Do you remember Ronald Reagan's famous quote from his presidential campaign back in 1980?...."Government isn't the solution to our problem. Government IS the problem."
I have a new updated version for the presidential campaign of 2012...."Mitt Romney (and his peers) aren't the solution to our problem. Mitt Romney (and his peers) ARE our problem."
IMO, it's the shenanigans of the hedge fund managers, the investment bankers, the financial engineers, the slick derivative / swap traders, etc, who screwed us blind, raked off billions of dollars for themselves, and left us to deal with the world-wide disaster they created who are ALL our problem.
Everyone seems to have that one single political "hot button" that determines who they'll vote for. For some it's gay marriage, immigration reform, abortion, jobs, health care....whatever. For me it's re-gaining control of the irresponsible, downright dangerous financial services industry. Right now we're well on our way to another financial train wreck. The guys who caused the last one are still in control of their respective institutions, high-risk deals are still being made, mega-bonuses are still being paid, champagne corks are still being popped, and white-collar jail cells are still empty.
Barack Obama SHOULD have done something long before now. I have no faith that Mitt Romney will turn on his peers now and start looking out for OUR best interest if he should be elected. What to do?
What's your "hot button"?
" What to do?"
ReplyDeletePitchforks & torches???
f
I'm not an Obama fan, but people forget he can't do things alone.... he needs the support of the whole congress and he doesn't have it! There is too much "opposition" to everything the other party (no matter which one) plans, no matter how good the idea is. The whole system is getting to be as bad as Greece! That's how I see it...
ReplyDeleteIf I lived in the US my ‘hot button’ would be universal healthcare. Being a Brit I’m not conversant with the way government operates over there, but I suspect that Dorrie has it. From what I read on Facebook and elsewhere far too much energy is being wasted on fighting with each other, and being obstructive.
ReplyDeleteHow much research have you done to back up your statements? In fact, what led to the recession was losses in the subprime home lending market; a market created by Congress and specifically the Dodd/Frank bill.
ReplyDeleteDorrie and Simon live in the sort of utopian societies that are, in the case of Britain, on the verge of failure or, in the case of Germany, on the verge of Statism (again) so I understand their perspective. What they should understand is that the nature of our political system in adversarial and not cooperative. Our system has two parties that oppose each other and represent differing views. IN the parliamentary systems, there are multiple parties that are forced to work together to arrive at compromises. Britain's system has led to an emasculated society that, in the course of one monarch's reign, has gone from one of the greatest nations on earth to nearly third-world status. I'm not insulting Simon's country but I know he understands Britain's sad decline. I would not want to emulate that system. Germany, it seems, is still the strong man of Europe and that has always been problematic. I know the Greeks think so.
You, however, live in the greatest state of the greatest nation on earth. We've never tried to be Utopian because the trade-off for Utopia is lack of freedom. We've always been contentious and argumentative. Parties oppose each other because the choices are often clearly different.
Politicians, despite the ostrich mentality of so many citizens that believe otherwise, clearly represent their constituents. Obamacare is a fiasco, I want my representative to vote against it (he does).
Obama's economics have led to the highest levels of unemployment since the Great Depression (again, my Congressman votes against the Obama proposals). If Obama's ideas worked, he could cobble together the support he needs (as Reagan did when he did not control Congress). But Obama's failed policies led to his losing control of Congress. In 2010, the people spoke and elected a Congress they knew would oppose Obama. And oppose they have, thank God.
So yes, people care Mr. L&S. The real question is: how much do YOU care? In November, let's end this failed experiment and send our Community Organizer back to the community (where he can live off the wealth he's accumulated in his time in DC).
My research, Burst? I read. Most recently Hank Paulson's book "On the Brink" (former CEO of Goldman Sachs, Treasury Sec to GWB), Ron Suskind's book "Confidence Men; Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President" (Wall Street Journal writer), Gretchen Morgensen's book "Reckless Endangermenet" (NYT business reporter), and many others.
ReplyDeleteFirst, you're not even close chronologically if you think Dodd/Frank caused our recent (2008) economic meltdown. It was the knee-jerk reaction to that crisis. The seeds for that were sown 20 years ago when politicians OF BOTH PARTIES gradually succumbed to the onslaught of financial industry lobbying. The final straw was when the a Democratic President (Clinton) and a Republican Congress (both houses) completely caved by repealing Glass Steagall. That was the "full speed ahead" signal the financial services industry needed to blow and go...read "gamble like crazy". They lost, and we got stuck with the bill.
