What's wrong with corporate-purchased Republican free market capitalism?
Now Playing: Clive Crook, The Atlantic.com
Topic: Business & Labor

Thank you Mary at Pacific View for pointing me toward this excerpt

Consider a society in which everybody was a profit-maximizer. What would it be like? It would be one in which rulers, soldiers, judges, bureaucrats would take whatever they could. It would be one in which bribery and corruption were the norms. It would be one in which market capitalism of the kind Professor Landsburg (and I) extol would be impossible. It would be one in which almost everybody would be poor. And because it would be one in which almost everybody was very poor, it would also be one in which the only way to obtain wealth would be to join in the race for political power. This would be all too natural. It would also be a negative-sum society, in which life tended to be nasty brutish and short.

Profit-maximization is not a generalizable norm for a successful capitalist society. Indeed, it is not an ethical principle at all, for it violates Kant's categorical imperative -- that one should "act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Profit-maximization is a situational ethic, applicable only to economic activity -- that is, activity carried out under competitive conditions. Monopoly providers of public goods -- security, justice and so forth -- must not act under profit maximization.

We do not even want people engaged in private business to be profit-maximizers tout court. Let us suppose, for example, that a business knows of an undetectable way of dumping poisonous waste, thereby saving itself vast sums of money. Do we believe that it 'ought' to do this? I certainly do not. Do we believe businesses ought to create cartels? No, again. Do we regard it as right for business leaders to manipulate their pay -- by back-dating stock options, for example -- in order to steal as much as possible from their shareholders? No, yet again. Yet all these people are doing is maximizing their personal profits, as individuals in the market economy supposedly should

Jobs With Justice, Wal-Mart, Fircrest's ex-mayor
Now Playing: Jobs With Justice: Newsletter
Topic: Business & Labor

Fircrest Mayor Dave Viafore lost his position this month after backing Wal-Mart’s planned invasion of this community nestled between Tacoma and University Place.  In a vote of 4-3, the City Council demoted Viafore to City Councilmember following his nomination to the JwJ Grinch of the Year contest and a community revolt against Wal-Mart.  Even the Wal-Mart lovin’ News Tribune cited the Wal-Mart issue as Viafore’s first factor for his demise in a front page top-of-the fold story.

JwJ was an important ally in the Fircrest Against Wal-Mart (FAW) community campaign.  Once the community organized overwhelming opposition to Wal-Mart, Viafore desperately tried to paint himself as neutral. 

While Viafore’s ouster at the age of 43 and after a 14 year reign sends a message to all regional mayors courting with Wal-Mart, challenges remain to prevent an anti-worker Big Box company from invading the Fircrest site. 

The Fircrest City Council has yet to rezone the Big Box designation of the site.  The new Mayor Kathy McVay has a hostile history to FAW members’ efforts to debate the Wal-Mart issue. 

Fircrest residents continue to want the site to be a source of needed commercial tax revenue but political leadership has failed to embrace publicly a pro-worker option.

Graphic Immages for your own good
Now Playing: Morning email from my friend Tony
Topic: Business & Labor

Canadian Telelvision is KICK ASS! 

Boy, these are some SERIOUS TV ads. It's about accidents in the work place.

If you are sensitive skip it. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwCyVku1HvI&feature=related

What Would Lincoln Say to Cheney and Associates?
Now Playing: Rick Crawford, crawford@cs.ucdavis.edu
Topic: Business & Labor

We have no historical tradition that would enshrine nascent or fully developed corporate capitalism as the basis for the highest global good of all concerned. We do have the ultimate proof of the flaws written into the charter of a corporation as an entity without conscience.

 

What Lincoln Foresaw: by Rick Crawford, crawford@cs.ucdavis.edu

 

Corporations Being "Enthroned" After the Civil War and Re-Writing the Laws Defining Their Existence

 

Here is a sobering quote by Abe Lincoln:

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
-- U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)

Some people expressed doubts about its authenticity, given Lincoln's work as an attorney for railroad corporations! It was an interesting job tracking it down and verifying its authenticity.

