Quite A Week Of Legacy Bashing
It was quite a week in the annals of Legacy Bashing.
First, Edward Kennedy’s forty-year efforts to reform the health insurance industry appear to have come to naught with Scott Brown elected to fill his vacated Senate seat. And two days later, John McCain’s campaign finance laws go down in flames in a 5-4 Supreme Court decision (Citation: Citizens United over the Federal Election Commission (warning, PDF file) striking down spending limits on corporate and union electioneering in candidate elections.
A victory of the philosophical over the practical, the decision hands unionist and corporatist interests a literal blank check for further subverting democracy in America. With virtually unlimited budgets to influence public policy and persuade elected officials into doing their bidding, this ruling guarantees that Congress-members will spend an even bigger majority of their time in fundraising pursuits instead of causing mischief in the legislative chambers. SCOTUS has, in effect, turned K Street into the American electorate, and handed the likes of GE and NewsCorp the right to elect our leaders for us.
In spite of all the wailing and rending of garments, this may not be an entirely bad thing. After all, corporations and unions do represent their membership—unduly influenced though their labor force and shareholders may be by their management. Without the political clout of a powerful parent entity or family empire behind them, the chances of an individual American prospering on the strength their own efforts are hugely diminished—if for no other reason than from anti-competitive strategies employed against them by larger, better-established rivals. After all, these entities are de facto republics, ostensibly using their power of representation to bargain and fundraise on behalf of their shareholders and memberships; the ultimate expression of free market enterprise at its collectivist finest…er, oops.
And let’s face it, when 42% of Americans never buy and read another book after graduating from college, Winston Churchill’s famous dismissal, “All I need to know about democracy can be gleaned from one five-minute conversation with the average member of the electorate,” seems increasingly sage. Just consider how many voters (let alone candidates,) still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9-11 attacks, or could explain why there is a border between North and South Korea. In 1966 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not levy a poll tax or literacy tests as a prerequisite to voting in state and local elections. Maybe this Supreme Court will want to reconsider those arguments as well?
To people who argue that markets allocate resources better than politics do, I would say that in America, markets are our politics. Markets determine policy—and who gets taxed to pay for what, (and in whose pockets those monies end up.) Wall Street, literally The Market, is in every sense of the word the driver of American policy, both foreign and domestic.
Markets determine social policy. The housing bubble did not come about out of a heightened sense altruism on the part of the credit lending or real estate industries. The American Dream (whatever that may once have meant,) was reconfigured by Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, to mean “owning” a house. Period. Clever manipulation of both credit markets and the mass media combined to pull off the biggest con game of all time; and legitimate issues groups like HBB are left essentially powerless in its wake. Even if every single reader of this blog pledged $10 a month to lobbying efforts, it wouldn’t even make a dent in what a concerted campaign by the NAR could counter—let alone one launched by a privately-held corporation like the Fed. Our best intentions and efforts to the contrary, we’ve all seen what Mozillo’s Money did to the standards and practices of the mortgage lending industry. Now Big Money is free to take over the rest of our public decisions for us too.
Markets determine who gets to make the laws. Mrs. Palin would never have been considered a realistic candidate for elected public office had she not been perceived by the Oiligarchs as an easily-manipulated stooge for the oil industry. Arnold Schwartzenegger would never have been elected to the governorship of California had he not made a pact with Kenny Lay and Michael Milken to drop Gray Davis’s federal lawsuit against Enron and its shadow energy subsidiaries once he reached office. Chris Dodd would never have come to chair the Senate Banking Committee without the explicit backing of the insurance and financial industries headquartered in his home state. Worse for issues groups, markets only tend to strengthen incumbencies. Money buys loyalty–just ask the aforementioned Senator Dodd.
But to some, this Supreme Court decision is a victory for free speech. Such smaller but outspoken issues organizations as Planned Parenthood and gay rights groups, the ACLU, and the NRA are corporations, too. They are now free to raise and spend as much money electing public officials as their supporters– limited only by their consciences and pocketbooks– care to donate. Buying and maintaining a legislator is a time-honored American tradition. Now in the time of internet fund-raising, it’s not outside the realm of possibility for an issues group in, say, Utah to purchase the services of a Congressman in North Dakota. Or an anti-civil rights amendment in California. Conversely, through a well-conducted national email campaign, a wine store in Maine can overturn an interstate ban on wine sales to Massachusetts. The sword cuts both ways.
But herein lies the essential problem. Although free speech is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, equal access to it is not. And equal campaign financing is definitely not. Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign raised over a half a billion dollars from PACs and private individuals– far exceeding the hundred million or so reportedly donated to John McCain. Although by exploiting loopholes in McCain’s own campaign finance reform law, the RNC was able to funnel additional hundreds of millions more to him, he was nonetheless at a disadvantage because he chose to accept his own government public financing option and forego the beneficence of The Market. Now that the RNC’s reserves have been drained in that failed effort and they need a way to replenish them, this SCOTUS ruling in favor of corporations should come as no huge surprise to anyone familiar with the politics behind the power.
Howard Dean’s health reform proposal and Ron Paul’s campaign against the Fed are classic examples of populist causes subsumed by corporate interests. Now that SCOTUS has given unions and corporations free rein to buy out private voices, it remains to be seen whether or not these voices will be stilled completely, or whether the wave of public outrage sweeping our nation will force a reexamination of the inner workings of our judiciary along with those our other national institutions.
It’s not unprecedented. If Congress has the will and the backing of the American people, Supreme Court rulings can indeed be overturned or circumvented. FDR’s 1937 attempts at “court packing” could be revisited. Or it’s possible that Congress could pass a Constitutional amendment overturning the SCOTUS “Prohibition” on campaign finance limitations. But neither of these options is likely, given the number of equally pressing and philosophically less challenging concerns already threatening to overwhelm our Country. With a dead economy, two un-winnable wars, the failed states of Haiti and Mexico at our doorstep, and a generation about to retire bankrupted, such frivolities as whether or not America remains a democratic republic seem almost superfluous.
But some good may yet come out of all of this. In a time of rampaging unemployment, particularly in the creative arts industries, those recent “communications” graduates we all take such delight in disparaging may find their career outlooks vastly improved with the billion$ that are sure to flow into the coffers of the production companies and advertising agencies who bring us the 2010 political season. Certainly pollsters and lobbyists will get a new $hot in the arm, and at least one enterprising politician is taking advantage of this controversy to make himself –or rather, his campaign—a pile o’ money. Congressman Alan Grayson, (D. FL.,) most recently of the successful House campaign to bring daylight into the shrouded inner chambers of the Fed, has already announced a petition and fundraising campaign to protest the ruling. Look for Elliot Spitzer to restart his political career on its coattails, and a host of hopefuls from the run-the-bums-out provinces to jump on the Reform Party bandwagon. Elizabeth Warren comes to mind, as do the rational wings of the Ron Paul Contingency and MoveOnHuffKos. Who knows, when enough “ordinary” Americans get sick of seeing “This Assembly brought to you by Verizon” plastered all over their State Houses, and “The Beer of Proposition 8″ imprinted on their brewskis, this might just be the one issue that finally unites our Country’s disparate politics in favor of a true American Democracy again.
by Allena Hansen
From the post:
But some good may yet come out of all of this. In a time of rampaging unemployment, particularly in the creative arts industries, those recent “communications” graduates we all take such delight in disparaging may find their career outlooks vastly improved with the billion$ that are sure to flow into the coffers of the production companies and advertising agencies who bring us the 2010 political season.
