Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reveals

TB1996

Star
Registered
http://www.thenewamerican.com/econom...ts-of-interest

During a 2½ year period starting at the end of 2007, the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in secret bailouts to banks and other companies around the world, according to a government audit of some of the U.S. central bank’s operations. Much of the Fed's largesse was lavished on banks in Europe (such as Barclays, left) and Asia, the audit revealed. More than $3 trillion, for example, went to financial institutions in just five European countries. Trillions more flowed toward some of the biggest banks in America. Institutions from Brazil and Mexico to South Korea and Canada also benefited.

The 266-page report, produced by Congress’s non-partisan investigative service known as the Government Accountability Office (GAO), has already sparked intense outrage since its release on July 21. Fed apologists, however, have been quick to defend the actions, saying they were “necessary” to “save” the economy and justified under the Federal Reserve Act.

“The scale and nature of this assistance amounted to an unprecedented expansion of the Federal Reserve System’s traditional role as lender-of-last-resort to depository institutions,” the report stated.

Beyond the secret bailouts — to put the figure in perspective, consider that the output of the entire U.S. economy last year was well under $15 trillion — problems with conflicts of interest and no-bid contracts also featured prominently in the audit report.

One example highlighted by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I - Vt.) was the CEO of JP Morgan Chase serving on the board of the New York Fed even as his firm scooped up almost $500 billion from the central bank. The bank was simultaneously helping to administer the Fed’s secret bailouts.

But JP Morgan Chase was hardly the only example. According to the analysis, more than 80 percent of the Fed’s largest contracts to manage the programs were awarded without bidding.

Many of the companies that received the contracts were also being showered with central-bank bailouts at the same time. And more than a few insiders were granted “waivers” to hold investments in companies that were being rescued by the Fed.

"As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the world," Sen. Sanders, a self-described socialist, said in a statement about the report. "This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you're-on-your-own individualism for everyone else."

The congressional investigation was triggered as part of the financial “reform” bill passed last year despite strong Fed opposition. After the original “audit the Fed” bill by Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) passed in the House and became extraordinarily popular with Americans, Sen. Sanders helped ensure that only a watered-down version made it out of the Senate.

But even with what is known so far, critics are on the attack. Another report about the Fed is also due to be released in October of this year. And in recent months, other previously secret information about the Fed and its operations has come out following years of litigation.

All of the disclosures have fueled a growing anti-Fed movement aiming to eventually abolish the central bank - essentially a sort of banking cartel with private shareholders but some veneer of government oversight. Sen. Sanders suggested in his public statement, however, that the institution should merely be “reformed” to serve "working families" and not just Wall Street CEOs.

"No agency of the United States government should be allowed to bailout a foreign bank or corporation without the direct approval of Congress and the president," he noted in the statement, perhaps not realizing that the Fed, by its own admission, is not an agency of the government. "No one who works for a firm receiving direct financial assistance from the Fed should be allowed to sit on the Fed's board of directors or be employed by the Fed."

The biggest single beneficiary of the Fed’s bailouts was Citigroup, which received about $2.5 trillion in assistance. Several other top banks in the United States, including Bank of America and Morgan Stanley also benefited to the tune of trillions of dollars. British bank Barclays PLC took close to $1 trillion.

The GAO report suggested that the Fed should implement better policies to deal with conflicts of interest. Its policies on awarding contracts, record keeping and risk management should also be revised, the agency recommended.

The Fed’s chief lawyer responded by saying that the central bank would “strongly consider” the advice. But for now — following bailouts to a bank owned by Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, blatant and widespread market manipulation, wild money printing, and secret bailouts larger than the U.S. economy — analysts expect outrage to continue growing.