I know, you're going to say we should have just let them go bust, but they were too intertwined. A couple of bad ones would have taken many more, possibly all the others with them. It would have been one giant downhill snowball into depression. What we suffered through would have paled in comparison. And here's my concern: NOTHING HAS CHANGED. The same players are still playing, still gambling, still making BIG bucks...until things all explode again. We need to break these mega-financial giants up now into pieces that CAN be allowed to fail if they go too far.
And as I've opined before, too many of us, including you my friend, see our political party sgtructure as black/white, good/bad, us/them. We need options, third (fourth?) parties who are not already corrupted by special/financial interests. You say you're for pure capitalism, yet you defend crony capitalism by not attacking it. Yes, health care/Obamacare is a big deal, but it pales in comparison to what the out-of-control financial industry will do to us ALL of we don't stop them.
Yes, Burst I DO care. I care enough to see that Mitt Romney is NOT going to slap the hand of his financial buddies if he becomes President. And so far Barack Obama hasn't either. That's my dilemma.
S
Oh, and let me add...in these books the authors detail meetings, who attended, what each person said, etc. They give dates, times, places. If they were not true there would be libel suits everywhere. NOBODY has challenged the accuracy of the accounts, therefore I believe them.
ReplyDeleteI guess my hot button is freedom, in general. If I have to be more specific, the First Amendment freedoms would be at the top of my list. Anytime somebody tries to curtail those, I steam.
ReplyDeleteI don't have the answers. I don't think anyone really does - short of a full-blown Revolution - which just would not happen here - Americans don't have the stomach for that kind of grass roots agression against the political machine. Politicians are liars. They may not have started that way but they ALL end up that way if they want to STAY in politics...because that's how the game is played. They think nothing of you or me or any of their constiuents. They will lie, cheat and steal to stay in office. They will tell you exactly what they want you to hear. The are liars - plain and simple because all they believe in is their own personal POWER.
ReplyDeleteI've always seen the world as black and white. I think almost everything can be put into a yes/no, right/wrong, 0/1 format. I think that 20th century thought tried to introduce gray into the argument through secular or humanist philosophies. Perhaps it was a reaction to the two great and failed philosophical and political movements of the 20th century: Communism and Nazism, both of which were brutally intolerant.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, tolerance emerged from the new lexicon of political correctness to become opposite of its original meaning: tolerance is intolerant of anyone opposed to its politically correct meaning.
We can discuss who is to blame for certain financial conditions today but the real crux of our disagreement is the idea that greater choice will result in a better democracy. I don't think it will. As I said before, I think we have two clear choices for each issue facing us. The choices may be, and frequently are, fine-tuned by politicians but democracy does not do well with too many choices; i.e., shades of gray.
European gray democracies work until confronted with crisis. They torture themselves over multiple solutions relevant only in a economically advanced culture and seldom truly answered by legislation too open-ended. During a crisis though, like the current one in Greece, the arguments are again reduced to black and white. It is Europe where the cruelest of intolerance has arisen as Europeans cast aside the gray and make cruel hard choices (i.e., the Jews are responsible for all that is wrong so they must be rounded up and destroyed).
The USA has been successful because it has resisted the European model. Europe has always been a turbulent place and a couple decades of relative peace and prosperity should not be mistaken for a seed-change.
And that, sir, is why I don't think multiple parties are the solution in this country. To paraphrase someone important, nothing is beautiful but the truth and nothing is as ugly as a lie. In other words, there are only two options even if we disagree on which is beautiful and which is ugly.
Bursti, unless you have lived in Europe, you cannot understand how things work here. I made the decision to stay here for good reasons. It is NOT as socialistic as some US media tends to present it. There is so much false propaganda being published about the situations here.
ReplyDeleteThe USA successful? hmmm, glad you think so. Yes, we have a multi party system here and that's GOOD! The third parties often give a much needed balance. With only two, they are constantly on each other's throats. With more parties, there is a basis for compromise... and some times very good input.
Dorrie, did I ever tell you about my life? If not, I really should. Yes, I have spent time in Europe. Even in Germany. And yes, I need to look you up the next time I am there.
ReplyDeleteI think the USA is the most successful nation the world has seen. Exactly because I have spent so much time in different countries. We will differ on third parties. I believe Europe is on a precipice and if the past is any indicator, something bad will arise.
In a multi-party system, compromise is a necessary quality yet one of the most "at your throats" parliaments is Britain's.
Our confrontational system of government has worked exactly this way for more than 200 years. It has taken America to a peak that no other civilization has attained. I'd like it to stay there and so I'd like to defeat the current, Obama movement to make us into a European democracy. I don't want to compromise with Obama, I want to defeat him and drive him out of Washington to a nice golf course in Arizona where he can slip into a Jimmy Carter-like oblivion.