My comment:
Speaking as a member of the aforementioned creative arts industry, I’m here to tell y’all that the increase in work opportunities are not going to come in the form of employment. Rather, they will be in the form of freelance work.
Which means that the future will belong to those who can view their skillsets as packages of services that can be sold on a project basis. And, once the project is done, so is the gig. Time to go looking for another.
This is a megatrend that is starting to spill over into other industries. And that implies that the government’s current efforts to spur job creation will be for naught. Because jobs as we used to know them will not be coming back.
BTW, in addition to rantin’ and ravin’ on this blog, I write for an online hangout for freelancers called Freelance Switch. One of my recent articles describes the current state of freelancing. I think you’ll find the comments that follow it to be interesting.
those recent “communications” graduates we all take such delight in disparaging may find their career outlooks vastly improved with the billion$ that are sure to flow into the coffers of the production companies and advertising agencies who bring us the 2010 political season.
Who says that work won’t be offshored?
I’ve tried that. Never again.
Why not? Because I found that there was quite a language barrier between me and my overseas subcontractors. They also didn’t have the same time urgency as Americans. It took days to get very simple things done.
I was thinking more of Canada.
“Who says that work won’t be offshored?”
I work as a freelancer in the ad industry.
There’s a limit to how much can be “offshored;” the creative aspect, particularly, requires high level of cultural affinity. Even the best-educated people in India aren’t likely to be able to write effective copy or design effective TV spots to sell cars, iPhones — or public policy– to American consumers.
Giacomo,
Right, and no good gig last forever either? We get it, if you worked at a job making hammers, you could be on the bubble?
We spend so much time focusing on what can -not- be done here, we often miss the things that ‘can’.
I think what will happen is gradually our cultural tastes will morph into a more Euro-Asian-world variety, to which foreigners will be able to cater. We’re already seeing some of that. Look how popular some of Japan’s fads have become over here.
In Montana,
“no good gig last forever” ( And I meant it! )
No, I ‘do’ hear you. As they merge, we’ll lose the home field advantage. To be fair, there’s a TON of Jap-Fads that didn’t translate?
Such as the Sony Mini disc…..great piece of technology for its day, but sony marketed to J6P instead of the people who really bought the item…yup us DJ’s.
———————-
there’s a TON of Jap-Fads that didn’t translate?
Although this was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, you’re absolutely correct in that project-oriented employment is likely the way of the future. Who knows, with enough downsizing, maybe we’ll all go back to finding a patron in the aristocracy to support our work– one with a lot of serfs and vassals.
The self employed are the self reliant. The self reliant built a great society in these United States. Since the Great Depression as a nation we’ve been looking for hand outs and new government programs when our government is broke. The penalty for printing money will be a generation that has a big bill and isn’t happy about it. This I believe will be the end of our republic if we don’t change our ways.
I forget who said it…..that deal about a republic lasting till the citizens found they could vote themselves largesse from the public treasury…..seems to apply now more than ever.
Inspired by the Supreme Court decision, I proposed a new solution for the suffering MSM: a reporterless newspaper whose “news” was whatever interests with money paid to put into it. That’s free speech, isn’t it?
We already have CNBC. It may not be a fish wrap but they get the job done.
…”or whether the wave of public outrage sweeping our nation…”
Against the SCOTUS decision? I don’t see it. Yes, the Huffington and MoveOn bloggers are up in arms, but that’s more a ripple than a wave. J6P’s concerns are on jobs and the economy, and any future voting decision he makes is not going to be based on which candidate might favor and which one might oppose a law overturning that decision.
BTW, that wasn’t so hard, was it?
Yeah, Bill, you’re right. This issue is far too nuanced to engage the people it affects the most. So what else is new?
back at cha.
PS. By “wave” I was referring to the spate of populist backlash we’ve seen of late– and about which I’ve been writing. The Tea Party, Ron Paul and Alan Grayson, Elizabeth Warren, Scott Brown’s election, the subtle changes in the popular media, et al. Watch for it to be addressed at length in the SOTU address tonight.
SOTU’s not until tomorrow night. Tune in at 9 p.m. Eastern Time.
I think I’d rather listen to the delusional homeless guy down the block talk to me about the current state of our nation. He blacks out every once in a while during his soliloquies but they are still more factual than what I would witness tomorrow night.
As long as Geithner, Bernanke, Summers, etc. are all still around that guy has zero, and I mean zero, credibility on anything.
As long as Geithner, Bernanke, Summers, etc. are all still around that guy has zero, and I mean zero, credibility on anything.
Like it or not, the Dems will realize this too late. But the Republicans will just replace them with similar stooges who are better at spin.
I still can’t believe McCain thought Phil Gramm and Doug Holtz-Eakin would fix the economy and health care (one is a tool and Wall Street shill, the other one would have advocated giveaways to pharma and insurance companies).
Both parties could care less about real reform of anything.
It’s tomorrow, but I will be enjoying a meal at the Wool Growers and some good Basco wine. Couldn’t care less what the Lier in Chief has to say.
There’s no outrage from me. I think for once, the SC did the right thing.
The “campaign finance reform” Bill was a disaster and I had contempt for McCain when it was proposed. There was no reform except to put a choke-hold on free speech by involved citizens.
It gave the “PRESS” a free reign to publish supporting campaign propaganda as “news” and stopped individuals from banding together to circulate voting information to their neighbors.
I used to circulate some flyers when election time was coming to show the RECORDS of Politicians and Judges concerning how they voted on key issues. That should be a job for the PRESS. Every year, they should publish what each Senator and Congressman has done since the last election concerning all votes. IT NEVER HAPPENS.
Instead, we get an OPINION piece and endorsments from the press.
This is NOT democracy. It is deception. IF most people were made to recall how so-and-so voted, they would VOTE them OUT.
But this never happens, so citizens have been left to band together to provide this vital information, most importantly weeks and days before the election. McCAin=feingold made that illegal.
It was one of the crapiest bills to ever hit the floor and there have been many.
I applaud the SC for doing the right thing. There are other ways to rein in “finance” for campaigns besides putting a muffle on peoples free speech.
Excellent point, Diogenes.
Citizens banding together to get the information out is precisely what free speech is all about. When that opportunity is effectively muzzled by the MSM, incumbents, and institutional interests, it’s just that much harder to do.
I’ve yet to hear of any good ideas to resolve this conundrum…and as you point out, it is indeed a thorny one. Where do you strike the balance between the PTB and We The People? Suggestions?
clapping load and furious, the applause meter just pegged. Thanks Dio.
“There was no reform except to put a choke-hold on free speech by involved citizens.”
Exactly! Well said, Diogenes.
The good old USA has a very big problem it is called Truth and can you stand the truth? The country has been on borrowed time for many years now and like people who bought to much house or to many houses the bill collector came and foreclosed.
Pretty much the USA was foreclosed on also but they print the money so they can at least for the time being make it look like all is getting better.
300+ million people, many think they are entitled to a high paying job because they went to college and owe a huge student loan then they find out there isn’t enough high paying jobs to support the lifestyle they think being born in America entitles them to.
Americans saw the Life styles of the Rich and Famous (the program that single handed ruin the country) along with granite counters and stainless steel kitchens and they thought that was the ticket to being rich, buy and sell houses.