---------- Post added at 01:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 AM ----------

The first ever GAO (Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year.Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill (HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out. Ben Bernanke (pictured to the left), Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve s nearly 100 year historywere posted on Senator Sander s webpage earlier this morning. What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 (TRILLION) had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks
everywhere from France to Scotland.From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.
To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is only $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is only $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.
In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.
This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else. Bernie Sanders(I-VT)
When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability.
Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy.If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses can be stopped with five dollars worth of bullets.
[Regardless of whether this money is fiat money (money printed with nothing of value to back it), if it is a currency forced on society and the world, with enforcement by the Fed, IRS, the U.S. military, et al, --which it is-- the acts of the Federal Reserve are, in essence, the transfer of greater wealth to the rich insider banks and corporations, while the rest of the world grows poorer, and as the value of this funny money grows less and less in purchasing power. These insider banks, etc., then, exchange this funny money for gold and silver, the real wealth of the world, which, then, reinflates the world with more and more devaluing federal reserve notes. This, then, creates hyper-inflation, increasing the cost of all resources and commodities, while gold and silver climb to never-seen-before levels of value.
This is how the Federal Reserve insiders steal the wealth of the world and why the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. It's the world's largest Ponzi scheme! The Federal Reserve is nothing but a front for a small group of families who run a very large and successful white collar criminal Ponzi scheme. This criminal institution should be seized by the U.S. Treasury department and all assets frozen, and returned to the coffers of the U.S. Treasury in order to settle the U.S. debt and help begin to balance the U.S. deficit. All banks (listed below) should be forced to return the money received by the Federal Reserve. All families in ownership of the Fed and their agents should be located, caught, tried and jailed for grand larceny and treason against the people of the U.S.A. All government agents who protect and help facilitate this criminal organization should be fired from the positions and similarly tried and jailed for grand larceny and treason.
Meanwhile, Congress should return our country to its original monetary system (Lincoln greenbacks backed by precious metals) and, again, do its duty to regulate the coining of the currency of America as per the U.S. Constitution.]
The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131of the GAO Audit and are as follows..
Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs:$814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK):$541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom):$181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

Toooooooo much to read, but i'll be back to read the reviews!
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

And how much did they get back? Who hasn't paid their loans back yet?
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

obama_ballin.gif
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

and what are you ninjas going to do about it?

not a god damn thing


you gonna keep playing COD
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

the second report i posted at the bottom of the initial post ( no link), showed how the entire U.S. debt for 200 years is only 14 trillion dollars, but obama gave banks 16 trillion dollars, but they hollering about being broke and debt ceilings?????????????????:smh::smh::smh:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

the second report i posted at the bottom of the initial post ( no link), showed how the entire U.S. debt for 200 years is only 14 trillion dollars, but obama gave banks 16 trillion dollars, but they hollering about being broke and debt ceilings?????????????????:smh::smh::smh:


Did you read this part when you titled your thread?

"During a 2½ year period starting at the end of 2007,"

Obama was sworn into office January 20, 2009

So a better title would have Bush's name in it.

:smh:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

"but we, but we got our first black preeesiiiidant............"




them ninjas pulled off the great DIVERSION, putting a black face in office and ran out the back door with all the money.............,
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

the second report i posted at the bottom of the initial post ( no link), showed how the entire U.S. debt for 200 years is only 14 trillion dollars, but obama gave banks 16 trillion dollars, but they hollering about being broke and debt ceilings?????????????????:smh::smh::smh:


Did you read this part when you titled your thread?

"During a 2½ year period starting at the end of 2007,"

Obama was sworn into office January 20, 2009

So a better title would have Bush's name in it.

:smh:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

Did you read this part when you titled your thread?

"During a 2½ year period starting at the end of 2007,"

Obama was sworn into office January 20, 2009

So a better title would have Bush's name in it.

:smh:

who gives a fuck, obama KNEW and appointed his boys to finish the looting............:smh::smh:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

Did you read this part when you titled your thread?

"During a 2½ year period starting at the end of 2007,"

Obama was sworn into office January 20, 2009

So a better title would have Bush's name in it.

:smh:

Dayum dude...beat me to it.

Stormfront niggas on BGOL hard lately spreading misinformation. :hmm::hmm::hmm:


-CTF
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

who gives a fuck, obama KNEW and appointed his boys to finish the looting............:smh::smh:


Yeah you're right. Who gives a fuck. It's only facts. We don't need that to form opinions, Right?