The first ref I heard for this quote was Jack London's 1908 Iron Heel. And although the quote indeed appears there (near p. 100), Jack London offered neither context nor source.

More recently, David Korten's book, When Corporations Rule the World (1995, Kumarian Press), sources the quote to Harvey Wasserman (America Born and Reborn, Macmillan, 1983, p. 89-90, 313), who in turn sources it to Paha Sapa Reports, the newspaper of the Black Hills Alliance, Rapid City, South Dakota, 4 March 1982.

But given Wasserman's ties to Howard Zinn, and his status as co-founder (?) of the Liberation News Service, citing that kind of trail is like waving a red flag for the skeptics ;-)

Fortunately, after some burrowing in the univ. library, I was able to confirm its authenticity. Here it is, with more surrounding context:

"We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its end.
It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. . . .
It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes
me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war,
corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places
will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong
its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth
is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.
I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety
of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war.
God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless."

The passage appears in a letter from Lincoln to (Col.) William F. Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864.

For a reliable pedigree, cite p. 40 of The Lincoln Encyclopedia, by Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY). That traces the quote's lineage to p. 954 of Abraham Lincoln: A New Portrait, (Vol. 2) by Emanuel Hertz (Horace Liveright Inc, 1931, NY).

Based on about 3 hrs of research, it appears Lincoln has been extensively SANITIZED FOR OUR PROTECTION.

The Hidden Lincoln; from the Letters and Papers of William H. Herndon, by Emanuel Hertz (Viking Press, 1938, NY), details how Herndon (Lincoln's lifelong law partner) collected an extensive oral history and aggregated much of Lincoln's writings into a collection that served as the basis for many "authoritative" books on Lincoln.

By all accounts, Herndon was scrupulously honest and plainspoken. Hertz quotes Herndon's characterization of the various "big-name" authors who relied on his collection for primary source materials:

"They are aiming, first, to do a superb piece of literary work; second, to make the story WITH THE CLASSES AS AGAINST THE MASSES. [my emphasis added] It will result in delineating the real Lincoln about as well as does a wax figure in the museum."

In several books, I found numerous places where Lincoln spoke about Capital and Labor ("Workingmen"). Lincoln re-used his own material frequently, and virtually identical passages appear in several places. Lincoln praises the moral rightness of both Capital and Labor, but this is invariably in the context of a nation where NO MORE THAN ONE MAN IN EIGHT is a Capitalist or a Laborer, ie, where 7/8 of the population are "self-employed" on their own farms and homesteads.

This social context of general self-sufficiency would explain how Lincoln could serve for years as a railroad corporation lawyer with (apparently) no qualms, yet pen the "corporations enthroned" passage to Elkins.

A final Lincoln tidbit, although it pertains to one very specific case:

"These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert to fleece the people, and now that they have got into a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel."

speech to Illinois legislature, Jan. 1837.
See Vol. 1, p. 24 of Lincoln's Complete Works,
ed. by Nicolay and Hay, 1905)

integrity, service and treating people right
Now Playing: On the passing of Les Schwab
Topic: Business & Labor

May 19, 2007, 19:00 GMT

PRINEVILLE, OR, United States (UPI) -- Les Schwab, founder of a U.S. chain of tire stores bearing his name, died in Oregon this week at 89, the Portland Oregonian reported Saturday.

Schwab grew to become a familiar face in the Pacific Northwest with his television commercials and a chain of stores that topped 400 and racked up $1.6 billion in sales last year.

'There will never be another Les,' Phil Wick, chairman of Les Schwab Tire Centers, said in a statement. 'He was a visionary, and all of us who worked with him will stay true to his vision of integrity, service and treating people right.'

Schwab launched his company in his hometown of Prineville in the 1950s after serving in World War II and a pillar of the small central Oregon town until his death, the newspaper said.

As part of his devotion to customer service, all employees of Schwab from president on down were required to begin their careers changing tires at one of his stores.