The gov’t was to busy on selling the country on war in the Middle East a very hard sell to be sure. The banks were happy as a lark and real estate agents who barely made it out of HS took a real estate exam and made a fortune while people who graduated from college with student loans to pay were left wondering who was the really smart people in life.
In the end the USA saw a auto industry broke which they now own, Country Wide Mortgage a once darling of the industry broke, most Reagents who know nothing and charged up to 6% commission on your home now broke, and trillions not millions or billions in gov’t debt which we all are suppose to believe will go away and all will be fine and dandy.
May i suggest that college degrees your family went into debt for be put to good use as wall paper for the rented apt you will be in for many years , come to think about it you are better off renting then buying a home any way.
BTW young people become a lobbyist for big business, that is the job of the future in this Nation?
“300+ million people, many think they are entitled to a high paying job because they went to college and owe a huge student loan…”
Tell me about it. I wish I could tell you exactly how many recently graduated hires I’ve made at the entry level paying $12+ per hour only to have them complain that it’s not enough. Perhaps it’s my fault for thinking entry-level is exactly that. By the time I pay health benefits, unemployment tax, SSI, and workers comp, that $12 per hour position actually costs me well over $40K per year.
A lot of American kids have been conditioned by popular culture to believe that once they graduate from Podunk U, they’re entitled to a car, an apartment of their own, $400 shoes, and Friday nights at the MetroBar. As they’re discovering, they’re not. The era of the Yupster is soooo over– mercifully– if indeed it ever really existed. Maybe this new group coming up can get US back on track with a more realistic set of societal expectations.
It’s to the point now where I’d much rather entertain hiring someone without college that has some work experience as opposed to a recent college graduate. The 4 year party/endurance test doesn’t entitle you to anything but some expensive student loans. I’ve got an MBA and was about 80% of the way through my DBA before deciding not to continue and I’m very disappointed with higher education.
I agree that an MBA is an utter waste of time and money.
Curious…why do you look for a college graduate for an entry level $12 per hour job? IMO, those are not jobs one goes to college for.
Sounds like you all have a great plan. Get rid of college graduates because a few get all uppity about what they deserve in the $12 (only $4 more than McDonalds starts at in my area) salary range.
While we are griping about pathetic hypocritical generations, let’s go the other way too for some balance:
1) The elder generation had fair priced college, but jacked up the cost for their kids.
2) The elder generation had their period of ‘free love’ but then it’s ‘Just Say No’ for their kids.
3) The elder generation had their period of good jobs, decent starting salaries and control coming out World War II, but outsourced it all away to Asia, and then complain about their kids wanting that back.
4) The elder generation could carry a family on 1 salary, and now that’s a pipe dream.
5) Guess who is still in control? The elder generation, but now instead of blaming all their problems on their parents, they blame it all on their kids.
6) They force out their parents from good jobs because they are ‘too old’, and demand that their kids only make peanuts for the same jobs.
7) The baby boomers complain about their kids’ education when they are the teachers.
There are good eggs out there, but generally, when the baby boomers are gone, the US is gonna be a better place. I don’t think there has ever been a more entitled and self-interested generation who, when given control, have done as much damage.
Good post Overdog
I have to smile as I recall making these same arguements against MY elders and the mess they’d left us boomers. All the while railing against “our generation’s” powerlessness to affect “the establishment,” and how royally we’d been skewered by our demographic circumstances.
In thirty years or so, you too will be able to shake your head at the presumptions of the younger generations bitching at you for the mess YOU’VE made of THEIR world.
I’m no baby boomer and your attitude reinforces what those boomers think about the present generation.
Let’s start out with $12 per hour. That’s 50% more than what McDonald’s starts at in your area. It’s $8,320 more in a year. Additionally my firm pays benefits and gives paid vacation. What do you suppose that costs? Let’s take it one step further and figure out what type of lifestyle can be had for one on $12 per hour. A 1 bedroom apartment in these parts is about $700 per month. An all inclusive studio will run you about $600.
So let’s take your $1,500 take home and subtract $600 for your rent and you’re left with $900. You have to pay for your food, transportation, and entertainment out of that $900. That means no money for coach handbags and $200 bar tabs. At the entry level you should be eager to move up the ladder, not happy with the status quo. Clearly there’s enough money to live on $12 per hour (in most parts of the country) but not enough to get your “entitlements.” Everyone needs to start somewhere.
There’s something else about entry-level jobs: A lot of them really stink. If they had an odor, it would be Eau de Skunk.
Now that we’ve described the aroma wafting around this comment, here’s the bright side:
There’s nothing like a crummy job to motivate you to find something better to do. Like beef up your skills so you can get a better job. Or decide to use the crummy job as a savings generator so you can do something you’d really enjoy. Such as becoming a freelancer or going for a long bicycle trip. (Yours Truly has done both.)
Oh Yeah…It always makes more good sense to hire some guy on the cheap that has experience selling firecrackers rather than some trainable kid that has some at least 4 yrs education in civil/mining engineering as your one of your blast engineers.
In-house corporate lawyers and their Mba’s call it “Management Risk” or “Management Perogrative” and it leaves a wonderful hole in the financial ground sheets when the company or indiviadual kills someone or you gets sued $hitless.
From mining to medicine and from aviation to law…there is a good reason some industries and companies demand to see some form of basic college degree, certificate of training, educational sheepskin or license to practice.
I don’t care if you’re running US Steel Minnesota Mining Operations Division or a fly-by-night North Carolina turkey kill plant. If they don’t have the proper basic education or training, you better provide comprehensive in-house testing, training and documented records, even if the job is just simply driving a forklift or working on assembly line.
In today’s business world, you are resposible for your Employee’s Actions and you get what you pay for…even the MBA’s that preach Management Risk or Perogratives.
Just Sayin’
Andy, could you tell us a little about your company? What kind of business are they in? What are these new college graduates getting hired to do? Are there actual oppurtunities for a significant number of $12/hour employees to move up the ladder? Or is it a very small number who got chosen to be supervisors or whatever?
I’m in the property and casualty insurance business. You’ve pretty much got 2 tracks in this job. The sales track and the service track.
Salespeople start in the $12 per hour range and they start by answering phones and doing files, same as the service people. Once they’re licensed and comfortable pay is in the $50 to $75K per year range. After years of hard work and renewals, $100K+ isn’t uncommon. Some will go on and open their own agencies and the opportunity is limitless.
Service people also have a place to move up the ladder. Good service people who are trusted to service large commercial accounts are generally paid around $40K with full benefits. Get the office manager job and you’re in the neighborhood of $60K per year, again with full benefits.
Salespeople start in the $12 per hour range and they start by answering phones and doing files, same as the service people.
Good telephone skills can take you all sorts of places. They’re nothing to sneeze at. (But please put your phone on mute before you sneeze. And, if you don’t cover that sneeze, clean the telephone receiver and your work area.)
6) They force out their parents from good jobs because they are ‘too old’, and demand that their kids only make peanuts for the same jobs.
yes but they gave their parents pretty good entitlements as a trade something they won’t get themselves
read “the fourth turning” or maybe you already have ?
96) They force out their parents from good jobs because they are ‘too old’, and demand that their kids only make peanuts for the same jobs.