Fucking idiot.
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

"The New American also publishes articles about economics (from a free-enterprise perspective of course!), culture, and history. It is published by American Opinion Publishing, a wholly owned subsidiary of The John Birch Society."

http://www.jbs.org/

It's always good to know the source of any story, and whatever agenda that source may have.
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

"The New American also publishes articles about economics (from a free-enterprise perspective of course!), culture, and history. It is published by American Opinion Publishing, a wholly owned subsidiary of The John Birch Society."

http://www.jbs.org/

It's always good to know the source of any story, and whatever agenda that source may have.

THE WASHINGTON POST

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...-of-interest/2011/07/21/gIQAJbbnSI_story.html

When the Federal Reserve launched an unprecedented series of interventions in the financial system in 2008, it often moved so quickly that the usual practices for preventing conflicts of interest couldn’t keep up, according to a new report.

An audit of the Fed’s emergency lending programs by the Government Accountability Office, ordered by the financial reform law passed last year and released Thursday, reports generally sound financial management by the central bank as it undertook programs that deployed trillions of dollars to backstop a faltering financial system. But it brings to light difficult issues that arose when the Fed undertook actions that its rules never envisioned.


 After a rocky start in his role as Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner has not only survived but grown in stature, using his newfound influence to push President Obama to focus on curbing the nation’s soaring debt.



For instance, William C. Dudley, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York who was a senior official there in 2008, owned stock of American International Group before the Fed bailed out the giant insurance firm. The GAO report did not mention him by name, but Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who spearheaded the audit, identified Dudley as the unnamed official described in the report.

Lawyers at the New York Fed allowed Dudley to continue owning the shares while working on issues relating to the bailout. They concluded that for him to sell the shares immediately after the central bank bailed out the firm would be more ethically problematic than simply holding onto them and selling at a later date.

Dudley “held shares in these companies as part of his personal portfolio that predated his service at the New York Fed,” a spokesman for the central bank said. “A waiver was granted allowing him to hold these shares based in part on the judgement that had he sold these shares immediately after the interventions it would have the appearance of a conflict.”

The GAO report did not condemn the Fed’s actions, it simply illuminated them. Dudley has subsequently sold all the shares on dates agreed to with the bank’s ethics officers, the spokesman said.

The GAO also recommended that the Fed make clearer and more rigorous its policies for hiring independent contractors to manage investment programs. During the crisis, the New York Fed hired outside firms to manage many of its special lending programs, such as one designed to backstop the market for short-term corporate loans, without holding a normal bidding process for the contracts.

The report also found that lines of authority between the Fed’s Board of Governors in Washington and the 12 regional Fed banks around the country were sometimes muddled during the crisis. For example, it was not always clear where authority resided on questions of what collateral would be adequate for an emergency loan.

The report was the latest to detail aspects of the Fed’s actions during the financial crisis that were shrouded in mystery at the time. Another provision in last year’s Dodd-Frank Wall Street regulatory overhaul, also instigated by Sanders, required the disclosure of what individual banks and other entities received loans from the Fed.

“As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the world,” Sanders said in a statement. “This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you’re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else.”

The Fed’s general counsel, Scott Alvarez, said in a letter responding to the GAO’s audit that officials will “strongly consider” the recommendations.

For more news about economic policymakers, visit Post Business.



:smh::smh::smh::smh::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

"but we, but we got our first black preeesiiiidant............"




them ninjas pulled off the great DIVERSION, putting a black face in office and ran out the back door with all the money.............,

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

THE WASHINGTON POST

:smh::smh::smh::smh::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Ok, so tie it all together now.

The first article (with a very slanted neocon view) sites Obama for being responsible even though this happened a year before his election and 2 years before he was sworn in.

The second article sites how the GAO pointed out issues with the FEDs actions and irregularities during that time.

If you would, please make the title of your post, article #1, and article #2 mesh cleanly without the typical neocon talking points. Then please explain how a not even elected President (or even a sitting President) would have control over the monetary policy of a quasi-private banking institution while keeping this in mind:

"According to the Board of Governors, the Federal Reserve is independent within government in that "its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government."

Thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

No coming in accusing Obama of stuff that didn't happen on his watch is tho.

http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/living-black-fantasy-obama-delirium-effect
Barack Obama’s presence in the White House is bad for Black people’s mental health. Even as the African American economic condition deteriorates by the day, Blacks perceive a world in which their prospects are improving. Something did change for the better for Black people in 2009. The problem is, it only happened in their minds.
Living a Black Fantasy: The Obama Delirium Effect
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
“Majorities of African Americans told Pew pollsters Blacks were better off in 2009 than five years before, when by all economic measurements the opposite was true.”
There is a world of perception and a world of reality. There is also another realm, a domain of willed fiction that is impervious to reality and treats facts like enemies. It is the Delusion Zone and, judging by the results of a recent Pew Research Center survey, large majorities of African Americans have been trapped there for at least the year since Barack Obama took up residence in the White House.
Life in the Delusion Zone is animated by the purest magic, a place where catastrophe is instantaneously transformed into its opposite. Examine an item from the real world Washington Post of January 15, whose headline screams, “U.S. unemployment rate for blacks projected to hit 25-year high.” Contrast that with the Pew findings released the same week, which concluded that “blacks' assessments about the state of black progress in America have improved more dramatically than at any time in the last quarter century.”
The judgments of a nationally representative sampling of 812 blacks can't be wrong, can they? Yes, they can. Obamamania appears to destroy brain cells and disable both short- and long-term memory.
Consider that the proportion of African Americans that say Blacks are “better off than five years ago” has nearly doubled since 2007, from 20 percent to 39 percent. What actually happened in the interim between 2007 and 2009? The negative assessment of the Black condition in 2007 compared to five years before, makes sense. Black unemployment in 2002 stood at 11 percent. By 2007, Black unemployment had dropped to 8.3 percent, significantly better than at the height of the Bush first term recession five years before. However, by 2007 the housing foreclosure crisis was casting a dark gloom over Black America, and December 2007 would retroactively be declared the first month of the Great Recession. It was, therefore, rational that only one in five Blacks would rate African Americans as better off in 2007 than in 2002.
“Obamamania appears to destroy brain cells and disable both short- and long-term memory.”
The latest Pew poll, conducted mostly in November of 2009, showed twice as many respondents felt Blacks were better off than five years earlier, in 2004. This, despite the fact that Black joblessness stood officially at 15.6 percent in November 2009, and heading higher, compared to 8.7 percent in November 2004. In five years, Black unemployment had nearly doubled, and the housing foreclosure crisis had ravaged Black neighborhoods, with no let up in sight. Any rational five-year assessment offered in November of 2009 would have been as gloomy as the numbers.But Black folks weren’t being rational. Thirty-nine percent of them – nearly twice as many as in 2007 – told Pew pollsters Blacks were better off in 2009 than five years before, when by all economic measurements the opposite was true.
What happened between 2007 and 2009, besides the worst recession since the Great Depression, with Black unemployment projected to hit 17.2 percent by the third quarter of 2010? Obama happened.
“Any rational five-year assessment offered in November of 2009 would have been as gloomy as the numbers.”
Obama-induced chemical imbalances messed up Black people’s minds regarding the gap between Black and white incomes. Asked if the racial gap had grown smaller in the last ten years, 56 percent said “yes” in 2009, compared to 41 percent in 2007. In fact, the racial wage gap had grown significantly. In 2000, Black households made 64.8 cents for every dollar made by whites. By 2008 Black households had slipped three cents, to 61.8 cents on the white dollar – approximately the same size gap as existed in 1989 and 1979. Blacks are worse off, income-wise, than ten years ago, and except for a brief uptick in Black household income during the Clinton bubble-boom of the Nineties, the Black-white earnings gap has remained virtually unchanged for the past 30 years.
ObamaL'aid is a mind-altering substance, a hallucinogen. It makes Black people see progress when they are actually facing disaster. Obama-on-the-brain also behaves like an opiate, blocking out pain. African Americans’ ability to apprehend political and economic danger is compromised by Obama-induced delusion, while the opiate effect prevents Blacks from knowing where and how badly they have been hurt. That’s a fatal combination.
BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com


:smh::smh::lol::lol::lol::lol: :itsawrap:
 