Copyright 2007 by United Press International

you may be contacted by a debt collector:
Now Playing: Collection Agencies
Topic: Business & Labor

They don't hesitate to charge and collect late fee's but that doesn't stop the sharking and bloodying of family financial waters. It's hard to sympathize with this segment of corporate capitalism which seems somehow to be a system of creating profits from within its own sphere by consuming the consumers down to bare bones and then crunching up the bones. 

[Excerpts] from

  via The Tacoma News Tribune

Consumer complaints against the folks who chase after people with unpaid bills are on the rise as creditors try to recover delinquent accounts."

When David Rhodes got a letter at his home demanding $351.89 for an old cell phone bill, he knew something was amiss.

Not only was the letter addressed to Janha Rhodes, but David Rhodes never even had an account with Sprint, although an agency named Collectech claimed he had.

“I called and I said, ‘Do you have a Social Security number? Do you have anything? Do you even have a signature?’ They had nothing,” recalled Rhodes, 60, who lives in Manhattan. “I was annoyed. Well, angry.”

Calls and letters from debt collectors are about as welcome as cockroaches, and they’re appreciated even less when the tab was run up by someone else.

Beyond chasing after people who haven’t paid their bills – for reasons understandable, or not – collection agencies often pursue the wrong person and sometimes play downright rough, critics of the industry charge.

In Washington, complaints against debt collectors rate third among all complaints to the state attorney general’s office.

 ...

Creditors, such as credit card companies and retailers, increasingly sell off their delinquent debt to companies that often buy it for just pennies on the dollar, said Jonathan Mintz, the New York City consumer department’s commissioner.

These buyers then either try to collect the debt themselves or farm out the work to other agencies.

This selling and reselling sometimes leaves collectors with bad information. It also prompts some collectors to get more aggressive because “they’re no longer protecting the reputation of the original business,” Mintz said.

 ...

Consumers are certainly not blameless. Even if collectors are targeting the wrong person, the debt they’re after is real. And delinquent debt is on the rise.

Outstanding consumer, government and business debt grew 7.5 percent annually between 2000 and 2004 to about $24 trillion, according to mergers and acquisitions advisory firm Kaulkin Ginsberg.

That, along with tougher bankruptcy laws, has helped create a boom in the collections industry.

But there are rules. Calling more than twice a week, or before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m., advertising a debt, and attempting to seize wages or assets without legal authorization are all forbidden.

The rules for debt collectors

The Washington State Office of the Attorney General provides tips to help consumers navigate debt collection and deal with false claims from collection agencies.

 

If you fall behind on your credit card or loan payments, you may be contacted by a debt collector: Collection agencies are regulated by the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Washington law. These laws require that debt collectors treat you fairly, and limit how often they may contact you.

When a debt collector may call you: Collectors may contact you in person, by mail, telephone, telegram or fax. However, they may not call you between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. A collection agency may not call or write to you more than three times a week. One of those calls may be made to your workplace unless a collector knows that your employer disapproves of such calls.

When a debt collector may contact people you know: If you have an attorney, collectors are prohibited from contacting anyone other than your attorney. If you don’t have an attorney, a collector may contact other people, but only to find out where you live, what your phone number is, and where you work. The debt collector may not tell those people that you owe money and, in most cases, may only contact your employer or others once.

You can stop a debt collector from contacting you by sending a written request: The collector may not contact you again except to say there will be no further contact or to notify you that the debt collector or your creditor intends to file a lawsuit or take another specific action. If you don’t believe you owe money, you should notify the collector in writing. A collector may contact you after receiving your letter, but may not pursue the debt if you are able to prove that it has been paid or that the debt is not yours.

Other restrictions: Debt collectors may not require you to write a post-dated check, harass you, use false names, provide fake credentials, publish lists of people who owe money, make collect calls, raise interest rates or add additional charges not allowed by law or threaten to have you jailed. They also may not take your possessions or garnish your wages without a court judgment. An exception allows a garnishment up to 10 percent of the debtor’s pay if a federally guaranteed student loan is in default.

To report a debt collector for a violation: If you believe a debt collector has violated the law, you may file a complaint with the Attorney General’s Office online at www.atg.wa.gov or call 800-551-4636 to request a complaint form by mail. You have the right to sue a collector within one year from the date the law was violated. If you win, you may recover money for the damages you suffered plus an additional amount up to $1,000. Alternatively, you may join a class-action lawsuit against a debt collector, if one has been filed.