And to pile on, they forced their parents from good jobs because they were ‘too old,’ but when it came time for them to retire and open jobs for their kids, they hang on kicking and screaming. (probably because they traded up their manse one time too many)
Wow Bad Andy…I would venture to guess Cubb or Federated Insurance commerical lines due to their adversion to accept loses. Their Risk/Loss Control/Underwriting/ gangs seems sucessful in weeding out their risk pools due to a history of carefully Cherry Picking only safe customers their niche pools.
Well, Cubb Insurance has had some problems there ….
You got it Bad Andy take care
swguy,
Great post btw. I dig where you’re coming from. While I look forward to a day when “societal expectations” do NOT include LSOTRAF, there’s no call to tell college age kids, you’re in for a life of serfdom, and there’s no turning back! Sob, sob.
The game is different, no doubt, but have we forgotten how to adapt altogether?
LSOTRAF
For the acronym-challenged, that’s Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.
You can always hope the younger generation will rebel against serfdom. Of course that means the currently retired won’t have their retirement benefits paid.
WT,
Don’t we owe them at least that much? I’d never expect trough-fed public servants to relinquish ALL of their “hard fought” benefits, but at some point, given you’ll have to get off that fluffy chair ‘any’ way..?
Why not do it out of ‘generousity’ ( read necessity ) and at least smooth over the relationship? IMHO.
Social security is a prime example of why government should not be allowed to handle most aspects of life. There’s no more money for social security. The sooner we realize it and phase the program out, the better.
“Social security is a prime example of why government should not be allowed to handle most aspects of life. There’s no more money for social security. The sooner we realize it and phase the program out, the better”
Right…we can let you private insurance company boyz or the Wall Street gang “handle it”
They have all done absolute wonders for the US Heath Care Costs and investments …with other peoples money.
Insurance salemen and companies have little more crediblity than the floor whores in used car lots they sometimes insurance in my book and I am old enough and experienced to have known plenty of both.
“The gov’t was to busy on selling the country on war in the Middle East a very hard sell to be sure.”
It wasn’t that difficult except possibly for Colin Powell. Many of the coastal tech-liberals work in the defense related industries, and in flyover country everyone gets their programming from a pastor who reminds them that Jesus won’t return if the JOOZ aren’t the landlord, so there is an ample supply of tobacco chewing ground forces. Now…just keep the expenses off the books. The smart folks know what’s happening, but they won’t admit it in a casually because they know the U.S. is living under an retaliatory financer’s occupation.
3) The elder generation had their period of good jobs, decent starting salaries and control coming out World War II, but outsourced it all away to Asia, and then complain about their kids wanting that back.
Thanks overdog. That’s the key point missed by most posters. How can blame be assigned without talking about outsourcing?
First, Edward Kennedy’s forty-year efforts to reform the health insurance industry appear to have come to naught with Scott Brown elected to fill his vacated Senate seat. And two days later, John McCain’s campaign finance laws go down in flames in a 5-4 Supreme Court decision (Citation: Citizens United over the Federal Election Commission (warning, PDF file) striking down spending limits on corporate and union electioneering in candidate elections.
Yes - it was a GREAT week. And don’t forget Air America went bankrupt and went off the air!
This whole piece is one kooky left wing rant lacking any ties to reality. Where to even start?
Markets determine social policy. The housing bubble did not come about out of a heightened sense altruism on the part of the credit lending or real estate industries.
Your are right - government got involved. The reason there is so much lobbying? Big government is involved in all aspects of our lives.
Want to end lobbying? REDUCE GOVERNMENT. Imagine if government told the banks - you make a bad loan, you eat it. We are not going to back you nor tell you how to lend. You figure it out or go bankrupt. Lobbying for banks would drop to zero. Now multiply by the 100,000 other things big government is involved in.
Right, naners. How terrifying it must be to live in a reality where a piece excoriating the death of John McCain’s legacy legislation is perceived as a leftist rant.
Frankly there are too many holes in this great “legacy legislation” that many have driven trucks through. Corporate and individual money needs to be banned from the electoral process. How we get there I don’t know.
I agree, Andy, McCain-Feingold was only a template and riddled with loopholes– as McCain’s own presidential bid so aptly demonstrated. But like the health “care” monstrosity, at least it was a starting point with an aim towards shifting the power base in this country away from the corporate oligarchy and back towards the people. Democracy is always a work in progress.
Democracy is always a work in progress.
And, for a housing-based analogy, a work in progress is what your kitchen looks like while it’s being remodeled.
There is a simple answer to health care. It’s allowing policies to be sold across state lines and eliminate underwriting criteria for pre-existing conditions. Competition really would make health care more affordable. If it was more affordable, more people would buy it.
Should there be a mandate on coverage? That I have to answer with a huge ABSOLUTELY NOT! Make medical bills like student loans, you can’t discharge them in a bankruptcy. Then if someone makes the decision not to purchase coverage, they know it’s on them.
Phil Gramm was McCain’s economic adviser during his campaign. Gramm was the father of the movement to overturn the Glass-Steagall Act. McCain, Obama, all of them, are one in the same.
When I became a political atheist, I regained my sanity. As someone here coined the term, “addicted to hope-ium”
Bad Andy-
With all due respect, as a person who fought tooth and nail with BC (Individual Plan) to pay my medical bills, I disagree. Just because you have health insurance, doesn’t mean you aren’t sitting on a pile of liabilies. Just ask Allena. If my Attorney hadn’t coached me, I would have been up ***** creek. You don’t know the truth about your insurance carrier, until God-forbid you need to use it.
While I understand there are problems with some health carriers, the vast majority of health carriers do a good job. Look to the big brand name carriers with a reputation at stake. Avoid buying the least expensive policy based on price alone.
If you think you have a hard time with private companies, try dealing with the government. Do you like the service you get from the IRS? I live in Florida and our largest home insurer is the government. No one who’s ever had to deal with them has glowing reviews about getting their claims paid…OH…and you can’t sue them for acting in bad faith if they wrong you.
Politicians are by definition, creatures of the body politic– meaning they are all of the same body. At this point that body is less of an amoeba, and more of a paramecium. You can cut off one segment, but the damned thing will replicate itself and grow back.
Though I am personally about as detached from the processed excreta of this beast as it is possible to be, I nonetheless consider it a civic duty to keep poking at it with an electrode to nudge it back into the culture and keep it from sliming over the petri dish and onto the floor– lest it escape and terrorize the countryside.
“Make medical bills like student loans, you can’t discharge them in a bankruptcy.”
Oh, jeebus, thank god you’re not making the laws. People choose to go to college, but they don’t choose cancer for gods sake. And, if you think insurance pays for all of the expenses of cancer treatment, you need to wake up.
Andy: if you’re talking about government-run health care, there’s no need to use the IRS as an example. We already have it and it’s called Medicare. It’s working quite well for our senior citizens, with many fewer horrow stories than we hear about private health insurance companies. It’s also much more efficient.
Grizzly, there’s very little that isn’t covered on a comprehensive health insurance policy. You do run into situations such as lifetime maximums…but with no exemptions for pre-existing conditions, you’d in theory be free to buy another policy if you hit a lifetime maximum.
Mike, Medicare is underfunded, and full of fraud. You might want to look into the system before defending it. Talk to doctors. Most of them would prefer not to accept Medicare at all…and don’t get me started on Medicaid…
I was looking at the big picture there. Medicare has far fewer issues with not paying legitimate claims for necessary care than private insurance companies. It’s also more efficient than private insurance because it spends much less on administrative overhead than they do.