OK then...here's a black and white question for you: Do you believe the absolute minimum regulation of our financial services industry (commercial and investment banking, hedge funds, brokerages, derivatives, swaps, etc) will lead to a long-term stable financial system for us all? (NOTE: What we have now isn't much different from what we had for all of the 21st century to date...remember how that turned out?)
ReplyDeleteIf you say yes, why do you think things will end up any better than they did in 2008? If you say no, then you're agreeing with me, and you'll want some serious regulation, with teeth, that will break up the "too big to fail" banking system. And yes, as things exist today they ARE too big to fail. The consequences will be catastrophic if we don't break them up into small pieces that CAN be allowed to fail if they gamble wrong.
S
Yes, Scott, I believe that a free market governs itself. I believe in minimal government interference and see only negatives when government over burdens the free market, for example: healthcare.
DeleteAs for 2008, it was, as you pointed out, a strong correction to an inflated market that was exacerbated by the bailouts. I don't understand why you think a bank is too big to fail. How do you know? What would be the disastrous consequences (outside of Obama's campaign donors)? Government stimulation prolonged the great depression and is doing exactly the same thing under Obama.
Burst...did I understand you correctly when you said you DID believe things could be seen as black/white, and that "gray" was introduced in the 20th Century? If you said that I strongly suggest you go back and re-read your American History.
ReplyDeleteThe United States Constitution (18th Century) contains the greatest COMPROMISE of all time...the way our system of representation is established. The large states such as MA, VA, and PA wanted a body of representatives apportioned based on population, which would give them more representatives/power. The small states such as DE wanted equal representation regardless of population, otherwise they feared they would be marginalized. The GREAT COMPROMISE....a bicameral system of representation. The House of Representatives satisfies the large states, the Senate satisfies the small states. I suppose you would have stood your ground and NOT compromised if you had been part of the Constitutional Convention? A stand of NO COMPROMISE would have made the Constitution that we both revere today a non-starter.
And for the record, it's not that I so desperately want a third party. I just don't want the two we have right now. They are both rotten to the core, bought and paid for by special interests. They are corrupt.
S
I don't think compromise is wrong. I do it a lot during negotiations. But compromise should be between two alternative points. In the 20th C, the rise of humanism and secularism obfuscated alternative points. Instead of two alternative arguments, there were now 3 or 6 or dozens. Choices became more difficult because with so many solutions, the problems became more complex. In reaction, the political class evolved to guide the masses to the correct solution. The political class has done a good job of usurping both parties but from time to time, one party or the other rejects the political class and returns to its roots. The Tea party, for example, has attempted to take the Republican party away from the political class. Obama took the Democrat party away from the political class but reformed the political class under a new banner.
DeletePolitics has always been about corruption. It isn't the special interests that are corrupt but those that wield the power. In the US, politicians have a habit of turning over pretty fast and so political corruption is not as bad as in other systems.
"In the US, politicians have a habit of turning over pretty fast and so political corruption is not as bad as in other systems."
ReplyDelete??? how many of your senators and representatives have been "in power" for decades? As far as I can tell, there is not enough turn over in your system. And all this bashing of Obama... no, I didn't vote for him, in fact I didn't vote at all because I disliked the Republican choice completely and the Democratic one could have done better. BUT, as I said, it's not his personal fault... his hands have been tied by so many other decission makers.
Germany's unemployment rate has dropped to 6,7%... what's the US rate now?
I could go on and on.... but sorry, no time for further chatting, have to go to work and then a full schedule with the grandkids lol.
Germany's economy is artificially maintained by government supports and the false constraints of the Eurozone that favors Germany above all other nations. Without government support, America's true unemployment rate is more than double Germany's. But America's labor is more efficient than Germany's and America's standard of living is higher. I don't think government is the answer to the unemployment problem, rather a strong economy is the answer. Government has never built a strong economy.
DeleteA famous American president once said, "the buck stops here." It is true. A president is judged by how effectively he implements his ideas. President Obama is a failure on that count, regardless of why, the fault will remain his except in the eyes of his apologists.
We have many politicians that remain in power for far too long but we also have a consistent and regular changing of the guard as Dems and Reps battle for congress. So does Germany but in the battle for compromise, ethics are second fiddle.