C.R. Roberts, The News Tribune

 

 

 

"These deeds reflect the character of our people."
Topic: Business & Labor

"And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty. (Applause.)

When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self-sacrifice of the American people."

So spoke the current incumbent American President, mouthing the phrases that normally evoke pride, charity, humility and compassion in even the simplest minds hearing his words. The greatest, most powerful and most economically capable nation on earth? How should it spread the wealth, reach out to the poorest societies among us and teach the next generation about sacrifice and the highest good of all concerned? Our Christian in the White House, using simple declarative sentences, attempted to invoke spiritual images of Good Samaritans. Seeking to inform the world that as the leader of a nation of generous souls, Mr. Bush and his call to charity find themselves immediately faced with an opportunity to put up or shut up. Based on what I've seen so far, I think I'd rather he shut up. Words are cheap. Godly phrases to fool the masses is the cheapest of publicity tricks .. and the cruelest of public hoaxes. Debt relief to the poorest nations on earth? We must put up and give out, or tell our President to shut up. Read or listen to the entire text or broadcast this week from Democracy Now.

“Vulture fund” companies buy up the debt of poor countries at cheap prices, and then demand payments much higher than the original amount of the debt, often taking poor countries to court when they cannot afford to repay. Investigative journalist Greg Palast reports on one company trying to collect $40 million from the government of Zambia after buying its debt for $4 million. [includes rush transcript]"

I listend on my iPod while walking - and found myself of a sudden no longer in a healthy power-walk, but an anger-stomp. And why is it we have to get the most important truths from sources abroad like the BBC because our home-grown media think deceased ex-bunnies and diapered astronauts are the things most important for us to know. What the hell are all these folks talking about? Greg Palast says it this way:

"Here's how the vultures got Zambia. In 1979, Romania lent them $15 million. By 1998, Zambia was broke, so Romania offered to write off the entire debt for just $3 million. But before the deal was final, a vulture swooped in, and somehow snatched Romania’s cheap offer for his own company.

Michael Sheehan and his associates are now suing Zambia, not for the $3 million they paid, but for the original debt, plus interest: $42 million. But even bigger money is to be made in the US courtrooms, where Sheehan and others are asking for hundreds of millions of dollars from several desperately poor nations.

And George Bush can put an end to it all with a stroke of a pen. Under the US Constitution, the President has the power to stop the vultures from collecting a penny in a US courtroom, but he hasn't done it, even though just last month George Bush publicly committed his government to debt relief."

 

Again these words from Mr. Bush's 2007 SOTU:

"And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hopes for lifting lives and eliminating poverty."

Well, if a guy is trying to shore up support for one questionable decision about staying a course of bloodletting in Iraq, wouldn't it make sense to shore up support by donning a white hat with something that makes a dramatic statement about supposed compassionate conservatism? Palast lays it all out:

"Under US law, the President of the United States has the absolute power to stop any vulture fund from collecting money from a poor nation, under the US Constitution. It’s called the power of comity. The African nations are pleading with George Bush to stop his big donors from collecting. Now, what's happening is, is that in the State of the Union, George Bush said we have to give debt relief to the poorest nations. The US taxpayers are putting up more than a billion dollars to write off the debts of the African nations, but what Bush isn't saying is that he is then allowing that money to be captured by his biggest donors, like Paul Singer, so that the money for debt relief is not going to the African nations, where they're desperately in need for, you know, funding for medicine for AIDS, for education, which is what it's earmarked for. These guys are actually going into US courts and saying, “Give us the money.” Now, George Bush, again, has the absolute power, and the judges are waiting for him to write a note. They're saying, “George Bush can ask us to dismiss this case in one minute, but we need something in writing from the White House. ... We've asked the White House again and again. We called 10 Downing Street. The British government is absolutely adamant that the money should not go to the vultures. They call them vultures. It should go to the people of Zambia, the people of Congo and other suffering people in Africa. The Bush administration has been completely silent. Completely silent. We can't get them to respond. I stood outside the White House. I’m trying to get some type of response. ... What's horrendous is the kind of con that's going on. You have a president of the United States standing up in front of Congress, saying give us money, give us billions to write off, in the State of the Union. He puts it in the budget, without anyone saying that, in fact, it's not getting to Africa, it's going to his biggest donors, who are short-stopping it by interjecting themselves and buying up the right to collect and then using the US courts and the British courts. Bush can put a stop to it tomorrow morning. The problem is, is that he's not been responding.