That’s the big picutre. Regarding your other points, fraud exists in Medicare claims, perhaps even more fraud than insurance companies have to deal with. However, it shouldn’t be too difficult to start working on that issue. More agents can be hired in the division of the FBI that deals with Medicare fraud.
Regarding the underfunding issue, that is ultimately caused by the fact that medical spending has been growing significantly faster than inflation for decades now. Nobody has found a way to deal with that, which is why insurance premiums are much more expensive than they were just 10 years ago and employers are pushing more costs onto their employees.
There’s also a bit of a conundrum in your last point. Doctors don’t like Medicare because it doesn’t pay as much as they would like. However, paying doctors more would exacerbate the underfunding issue further.
Doctor here. Love Medicare. Make plenty money. Patients love Medicare. No preauthorizations - lovely!
“There is a simple answer to health care. It’s allowing policies to be sold across state lines and eliminate underwriting criteria for pre-existing conditions.”
“Competition really would make health care more affordable. If it was more affordable, more people would buy it.”
Yes, that’s true.
But this “allowing policies to be sold across state lines” business? What is it in reality? Think. Regulatory arbitrage.
There will NOT be more competition at all.
The undoubted result is that virtually all insurance companies will exit all states but one, whichever has the least regulation (i.e. making them pay what they promise) and the most overburdened regulator. 8% of the US GDP will flow through one tiny office in the capital of say North Louisiana. And funnily enough, the insurance commissioner of North Louisiana just doesn’t happen to be motivated to investigate insurance fraud against those Californian *nonconstituents*. Especially after taking in a game at the luxury box of UnitedBlueHealth Stadium. And especially after the North Louisiana legislature immunizes those Major Downtown Employers from out of state class suits.
It won’t happen? It’s already the reality with credit cards. Would you bet your life?
And there is no Federal Insurance Reserve with even theoretical regulatory power.
And why limit to “across state lines”. Why not Puerto Rico? Cayman Islands.
If campaigns are not funded by individual and group entity contributions then were will the funding come from? Tax payers? I don’t think it is a good idea to let the government decide which candidates and what parties are eligible for funding. And then you must consider if it would even be constitutional.
Bingo, vaelse.
Who gets to elect/bring to power whom, is really the essence of politics. Preserving the balance of that power is in itself a balancing act fraught with the possibility for mischief. While the old adage “them what has the money calls the shots” has always been the case, at least the Constitution allows for the possibility of a populist voice. Preserving that voice is OUR responsibility.
When you take political attack ads both in print and television off the table, there’s very little funding required at all. Public, televised debate should be where politicians get their exposure. Then you wouldn’t need expensive paid staffers to watch BS poll numbers and tell you how to spin your agenda.
Bad Andy,
Good point. And when we ‘do’ see debates, there’s all kinds of ground rules and things the candidates simply refuse to address and all kinds of restrictions etc.
I say Let’s get ready to ruuuumble! As you’ve alreadt shared, given the huge budgets involved and all that money on the line, neither candidate wants to take any risks. Stale, boring, polite.
While I understand there are problems with some health carriers, the vast majority of health carriers do a good job.
Until you need them.
2banana,
So true. In his follow-on post swguy actually -advises- young people that employment as lobbyist is actually where the growth market resides! ( Kind of funny actually? )
And I think this is the ’second’ time Air America went belly up. I guess I’m a little hyper-sensitive about all this potecting of one’s legacy as ( going back to Greenspan ) is a lot of what brought us here. Hell, I’m even dealing with it on a local level!
Want to end lobbying? REDUCE GOVERNMENT
How much do you reduce government to end lobbying? 10 percent? 50 percent? 90 percent? And then wouldn’t it just move to the state and local level? You can’t have 300 million people running around without government. The defense money alone would keep lobbyists around.
Uh, jess, that’s exactly what some of these guys want.
For the record, I hope I’m not being lumped into ‘that’ group. No one has been more vocal about loading up the REIC/MBS Channel w/ more regs. than you can shake a stick at! In fact I’ve gotten downright impatient about it.
Nor do I recall writing any Pro-Chaos posts? ( Yeah, that’ll help ) Still, I have to believe that if you shrink state/local by a roughly equal amount..? ( It’s so crazy it just might work! )
OT…but for you wingnuts that love to hate ACORN
“FBI Arrests James O’Keefe At Landrieu’s Office
James O’Keefe, the conservative filmmaker who posed as a pimp in video stings at ACORN field offices, has been arrested by the FBI at Sen. Mary Landrieu’s (D-LA) office in downtown New Orleans, in connection to what appears to be an attempt to wiretap the offiice, NOLA”
http://tinyurl.com/ycr6fdn
The FBI press release
http://tinyurl.com/yzlgebg
Just in case our liberal friends in the MSM…overlook this one
Maybe James is buddies with Jeff Gannon…
“Maybe James is buddies with Jeff Gannon…”
All the conservative family values types are “special” buddies. Larry Craig, Mark Sanford, Mark Foley, John Ensign, Ted Haggard, Jeff Gannon, etc. They like the authoritarian, black boot, jack boot nationalistic bent a’la nazi brownshirts.
Weren’t most of the brownshirts also gay or bi but denied it publicly?
Follow who is paying the lawyers and posting the bail bond monies.
Flanagan is an acting US District Attorney’s son. The other with him are from out of state.
Go figure
sorry… here’s the FBI Special Agents sworn affidavit in the James O’Keefe Gang Bust.
http://tinyurl.com/yecwydo
Yep.
Lobbyists + regulation = regulatory capture
Most things that seems like good legislation are merely window dressing for a windfall to the industry/corporation/oligarch that helped draft them.
Maybe the best unintended consequence from the recent court decision is that people will become so disgusted by the new flurry of negative ads that they will shut off the TV altogether.
And when that happens, people will start talking to each other. Strengthening relationships (or starting them) with family, friends, and neighbors. Building community.
(Gasp! We can’t have that! We must keep people isolated in their house-boxes! Going into debt to buy more stuff!)
Like we’re doing here, Slim. Thanks for “getting” it!
That’s the power of the Internet. You can build community AND be isolated in your house-box at the same time.
That’s why, when the work day is done, I like to get outta here. And go out and do things like the things I mentioned above. Y’know, strengthening relationships. Building community. That sort of thing.
people will become so disgusted by the new flurry of negative ads that they will shut off the TV altogether.
Yes, and we will get their opinions from churches, bloviating radio personalities, internet click ads or YouTube instead. Advertising has already replaced journalism as our source of information, the SCOTUS simply made it official.
Like it or not corporate adverstising is omnipresent, and we are always shaped by it. The only antidote is to teach people to do their own research, to be intellectually honest, and to have enough awareness of their own biases to suspect when they are being manipulated. Yeah, I know…good luck with that.
I read an article recently that mentioned how in the 70’s, the number of PR careerists was equal to the number of journalists. With the decreasing economic viability of print journalism, now PR jobs outnumber journalism jobs 3 or 4:1, and the ratio is growing. How’s that for recognition of who the real movers and shakers in our future society will be?
Only problem with PR is that, for a lot of organizations, it’s something that’s not needed on an ongoing basis. Here come those words again, but it’s project-based work.
