacity Osborne would be attending and who would be paying for his expenses.
The Treasury responded AFTER the conclusion of the conference to confirm that Osborne did indeed attend, and that his expenses would be paid for by the Treasury – ie the taxpayer.
While the government’s response claims that the Chancellor attended as a private individual, it also states that “For discussions in the periphery of the Bilderberg meeting, on issues of concern to the UK, the Chancellor acts in an official capacity.”
The letter also states that the Bilderberg meeting “affords the opportunity to meet other Finance Ministers and senior members of International Organisations,” and compares it to EU, IMF and G7 and G20 meetings.
Of course, the difference is that all of those meetings are on the record, where as Bilderberg takes place in total secrecy behind closed doors. The admission that George Osborne held secret discussions at Bilderberg in an official capacity with other finance leaders and the heads of international banking, at the expense of the taxpayer, represents a direct violation of the Ministerial code.
MP’s are not authorised to attend private meetings without disclosing details to the public, and they are also supposed to have a secretary on hand making minutes, which is not the case at Bilderberg. Even if Osborne held some discussions in a personal capacity, rather than an official one, that can still be classed as a conflict of interest given that he is an elected official.
This is not the first time that Osborne has been caught in the act. In 2011, The London Guardian reported that according to the Treasury, Osborne was attending the Bilderberg meeting in Switzerland in an official capacity as the British Chancellor. Despite the fact that this violates the Ministerial code, Osborne faced no repercussions.
Both Osborne and his opposition counterpart, Ed Balls (as well as Prime Minister David Cameron) attended the elite meeting this year. The two are often painted up as bitter political rivals in the British media, yet they have attended several of the secret confabs together in recent years.
Both Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson of Infowars confronted Mr Balls, the shadow Chancellor, when they ran into him at the BBC in London during a live broadcast that Alex was invited to appear on.
Balls refused to discuss his Bilderberg attendance and even denied that he had sworn to uphold the Ministerial code:
FILE – In this Feb. 13, 2013, file photo, Jack Lew testifies at his confirmation hearing to be the new Treasury Secretary in Washington. The Senate confirmed Lew on Wednesday, Feb. 27, 2013, to be Treasury secretary, affirming President Barack Obama’s choice of a budget expert at a time when Congress and the White House are at odds over sharp government spending cuts. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate on Wednesday confirmed Jacob Lew to be Treasury secretary, affirming President Barack Obama’s choice of a budget expert at a time when Congress and the White House are at odds over sharp government spending cuts.
The vote was 71 to 26 to support the nomination. A total of 25 Republicans and independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont voted against Lew’s confirmation.
Lew, 57, had most recently served as Obama’s chief of staff. He succeeds Timothy Geithner, who completed a tumultuous four-year term in which he helped lead the administration’s response to the financial crisis and recession.
Lew is scheduled to be sworn in on Thursday. He will take over just one day before automatic spending cuts are set to take effect. He’s likely to take part in any negotiations to reverse the cuts, and also in key budget talks next month to continue funding the government.
Lew began his government service in the 1980s as an aide to House Speaker Tip O’Neill. He brings nearly three decades of government service to the job, including two stints as White House budget director.
“Mr. Lew is well-qualified to be the nation’s next Treasury secretary,” said Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. “He has demonstrated time and again that he has the knowledge and expertise” to deal with the country’s budget problems.
But Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who opposed the nomination, said Lew as budget director was the architect of the Obama’s administration’s failed efforts to get soaring deficits under control.
In a statement issued after the vote, Obama said, “At this critical time for our economy and our country, there is no one more qualified for this position than Jack. … His reputation as a master of fiscal issues who can work with leaders on both sides of the aisle has already helped him succeed in some of the toughest jobs in Washington.”
During his confirmation hearing, Lew signaled no major economic policy changes. He advocated a balanced approach to reducing the long-term budget deficit through spending cuts and additional tax revenue.
He said he would be open to reforms to Medicare, but he didn’t spell out any details. Lew also said he would work with the committee on a rewrite of the tax code.
Beyond the budget, Lew is expected to hew closely to the positions Geithner struck on Europe’s debt crisis, the U.S. relationship with China and the administration’s defense of the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law that the banking industry has fought to weaken.
Some Republicans voted against Lew because they were not satisfied with his answers about his previous employment with Citigroup, including a brief time when he was chief operating officer for an investment unit in 2008. The unit has been criticized for making risky investments that imploded during the financial crisis. And Lew received a bonus of nearly $ 1 million in early 2009, a time when Citi was being bailed out by taxpayers.
Lew told the panel that he didn’t make decisions about the investments being offered to clients. He said his bonus reflected compensation for his work.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, opposed Lew’s nomination. He cited questions about his time at Citi, as well as Lew’s compensation while working as chief operating officer at New York University.
“Mr. Lew’s eagerness and skill in obtaining bonuses, severance payments, housing allowances and other perks raises concerns about whether he appreciates who pays the bills,” Grassley said.
One potential weakness for Lew: His relative inexperience with financial markets and international economic crises — areas that had played to Geithner’s background. Analysts think Lew will keep pressuring Europe to deal aggressively with its budget and debt issues. But they think this will consume less of his time given that Europe’s debt crisis now poses less of a threat to the global economy.
On trade, Lew is expected to keep prodding China. The U.S. trade gap with the world’s second-largest economy hit another record high last year. No breakthrough is expected, though.
Lew will also need to calm investors who have grown concerned about possible currency wars after Japan’s new government sought to lower the value of the yen as a way to boost exports and its weak economy. A weaker yen makes Japanese goods cheaper overseas and foreign goods costlier in Japan.
And Lew will need to defend the Dodd-Frank Act, which overhauled financial regulation after the 2008 crisis. Since the law was passed in 2010, Wall Street has fought to weaken many of its stricter regulations.
He may also need to work on his signature, which starts off with a soft “J” but is followed by seven loopy scribbles that render it illegible. The Treasury secretary’s signature is emblazoned in the lower right corner of U.S. dollar bills of all denominations.
When he announced Lew’s nomination, Obama said Lew had promised to work to make one letter legible “in order not to debase our currency.”
(Copyright 2013 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