I know that the president of Congo came to visit the White House, and the vulture, Paul Singer, his operation ran a whole smear campaign in the US press about what a terrible Marxist, horrendous president this is of the Congo. They did kind of a Hugo Chavez on the guy, to try to dissuade Bush from listening to him. But it's not the corrupt government that would be making the -- it’s not the guys who’ve put money in their Swiss bank accounts that will be making the payments to the vultures, it's the people of the Congo, the people of Zambia. That's the problem."

Enter U.S. Representative John Conyers, interviewed here by Amy Goodman (Democracy Now):

AMY GOODMAN: Joining us now from Capitol Hill is the new chair of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers of Michigan. On Wednesday, he and more than two dozen other members of the Congressional Black Caucus met with President Bush. It was the President's first meeting with the caucus in over two years. Joining us still in studio is Joslyn Barnes and Danny Glover. Welcome to Democracy Now!, Congressmember Conyers. REP. JOHN CONYERS: Always a pleasure, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about how your meeting went with the President yesterday? REP. JOHN CONYERS: Well, we talked essentially about Iraq, Katrina and the domestic breakdown that's going on right now. But it was my job, I felt, to raise the whole question of this bond speculation that goes on at the expense of poor debtor countries, in which their debt is bought up and then they're sued for the full amount. It’s bought up at pennies on the dollar, and then they're sued. And I wanted to thank you for revealing this to us, because it allowed me to ask President Bush two questions: one, about Paul Singer and Michael Sheehan; and two, whether he would be willing to stop this incredible misuse of our government’s charity toward funding aid to our poorer nations. JUAN GONZALEZ: And what was the President's response to your questions? REP. JOHN CONYERS: His response was, “I didn't know anything about this.” And he assigned a staffer to get on it right away. And so, it's our position that the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the Comity Doctrine brought from our Constitution allows the President to require the courts defer in individual suits against foreign nations. And so, we're conducting a couple of things. First of all, we want to know where these practices are going on at the present time, and, two, how we can get this information to President Bush so that he can, as he indicated to us, stop it immediately.

Apologies to Herodotus and the U.S. P. S. :

Your bills, my bills, Oil, Houses and distracting with Iran
Topic: Business & Labor
REFERENCE: Housing bubble bloodbath By Mike Whitney, Online Journal Contributing Writer I like Mike Whitney's writing, his style and the timeliness of his information. This article is a good example. [Excerpted in blockquotes with my comments added]

... rising foreclosure numbers are the result of rising monthly payments on the new-fangled loans which have low introductory interest rates, but can unexpectedly double after a two- or three-year period. Imagine mortgage payments that suddenly jump from $1,300 per month to more than $2,000 on a $129,000 house. That’s what many people will be facing in 2007 when their loans reset and they are suddenly forced out of their homes and onto the streets.

Buy your house with an adjustable rate mortgage. The day many of your lenders have been slobbering over is coming shortly.

. . A recent sampling of 100 stated income loans by an auditing firm in Virginia (based on IRS records) found that 90 percent of the income statements were exaggerated by 5 percent or more, WHILE ALMOST 60 percent OF THE STATED AMOUNTS WERE EXAGGERATED BY MORE THAN 50 percent." (Dan Dorfman New York Sun) Are you kidding me? A majority of loan applicants are grossly exaggerating their income and the banks are handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars WITHOUT EVEN CROSS-CHECKING IRS STATEMENTS?

Did you fudge on your income just to get the loan? I applied while my wife was still employed so her income had a lot to do with loan approval. Shame on you and shame on me ...