Which means that it can be subcontracted. To freelancers.
To give you a bit o’ history on this point, I used to work in the publications and PR office of a university-affiliated fundraising organization. As part of my benefit package, I was given a membership in the International Association of Business Communicators. Lotta PR types in that association.
Any-hoo, a recurring theme in IABC’s magazine was how to justify the worth of your job so that management wouldn’t eliminate it or have subcontractors do the work instead. And this was during the late 1980s and early 1990s.
As a denizen of Massachusetts I can tell you that the flurry of negative ads predates this supreme court decision. Thank God the special election is over!
Mrs. Palin would never have been considered a realistic candidate for elected public office had she not been perceived by the Oiligarchs as an easily-manipulated stooge for the oil industry.
I am undoubtedly no fan of Sarah Palin, and agree with the whole concept of corporate king (or queen) making, but I have to clarify this particular tidbit.
Sarah (like BHO) ran as an outsider for the Alaska governorship, and was known for calling out corrupt legislators about energy issues. Because the incumbent Republican governor was such an obvious stooge of the oil industry, she trounced him in the primary–earning the enmity of entrenched and flailing Alaska Republicans, who were in no position to fight because of so many federal corruption investigations. When she was governor (before McCain found her), she did a great job of standing up to the oil companies and worked in a bipartisan fashion to achieve her goals, instead of within the confines of her alienated party. Despite her right wing social agenda, that got her approval ratings in the state of over 80%.
Her downfall came when she was tapped for VP by McCain. It was a cynical choice meant to bolster his moribund political campaign with a shot of novelty: a young, attractive, woman whose social agenda was entirely acceptable to the party’s right wing. Like BHO, her lust for celebrity and high office, her uncritical religious convictions and lack of experience made her very malleable–just not on energy issues. She had a well established record of opposing the oil industry and was never their friend.
That was the one thing I liked about her, and believe me there is a lot to dislike.
AHA! Lured you out, NSO.
Mrs. Palin was indeed perceived as “a reformer” but don’t forget, she came to the RNC’s attention because of her opposition to their power base in the AK oil industry– thus implying at least an association with the industry and its players. As we have seen, politics has a way of changing people’s loyalties.
Nor does this opposition mean that she wasn’t in bed, so to speak, with the powers that be in the CANADIAN oil industry. Contacts are contacts, regardless of their politics, and money is money. Palin was so obviously an intellectually clueless, star-stuck power junkie that like Ahnode, it was pretty easy to co-opt her with promises of national fame, fortune and exposure. Which is precisely what the RNC did.
Ms. Hansen you have repeatedly stated how deeply you fell for Obama’s schtick. I don’t know if ridiculing others beliefs in politicians or calling politicians “star-stuck power junkie” is in your best interest. You have displayed great political naivete and fell head over heels for just such a political animal.
I believe in his message, NYCboy, not his policies. Ask me in three years what I think of his administration of what he has articulated.
Good night is that scary. I believe the population of Jonestown probably thought the same thing as they were being handed their glasses of Kool-Aid.
If you genuinely believe that the President of the United States is anything more than a symbolic figurehead, you are as naive as you seem to be accusing me of being. And if you think that a cooperative non-partisan ideal, free of religious and oligarchic overtones is Jonestownian, you demonstrate a misunderstanding of both the message and the messenger.
But then you could just still be wingin’ from your breakfast brew.
Over the years I have heard all of that president as a figurehead thing. I have heard it repeated many times and don’t believe it for a bit. If you believe it, then how much do you blame Bush for the problems of the past 8 years? By the figurehead reasoning he had no power anyway.
George Bush wanted to invade Iraq. I don’t care what his reasoning was. We indeed invaded Iraq, and Afghanistan, due to his wishes. Tens of thousands of people are dead due to these actions. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent.
If you still think that’s not the most powerful position on the planet then the delusions reside in California, not New York.
“And if you think that a cooperative non-partisan ideal, free of religious and oligarchic overtones”
If you think that Obama’s campaign didn’t have religious overtones, even if it is the religion of secularism, then you are kidding yourself. All you had to do was listen to his supporters and look into their eyes and you saw “true believers”.
Many people have political beliefs that have everything in common with religious beliefs. Believing in “Obama’s message” is no different than believing in Koresh’s or Jones’ message. All of them had a blueprint for “heaven”, in this world or another. The messages may have differed slightly but a hunger for power was behind them all, that is clear.
Thank you for asking about my breakfast brew. It is fully worn off.
GW was nothing more than a smug functionary of Cheney Corp., not its leader. I won’t even give him credit for ruining our Country. While I agree with you that until Obama dismisses Summers, Geithner, et al he has no credibility as a reformer, at least we can agree that he is attempting to salvage what is left of the American system rather than milk it for his cronies’ personal gain?
Hows about we just agree that you stay an idealistic curmudgeon, and I remain a curmudgeonly idealist? We have what we have, let’s strive to make it more democratic for everyone.
Cheers.
“…smug functionary of Cheney Corp…”
So the argument is the POTUS is a figurehead, but the VP occasionally might not be?
Not really. But the VP under GW was much more than a mere VP– more the chief-of-staff of a Grand Cabal.
NYCboy, IIRC you’ve often said you didn’t vote for either Obama or McCain. What viable alternative would you propose?
It almost seems that it doesn’t matter who is in office, they are all tools and sellouts. I might just vote next time purely for the one who wouldn’t appoint another invisible-deity loving, corporate lackey ideologue to the SCOTUS.
Hi NSO:
I want fully paid elections paid by US the taxpayers….everybody gets the same amount of money…no pacs no donations nothing… all funded by US.
Imagine if we had a minimum of 3 final candidates all receiving the same amount of money
We fund anyone who wants to run for office yes the communists the anti abortionists, the leftist rightist Larouch Ralph Nader Perot…and then through a winnowing process over a maximum of 6 month we choose the winner.
They all MUST participle in debates, and then the top 7 go on to the second debate then the top 5 then the top 3-4 in the finals
For example give everybody say 50 cents per voter in your district, 75 cents for senator/ rep, and $1 for presidential debates
110 million voters so repub demos ind. will all get the same amount….
————————————
NYCboy, IIRC you’ve often said you didn’t vote for either Obama or McCain. What viable alternative would you propose?
Hey Allena: Is that statistic about 42% of college graduates never buying a book after graduation something that you actually heard somewhere, or is it your own estimate?
A quick google search for ” % college students who never buy and read another book” yields 201,000 hits.
A quick google search for ” % college students who never buy and read another book” yields 201,000 hits.
Many of them on a bong, I do believe.
HAH!
I once read somewhere that about 30% of people in the workforce have a college education, but only about 20% of jobs in the economy require a college education. That means that about a third of college graduates shouldn’t have gone to college. This statistic that you’ve presented is further evidence of that.
I once read somewhere that about 30% of people in the workforce have a college education, but only about 20% of jobs in the economy require a college education. That means that about a third of college graduates shouldn’t have gone to college. This statistic that you’ve presented is further evidence of that.
Except jobs aren’t static and neither are the skills required for them so you’re never going to have a perfect match between the skills of the workforce and those required for the jobs. It’s rather limiting to have little more than the skills or education you need for your current job. One can certainly argue, however, that we don’t necessarily need more college graduates and would probably do fine with less.
