No Political Ads? AWESOME Idea!!!

Twitter recently announced that they will not be hosting any political advertising for the 2020 election season.

Some claim this is an infringement of free speech or some claptrap. No, this does not affect freedom of speech. The candidates can still have their own pages, they just cannot pay to promote those pages.

Yes, Facebook and all media should be following the same policy. So should Google. This is the absolute best, most fair system possible at this time.

There is no question that we are not going to get corporate media to cover all candidates equally or objectively. We once had the Fairness Doctrine which enforced equal coverage. Now we have neoliberal media on one side and Conservative media on the other. Corporate media intentionally conducts blackouts of Progressive candidates when not directly attacking them.

What elimination of political advertising does is even the playing field slightly. It means that the campaign with the least money has more chance of visibility, while campaigns with the most money cannot shove their campaign down your throat.

No political advertising also means PACs (Political Action Committees) will not be able to promote their favored candidate or agenda on any media that adopts this policy.

It also basically eliminates any more discussion about “Russians” paying for political ads on Twitter. Or Ukraine or China or whomever else. There can be no accusation of indirect influence via NRA funding, Planned Parenthood or whomever you care to name.

Yes, we will deal with claims that some media coverage is “Russian influenced” but then that has to be quantified more thoroughly. It has been a constant claim for years that RT is Russian propaganda. Yet when challenged to present one specific example, the claimants consistently fail to even attempt to present proof. I have asked Russiagaters if they think Larry King, Chris Hedges, Ed Schultz, Jesse Ventura, Abby Martin or Lee Camp are Russian propaganda because each and every one is or has been a regular on RT at some point. Jimmy Dore has been a guest anchor on several occasions.

The ultimate effect of such a policy would be the reduction of influence of money over elections. It’s a far more difficult battle we face to completely eliminate corporate money from politics but if we demand that social media and all media in general refuse to carry political advertising, we make the entire issue a moot point. It also reduces the chances that corporations and corporate media sources will invest massive sums into campaigns. The sum total effect would be a huge reduction in the amount of corporate money spent on campaigns. So no more $1.2 billion campaigns.

The only real concern I have with this is whether they will consider posts or videos by candidates to be advertising. As long as that’s not the case, it lends more power to individuals who share posts among ourselves. However, remember Correct The Record (CTR)? Paid trolls who posted for Hillary and attacked other candidates in all venues of social media? That is absolutely something we will see happening again. The advantage we have with them is that we can block them. So get ready to do that. They’re easy to spot and I will be posting methods through 2020 on how to identify them easily.

Right now we all need to write, post and petition all corporate media to follow the example being set by Twitter. If a corporate media source insists on hosting political advertising, we can organize mass boycotts of that source.

This is a very strong step toward what truly needs to be our ultimate goal for campaign finance reform- Federally funded elections at all levels, bottom to top. Equal funding for the top 4 parties (at least). No ballot access fees. We have many other steps we should push for but they are separate from campaign finance and advertising.

The Dangers of Shadow Banking

You have probably heard the term by now, “shadow banking”. However, many people don’t understand the risks it poses because they do not understand exactly what it is.

Shadow banking by all estimates is greater in size than the global banking system. By some estimates, it is greater in size than the global economy.

Comparison. You see lots of stories about how the Chinese shadow banking system poses a threat to the global economy. However, according to Bloomberg, the US shadow banking system is nearly twice the size of the Chinese shadow banking system, with China accounting for 16% of estimated shadow banking programs, while the US accounts for and estimated 31% (almost 1/3 of all shadow banking globally). In 2016, China began enacting policies to rein in their shadow banking problem. This is aside from the fact that most Chinese banks are nationalized. Nationalized banks cannot be shadow banks or pose the level of risk that privatized shadow banking systems do. In the US, any attempt at regulating shadow banking has met with legal, economic and political resistance.

What is it? Shadow banking is comprised of financial institutions and systems which are not held accountable to regulatory agencies the way officially recognized banks are. In the US, financial products and institutions are typically regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and Securities and Exchange Commission, with other regulatory agencies which oversee various smaller segments of the financial market. These agencies ideally place limits on how much financial institutions can loan out in relation to their deposits, practices that reduce fraud or economic/financial risk to the public.

Who is it? Shadow banking (I’m tired of typing that out. Let’s abbreviate it SB, okay?) is comprised of financial institutions which have a wide range of influence. You either right now or have in the past done business with SB entities without knowing it. They include such entities as hedge funds, short term lending agencies like payday lenders and vehicle title loan companies, home equity lenders, insurance companies and many investment firms. It also includes entities such as GoFundMe. However, the largest and most dangerous of all involve financial derivatives and credit default swaps.

Why are they popular? SB entities generally offer the chance of higher returns on investment compared to regulated institutions. However, a major reason they can offer higher returns is that the financial products they offer tend to be high risk. Their loans and products have a much higher default rate than standard financial products. Think of high interest loans to high risk borrowers.

The dangers. The dangers involved with SB is the fact that they do fall outside the regulations that regular banks are subject to. Regulations which require banks to maintain a certain level of collateral deposits as a percentage of how much they can loan out. If the economy or a specific entity show signs of a higher default percentage, leading to decreased returns or even loss on investment, investors in these entities can withdraw their entire investment without notice. If large investors or large numbers of investors withdraw their investments, it causes a run on that institution or even an entire SB industry category. That can have drastic effects alone but it can also have a domino effect, especially if a large SB company offers multiple products.

Not limited to non-banking entities. One huge problem with the SB system is that regulated entities often invest large sums in the SB entities or loan money to them. The SB system had a major role in the 2008 crash thanks to high risk loans and mortgages by SB companies which were packaged as lower risk loans in “bundles” which were purchased by standard banking institutions. However, banks are well known to establish their own SB companies as well. The obvious risk with this is that if these entities fail, they bring down large banks.