Banks are too big to fail in the sense that they are extremely intertwined. They are counterparties with each other on tens of thousands of transactions. If one big one defaults it would cause several others to go to/over the edge. Just look how Lehman's failure caused the entire system to seize up. Credit was essentially unavailable, credit that business needed to conduct its daily business. Another analogy....you don't thnk if GM and Chrysler had been allowed to fail completely they wouldn't have taken a lot of suppliers down with them? Could they have come back from bankruptcy without government asistance?. Fiat said point blank they wouldn't have been willing to put any money into Chrysler, and no one else would touch them. And suppliers to Chrysler also supply GM and Ford. The auto business is intertwined, too. GM? Who knows. And the banking industry DWARFS the auto industry. I believe in breaking up the banking giants into pieces that individually are NOT too big to fail. If each part knows they have no government backstop, then they might begin to conduct business more prudently.
ReplyDeleteObviously we'll have to agree to disagree. But remember this exchange: If your view prevails and banks continue to run free, there will be another financial catastrophie, likey MUCH worse than what we saw in 2008.
S
Credit was unavailable but capital remained. Those that had the cash have emerged in a much stronger position. My own company is a good example.
ReplyDeleteIf GM and Chrysler failed, do you think no one would have stepped into the void?
Would Ford have emerged in a stronger position? Would Toyota have built more US plants? Would new, more efficient companies have emerged out of the mess of GM, Chrysler or Bank of America? I think so and I think so because I believe that the American spirit of capitalism will prevail. I think this is the best goddam system in the history of the world and it provides the best goddam standard of living that any society has ever enjoyed. You can be poor in this country and own two cars!
We will always have ups and downs. Its the natural way of dealing with the weak and inefficient. There is nothing wrong with that. It needs to be the natural way because artificially maintaining the weak and inefficient leads to worse.
Our position at the top of the world heap has never been in question until the last 3 years. The Obama years have been a nightmare for this country both domestically and internationally. If you are satisfied with where we are, like our friend Dorrie, keep Obama and corrupt Congressional control in office. If you want to soar as only America is capable of doing, get rid of the bastard in the White House and then lets focus on truly turning over Congress. I want the goddam government out of my life. Period.
No offense intended to anyone...
ReplyDeleteNo offense taken, my friend. But still, we disagree. You ask, "If GM and Chrysler failed, do you think no one would have stepped into the void? Would Ford have emerged in a stronger position? Would Toyota have built more US plants?
ReplyDeleteThe answer...NO! Ford would likely have failed,too. Read "American Icon: Alan Mulally and the Fight to Save Ford Motor Company". How come? Because their supplier base was interconnected. Suppliers could not have stayed in business with JUST Ford's business. To omake it they need the volume of selling to ALL the automakers. Ford would not have been able to obtain the components they need to build their cars, yet their fixed costs would have continued. Bye bye Ford. Same with Toyota...build NEW plants? They wouldn't have been able to buy the components to keep their existing plants open, much less build new ones.
I would love to have a complete sweep of ALL incumbents from office. It would be a shock, but I think we'd be much better off. Trouble is, with only the Democratic and Republican parties to choose from, we'd be no better off. And they have invested considerable political capital keeping out any new parties for that very reason.
I agree history has shown we have an incredibly wonderful system of government. Trouble is, IMO, over the past half century it has become compromised. Today We the People have minimal influence over Congress and the White House. That perogative is now in the hands of the special interests.
In many ways we agree, but you seem to be fond of seeing things in theoretical, textbook, ideological terms. I see things as they really are in the everyday world. They differ greatly.
Bursti, you say:" Germany's economy is artificially maintained by government supports and the false constraints of the Eurozone that favors Germany above all other nations. Without government support, America's true unemployment rate is more than double Germany's. But America's labor is more efficient than Germany's and America's standard of living is higher."
ReplyDeletenot true! The German government has privitised more and more businesses. Telecommunication, post departments, and much more are now privately run, no longer government.
German standard of living is TOPS! Where do you get that it's sub American? In some cases we are even higher. I often found things in the USA at times still in the middle ages, for example... we no longer get paid with paper checks via the postal system, or weekly pay checks. ALL pay is done via bank transfer, and I've done online banking since 1992!
What standard of living do you mean is better in the USA? We have very few homeless and I think our crime rate is also much lower.
"You can be poor in this country and own two cars!" and who pays for that?? The businesses that get in trouble here are often ones that American companies took over.... Opel taken over by GM (there's a special word for their type of take-over.... and it's not a nice one) and now maybe an important factory may close down, causing unemployment (just one of many examples).
Sorry, Bursti, but America is NOT what it once was and Europe IS a good place to live (ok, perhaps not in Greece or Italy at the moment lol)