On top of the skills needed for any particular job, we could certainly use far more people that have much improved critical thinking skills.
That’s assuming they actually read a book in college…
I hope they’re exercising their library cards instead.
And, true confession: Yours Truly rarely buys books. I only do so if I consider the book to be a worthy addition to my library. As a reference that I can use for years.
But I do use the library quite frequently. Matter of fact, if the Pima County Library offered frequent flyer miles, I’d have several trips around the world.
On the Metro the other day, I heard some young things expressing their skeptecism about their local library. They thought the branch was too small to have much of anything. So I told them that they could go on-line, search for and reserve any item in the entire county system and have it delivered to their local branch for pick up within a 7 day window. They were elated, though I think they wanted to use this plan for DVDs, not books.
Hey Polly sounds like you are having a fun commute these days..
What are you doing with all that extra free time????
Part of the problem here is that it raises the advantage of being an incumbent to even greater levels. After all, incumbents are the ones in a position to vote on CURRENT legislation, not just whatever may or may not come up in the future. I have long been against term limits, because at some level they are an un-democratic, solution that treats the symptom rather than the underlying problem of incumbent advantage. But this decision is likelyt to so dramaticly shifts EVEN MORE money to incumbents that I’m thinking term limits are the only reasonable solution.
I was doing a brain exercise and trying to figure out why the founding fathers thought America different enough from mother England to force the split?
Apparently, they felt it better to have a nation without an entrenched monarchy (i.e. more egalitarian), smaller (i.e. local), and more responsive (i.e. answerable to the electorate).
That’s why the SCOTUS decision is wrong, because a moneyed aristocracy is no different from a religious or hereditary one…despite what Ayn Rand says. Making their voice equal to someone who is poor (at least with respect to government) is not the same thing as removing it, but they don’t get that.
We all have the right to bear arms, but if only certain people get to carry AK-47s when the bulk of the population carries slingshots and peashooters, it is the same as effectively disarming everyone else. But when it comes to Constitutional language the ideologues don’t see the forest for the trees.
It’s all just another sign that we’re slowly losing our democracy.
Slowly losing our republic, you mean!
However we choose to see it or what we call it this time, our country is slowly but certainly heading back towards the aristocracy from whence it sprang.
SLOWLY?
NoSingleOne ……Agree ,good post . I’m really shocked at the
High Court Actually . Somebody on this blog a while back posted a history of High Court decisions from years ago that increasingly gave Corporations more and more rights ,as if they were a individual .
Why, in fact, are Corporations afforded the same rights as individuals? They are not corporeal beings.
China will start placing its agents in all branches of US governments.
START?
Already underway… visit any U.S. university (many of them state govt owned & operated) to find your evidence…
“Clever manipulation of both credit markets and the mass media combined to pull off the biggest con game of all time; and legitimate issues groups like HBB are left essentially powerless in its wake.”
Even worse, we are infiltrated by trolls from the PR (prostitution) industry. Last week this was against the law, but now I guess they are just exercising their First Amendment rights.
I think the likes of your Moriarity have the good sense not to come out to play here without bringing their own balls, Prof.
Nice metaphor; I have no idea whether you are correct.
Tee hee.
“legitimate issues groups like HBB are left essentially powerless”
This is what perhaps shocks me most about “growing up:” that so many freaking adults PREFER belief over reality.
Another disturbing aspect of adults (and probably other people as well):
They prefer simple fictions to complex truths. This makes the sheeple very easy to manipulate.
‘…those recent “communications” graduates we all take such delight in disparaging may find their career outlooks vastly improved with the billion$ that are sure to flow into the coffers of the production companies and advertising agencies who bring us the 2010 political season.’
Many thanks for locating the silver lining amidst the glowering clouds of gloom on the horizon.
This is a bit dated, but nonetheless seems quite on topic.
* OPINION: THE WEEKEND INTERVIEW
* OCTOBER 18, 2008
Anna Schwartz
Bernanke Is Fighting the Last War
‘Everything works much better when wrong decisions are punished and good decisions make you rich.’
By BRIAN M. CARNEY
New York
On Aug. 9, 2007, central banks around the world first intervened to stanch what has become a massive credit crunch.
Since then, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury have taken a series of increasingly drastic emergency actions to get lending flowing again. The central bank has lent out hundreds of billions of dollars, accepted collateral that in the past it would never have touched, and opened direct lending to institutions that have never had that privilege. The Treasury has deployed billions more. And yet, “Nothing,” Anna Schwartz says, “seems to have quieted the fears of either the investors in the securities markets or the lenders and would-be borrowers in the credit market.”
The credit markets remain frozen, the stock market continues to get hammered, and deep recession now seems a certainty — if not a reality already.
Most people now living have never seen a credit crunch like the one we are currently enduring. Ms. Schwartz, 92 years old, is one of the exceptions. She’s not only old enough to remember the period from 1929 to 1933, she may know more about monetary history and banking than anyone alive. She co-authored, with Milton Friedman, “A Monetary History of the United States” (1963). It’s the definitive account of how misguided monetary policy turned the stock-market crash of 1929 into the Great Depression.
…
“…deep recession now seems a certainty — if not a reality already.”
The NBER waited until after the November 2008 election was over to date the onset of of the current recession — all the way back to December 2007.
Though the NBER has not yet dated it, our own Eddie has offered repeat assurances that the current recession ended six months ago.
PB,
Thanks, very worthwhile read. Still pretty sharp for her age and yes, BB is “fighting the last war” ( GD I ) I enjoyed her observation that it isn’t a matter of liquidity or even the banks wanting to lend ( it’s just that they don’t know who’s insolvent? )
I cannot recall Alan Greenspan calling up Senators to ask for their confirmation support. Since the Fed chairman position is increasingly politicized, would it make sense to transform it into an elected post?
Bernanke’s role ‘is being politicised’
Fed chairman is under pressure from Congress as rate meeting begins
By Stephen Foley in New York
Wednesday, 27 January 2010
War On The Dollar Exposed
Get The Shocking Bulletin Obama &Bernanke Do Not Want You To Read!
www dot UncommonWisdomDaily dot com
Alan Greenspan Exposed
Wall Street’s worst culprits incollusion with a deregulted Gov’t.
www dot WealthDaily dot com/Wall_Street
Ben Bernanke is juggling a two-day meeting of the Federal Reserve’s interest rate-setting federal open market committee with final appeals to members of Congress ahead of a vote on whether he should be reconfirmed as the head of the US central bank.
As other governors of the Fed warned about such a juxtaposition of supposedly independent monetary policy debate with high politicking, Mr Bernanke made a round of calls to lawmakers who are nervous about a backlash from voters, who blame the Fed chairman for the viciously unpopular bailout of Wall Street.
…
PB .. This lady in the article speaks the truth . I just posted yesterday that the problem wasn’t money for credit markets but the value of the underlining loan assets of the Banks/Investments firms . FDIC would of paid off on regulated Banks that failed ,unlike the Great Depression when FDIC had not been created yet . They just should of done orderly BK’s .Now we are stuck with these TBTF junk houses that call themselves Banks .
More generally, TBTF had not been created yet by the time of GD1, along with its attendant moral hazard problem for banks to grow to TBTF stature, then to employ high risk business strategies which make them richer than Croesus when the good times roll and make them whole when the black swan guano bomb lands on them. I guess that is another reason that BB is fighting the last war.