Regulation does not stop it. Some may believe that legislation like Dodd-Frank placed limits or regulations on the SB system. Not at all. Dodd-Frank only addressed standard banks and did not address the SB system at all. Many candidates receive campaign donations from SB companies. Some economists claim that if the SB system were eliminated that the economy would suffer greatly. However, all agree that it is an extreme danger which should be regulated.

Shadow Banking steals from the legitimate financial system. Were SB brought under control and regulation, it probably would result in less investment by some. However, it would result in greater stability in the financial system. SB investments divert funds from legitimate, regulated, more transparent financial systems. The fact is that returns on legitimate investment systems suffer as a direct result of funding diverted to the SB system, causing lower returns. SB is popular simply because of lesser regulation and oversight.

SB and regulated markets are tied together. As noted above, regulated systems and SB systems are tied together. However, even when not directly tied together, they are intrinsically tied because of shared investors. Some may believe that if the stock market and regulated systems retract that SB systems will expand. As seen in 2008, the opposite is true. When financial markets retract, they have a domino effect causing all markets to retract concurrently. Many businesses have a combination of funding from regulated and unregulated sources. Thus, when large businesses or a large number of businesses fail, it has an effect on all the above. When investors see a risk of losing because of a retraction, they pull funding from all investments in similar streams. In addition, Quicken Loans is a SB entity, now the largest mortgage lender in the country. Other mortgage lenders are also SB entities, though smaller.

Cyclic effect. As employers see reduced profits, they reduce staffing. When this happens in large numbers as we have only begun to see, it means the consumer market retracts. More consumers default on loans of all kinds. In the case of SB lenders, they are much faster to pursue vehicle repossessions, foreclosures, etc. This is an attempt to claim the property, charge the initial borrower and resell the property to a second borrower at a secondary profit. Yes, this is illegal for regulated lenders but not for unregulated lenders. In the interim and when this fails, SB profits decline. When profits decline, investments decline. When investments decline, the interest rates on any loan offers increase. This causes more rejections and more defaults. All of this reduces finances available for consumers to spend, causing a further decline in consumer spending, bringing us back to reduced profits for employers and the cycle continues. This cycle happens very quickly.

So, while shadow banking is typically described in terms which seem abstract or which affect only large investors, as you can see it absolutely affects you personally in very real terms. The fall of the stock market can mean the fall of shadow banking. The decline in each one and both can affect your credit, your employment, your housing, your retirement savings and on and on.

Wonder what Libertarians will think about this?

New BIG Project- Can Use Some Help

I am starting on a new project, just conceived. In this case, I could genuinely use some help. Mostly financial but later volunteer labor and maybe technical assistance.

I bought two new web domains last night for this project and they are intended to be permanent fixtures in the political landscape.

The concept is a centralized website where protests and political rallies can be listed, by state and city. If it gets off the ground, it may expand globally. 

My plan for now is that public access will be free of charge. There will be a charge for those listing the rally or protest. This does several things- 

1- By charging a fee to those listing an event, it decreases chances of fraud. 

2- It will allow me to have more time to maintain and moderate the site. 

3- It takes the financial burden off of me directly, so the existence of the site is better insured for the future. 

4- Future enhancements and developments will be easier to finance if they incur costs.

I am sure that this will involve more cost as time goes on. Initial plans are simply for the website. Over time, those plans will include email lists and text messaging to keep attendees current on events they have expressed interest in, such as cancellation or changes to location. 

True to form with the Issues Unite concept, this will be open to any party or political group. The exceptions being hate groups of any kind. Of course, once the page gets large enough, this will require the volunteer assistance mentioned, to confirm a group is who they claim to be. 

For cost, I expect to have tiered charge levels. The most expensive being for federal elections. Next would be state, then city government officials. The lowest tier would be for protests and local municipal officials such as school boards and such. 

I am debating whether to include message boards or not. Right now, it seems best to leave that out. It would take considerably more time, effort and risk of liability to moderate message boards. This decision will be reassessed as time goes on and resources allow. 

This really is a big project and will be time consuming. Up to now, most of my time has been spent writing articles and I have not had much time and energy left after working full time, writing part time, parenting part time and spending time with my gf. Have to sleep sometime. I may divert some time away from writing to work on this because with 2020 coming up, this is the right time to develop it, at least in some crude form. So any financial assistance is truly appreciated. 

As of right now, there is no such centralized database of protests and political rallies in existence. To keep up with these things is difficult and this limits public involvement in many cases, while favoring the candidates with the largest (typically corporate funded) budgets. For protests, there have been numerous protests I would have attended but never heard of them until after they were over. None of us can have a question that corporate media and corporate-funded candidates prefer things as they are. 

I am open to further suggestions to include in the concept at some point if you have any to offer. 

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 

I am an independent writer with no corporate sponsors or backing. The only income I make from my writing comes from views. At least I have reached the point where it makes more than it costs me! lol! My writing is done in between full time (and overtime) nursing, shared custody of my brilliant daughter and mundane existence.

Please consider becoming a patron on Patreon. I try and average at least 20 articles a month, so a $1 a month donation would come down to 5¢ per article to support independent, non-corporate writing. My Patreon page is here.

If you care to share articles with those who do not have Medium or Patreon accounts, I also post most of my articles on my own website, which has no advertising and I pay for with income from writing. My website is here and all articles can be shared freely. You can always quote me, no attribution required. My goal is spreading information and awareness. The whole point is building a better, more peaceful, more equitable world for us and future generations.