Re: Obama and the feds gave banks all around the world 16 trillion dollars audit reve

http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/living-black-fantasy-obama-delirium-effect
Barack Obama’s presence in the White House is bad for Black people’s mental health. Even as the African American economic condition deteriorates by the day, Blacks perceive a world in which their prospects are improving. Something did change for the better for Black people in 2009. The problem is, it only happened in their minds.
Living a Black Fantasy: The Obama Delirium Effect
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
“Majorities of African Americans told Pew pollsters Blacks were better off in 2009 than five years before, when by all economic measurements the opposite was true.”
There is a world of perception and a world of reality. There is also another realm, a domain of willed fiction that is impervious to reality and treats facts like enemies. It is the Delusion Zone and, judging by the results of a recent Pew Research Center survey, large majorities of African Americans have been trapped there for at least the year since Barack Obama took up residence in the White House.
Life in the Delusion Zone is animated by the purest magic, a place where catastrophe is instantaneously transformed into its opposite. Examine an item from the real world Washington Post of January 15, whose headline screams, “U.S. unemployment rate for blacks projected to hit 25-year high.” Contrast that with the Pew findings released the same week, which concluded that “blacks' assessments about the state of black progress in America have improved more dramatically than at any time in the last quarter century.”
The judgments of a nationally representative sampling of 812 blacks can't be wrong, can they? Yes, they can. Obamamania appears to destroy brain cells and disable both short- and long-term memory.
Consider that the proportion of African Americans that say Blacks are “better off than five years ago” has nearly doubled since 2007, from 20 percent to 39 percent. What actually happened in the interim between 2007 and 2009? The negative assessment of the Black condition in 2007 compared to five years before, makes sense. Black unemployment in 2002 stood at 11 percent. By 2007, Black unemployment had dropped to 8.3 percent, significantly better than at the height of the Bush first term recession five years before. However, by 2007 the housing foreclosure crisis was casting a dark gloom over Black America, and December 2007 would retroactively be declared the first month of the Great Recession. It was, therefore, rational that only one in five Blacks would rate African Americans as better off in 2007 than in 2002.
“Obamamania appears to destroy brain cells and disable both short- and long-term memory.”
The latest Pew poll, conducted mostly in November of 2009, showed twice as many respondents felt Blacks were better off than five years earlier, in 2004. This, despite the fact that Black joblessness stood officially at 15.6 percent in November 2009, and heading higher, compared to 8.7 percent in November 2004. In five years, Black unemployment had nearly doubled, and the housing foreclosure crisis had ravaged Black neighborhoods, with no let up in sight. Any rational five-year assessment offered in November of 2009 would have been as gloomy as the numbers.But Black folks weren’t being rational. Thirty-nine percent of them – nearly twice as many as in 2007 – told Pew pollsters Blacks were better off in 2009 than five years before, when by all economic measurements the opposite was true.
What happened between 2007 and 2009, besides the worst recession since the Great Depression, with Black unemployment projected to hit 17.2 percent by the third quarter of 2010? Obama happened.
“Any rational five-year assessment offered in November of 2009 would have been as gloomy as the numbers.”
Obama-induced chemical imbalances messed up Black people’s minds regarding the gap between Black and white incomes. Asked if the racial gap had grown smaller in the last ten years, 56 percent said “yes” in 2009, compared to 41 percent in 2007. In fact, the racial wage gap had grown significantly. In 2000, Black households made 64.8 cents for every dollar made by whites. By 2008 Black households had slipped three cents, to 61.8 cents on the white dollar – approximately the same size gap as existed in 1989 and 1979. Blacks are worse off, income-wise, than ten years ago, and except for a brief uptick in Black household income during the Clinton bubble-boom of the Nineties, the Black-white earnings gap has remained virtually unchanged for the past 30 years.
ObamaL'aid is a mind-altering substance, a hallucinogen. It makes Black people see progress when they are actually facing disaster. Obama-on-the-brain also behaves like an opiate, blocking out pain. African Americans’ ability to apprehend political and economic danger is compromised by Obama-induced delusion, while the opiate effect prevents Blacks from knowing where and how badly they have been hurt. That’s a fatal combination.
BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com


:smh::smh::lol::lol::lol::lol: :itsawrap:

So instead of addressing the issue of you accusing Obama for stuff that happened 1-2 years BEFORE he entered the white house, you respond with a hack job opinion article which did not in any way back up your argument. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Come on now if u r going to troll be a good troll at least. You can come better than that.
 
Back
Top