The Commerce Dept. failed to subtract the thousands of people who signed contracts but "simply walked away from their deposits when they realized they couldn’t flip the houses for a quick profit." Ooops! So the government is falsifying the figures to make things look better than they really are? You bet. And, most of the high-end homebuilders like Toll Bros are reporting cancellations in the neighborhood of 37 percent! ... Gadzooks! Okay, so the homeowners are lying on their loans, and the government is lying about the sales (and inventory) figures; is that it?

Oh? Well then if the govermint can do it, we sure as hell can too.

Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble So, what can we expect when interest rates tighten up and the market begins to slump? The banks are battening down the hatches and preparing for the worst. This just confirms that the real hurricane hasn’t even touched down yet and that America’s over-leveraged consumers should try to straighten out their financial affairs as swiftly as possible. (Get out of debt, pronto!) A USB study indicates that a "high percentage of borrowers with delinquent, defaulted and foreclosed loans have second mortgages. These borrowers are so overburdened by the added debt that THEY HAVE TROUBLE MAKING THE PAYMENTS ON THEIR FIRST MORTGAGES. This is an ominous development since 34 percent of all mortgages in 2006 were second mortgages."

Remember all those phone calls and letters from financial specialists offering to solve all your problems just because you're a home buyer? Did you fall for it?

The American consumer is hobbled by debt and has no way to increase his revenue as long as wages remain stagnant. Additionally, US households are now showing negative savings. (minus .2 percent) When the home equity "punch bowl" dries up, it’ll be hard times for the average over-leveraged American consumer. He’ll have nothing left for his buying sprees but the plastic in his wallet. (Credit card debt is soaring)

Oh beautiful for credit cards for amber wavs of red ink .... keep up that erected patriotism, spend spend spend ... charge charge charge your growing debt ... charge charge charge until you debt yourself to death.

So, what happens now? What can we expect from the architects of this colossal rip-off in the next year or two? Well, the Fed, the US Treasury and the Bush administration -- the real axis of evil -- would like to forestall the inevitable recession-depression until they carry out their forthcoming attack on Iran. That’s why Bush is sending another carrier group to the Gulf as well as a squadron of F-16s to Turkey. (It also explains why US forces seized five Iranian hostages in Irbil, Iraq last week.) The US is clamping down on transactions with Iran’s main banks ("unilateral sanctions") and has coerced the Saudis into "discounting their top-line sweet crude by $1.75 to US customers" (Jim Willie, Golden Jackass.com) to put additional pressure on Iranian oil exports. As Willie says, "This is the real story behind the falling (gas) prices, not the silly (East Coast) weather". Uncle Sam is gearing up for another Middle East dust-up in Iran and the lower gas prices are (temporarily) averting a US recession.

Wow! ANOTHER reason for the great capitalist need for Middle Eastern scapegoats and excuses ... I mean, terrorists and religious fanatics. (Sorry Dick and George Armstrong Custer Bush, I didn't mean to get it wrong.)

. . America holds record mortgage debt in a declining housing market. Even that might first seem okay -- we can just whether the storm in our nice new houses. And in fact things will be okay for homeowners who bought long ago and have seen the price of their homes double and then double again. But for more recent homeowners, who bought at the top and now face decades of payments on houses that soon will be worth less than they paid for them, serious trouble is brewing. And they are not an insignificant bunch. The problem for recent homeowners is not just that prices are falling; it’s that prices are falling even as the buyer’s total mortgage remains the same or even increases. Eventually, the price of the house will fall below what the homeowners owe, a state that economists call negative equity. They can’t sell -- the declining market price won’t cover what they owe the bank -- but they still have to make those (often growing) monthly payments. Their only "choice" is to cut back spending in other areas or lose the house -- and everything they paid for in it -- in foreclosure. Free markets are based on choice. But more and more homeowners are discovering that what they got for their money is fewer and fewer choices. A real estate boom that began with the promise of 'economic freedom' will almost certainly end with a growing number of workers locked into a lifetime of debt servitude that absorbs every spare penny."

Oh shit ...