You are a progressive. You are upset that the radical progressive agenda is failing miserably. Why not just be honest instead of posting these drifting pieces of fluff? You are not going to change any minds on this board, we are not the poor unenlightened 42% you speak down to. Freedom minded folks will not just bend over and let you Orwellian Intellectuals create your utopian society. Not on my watch.
Oooogah Boooogah, dearie.
“Orwell” was a satirist….
dats right Uhlaynuh! you be wun of doze dem dam dar librulls! dam gun grabberz!
Worse than that, ex, apparently I’m (shudder,) progressive and hell-bent on forcing freedom-lovers to bend over while I change their minds!
The horror…the horror….
And then insulted you by calling you a.. an intellectual!
Us oppressors should get together and have a book burning as a means to break bread with our “freedom loving” victims. Then wrap ourselves in a flag and jump in the fire as an act of contrition.
I had to attend a dinner party up in Snobsdale, just getting back on line.
Yeah, yeah, yeah…I’m a redneck…blah, blah, blah. I was using intellectual as a derogatory term not necessarily an insult. As a former Californian (Santa Barbara), I saw first hand what the progressives did to that state and I now see what they are doing to the state of Arizona.
Crushing our budget with excessive education spending, open borders, one behavior ban after another (politically incorrect behavior), higher sales taxes, higher fees, huge deficits, and turning our institutions of higher learning into halls of social justice and Marxism. If that is “progress”, I will pass.
“Snobsdale”
LOLOL!!!
Not at all sure why you’re calling me “progressive” (not even sure what that means in your world, ) cashed, but thanks, I think…. Fourth generation native CA. here. I’m about as far removed (literally, I live on a mountain top on a self-sufficient property, and rarely leave the place,) from the NEA, open border policies, Fireman’s, policemans, prison guards insane pensions reimbursements, tax monies-for-cronies, bloated bureaucratic, hoorah’s nest you seem to disparage as anyone in this State.
In the recent past I’ve written screeds here against the State’s obscene public safety pensions, against Ahnode’s pact with the devil to benefit Enron, against the Angelides real estate development/levy scam, in favor of a joint venture with Mexico to dispatch half our pension obligations to Baja, the insanity of redundant services and rampant special interest cronyism, the loss of our ports to China, and the possibility of legalizing marijuana for the tax revenues.
Not partisan, as I HAVE no party. Registered independent What I DO support, however, is parity under the law for all State citizens.
Did you actually READ what I wrote today? Seriously. How do you get socialist/progressive out of the rantings of a laissez faire anarchist who wants to see control of our government taken back by the electorate?
Hope you’re feeling a bit better after the shindig!
Too funny. Let’s see where we were back 50 years ago when corporations could look out for their own interests (such as saying that Cap and Trade will cost millions more jobs, and China and India will not even play). Let’s see:
1) We had practically no unemployment
2) We had practically no inflation
3) We had practically no imports
4) We had practically no debt
5) We were the envy of the WORLD
6) The DOLLAR ruled.
Now where are? We are LAUGHED at by our enemies, we are broke, and we’re about to become third world (once the dollar crashes).
Sorry, but I agree with the Supreme Court, it is time for a change.
These days :
(1) Corporations fire people and out-source jobs and manufacturing
(2)These days Corporations get multi- billion dollar bail-outs
(3)These days American Corporations import foreign manufacturing .
(4)These days Corporations throw their unpaid retirement benefits on to the Government Insurance fund .
(5)Corporations get cheaper labor by employing illegal labor while the government takes care of the health care obligation.
(6)Corporation enjoy low tax rates compared to 50 year ago
(7)Corporations can go BK and open up under a new name .
(8)With Globalism ,Corporations aren’t loyal to America anymore .
(9)Corporations pay their CEO’s to much and go for short term profits rather than long term and tend to gouge for junk they can increase the cost on by monopolies .
(10 ) Corporations already have their own TV channels (Business Channels )that are fronts for their PR .
(11)Corporations already pay for advertising including newspapers and
new media, therefore control content .
(12)Because of Corporation wealth ,you would have to be a fat cat to be able to sue them because they would just paper wave small pockets . This creates a unfair advantage in the Court system .
I could go on and on …but you want them to have more power?
“(1) Corporations fire people and out-source jobs and manufacturing”
Poor baby. I could go line by line too. As to corporations firing people, I’ve worked with hundreds of people that have “fired” corporations (i.e., by quitting - in some cases after costing the corporation tens of thousands of dollars in educational expenses…not to mention other training expenses). To me it’s only fair that as long as people are legally able to quit at any time, then corporations should be legally able to fire them.
(2) I think you’ll find even us right-wing extremists agree on this issue…it is sick - and Obama is doing it at least as much as Bush.
(3) Foreign imports. Can you blame them? Do you have ANY CLUE as to what it takes to set up a manufacturing operation anymore in this country (unless it’s a state-run green factory producing things no one wants). Do you have ANY CLUE as to the response in board rooms when analysts walk in and tell them what cap and trade will mean? I didn’t think so…but the answer is that they’d be INSANE to expand with Pelosi and Obama running things - they have no idea how hard they are about to be punished.
And I could go on…bottom line is that it’s very difficult for most people, after being educated in America, to be able to think outside of the populist cocoon, but I try to help them.
“Sorry, but I agree with the Supreme Court, it is time for a change.”
Could you be more specific, please? Will any change do? Were you hoping for Change You Can Believe In? What gives?
I was hoping for enough of a change so that my company can legally let the country know when Congress is about to do something REALLY STUPID that will result in the loss of thousands of jobs…before it happens.
We know that the status quo means that Congress and the Administration will do whatever they feel like, and the only response for a company is to export jobs around the world.
If that bothers you, sorry, I work blue collar and have seen thousands laid off at my company and other companies, and I don’t the garbage that it’s the big, bad, evil companies. Maybe I’m a useful idiot, but I do follow politics and I do know that there are CONSEQUENCES to a having to deal with an insane government - and I would like my company and others to be allowed to SPEAK UP.
Man’s disillusionment:
The gradual realization that Kurt Vonnegut, Jr’s made up religion, Bokonon, might not only be an entirely apt metaphor for real-world religion, but also for ‘free world’ governance:
“Verse 1: All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies.
…
The hand that stocks the drug stores rules the world.
…
Let us start our Republic with a chain of drug stores, a chain of grocery stores, a chain of gas chambers, and a national game. After that we can write our Constitution.
…
Maturity is a bitter disappointment for which no remedy exists, unless laughter can be said to remedy anything.”
Didn’t mean to be exclusive there; I suppose it is anachronistic and sexist to use “man” in the inclusive sense these days. Sorry…
So many scummy politicians; so little time to post all of their shenanigans…
* REVIEW & OUTLOOK
* JANUARY 27, 2010
A Fannie and Freddie Earmark
Chuck Schumer doesn’t think they’re losing enough money.
…
Taxpayers may look at the unlimited federal credit line now enjoyed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and see disaster. But New York Senator Chuck Schumer sees opportunity.
Yesterday he demanded that the two failed mortgage giants guarantee low rent for tenants in a Manhattan property they now own after the owner defaulted. As they say in Democratic Washington, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste.
Recently we told you about the Treasury’s Christmas Eve announcement that after chewing through $111 billion from taxpayers, Fan and Fred can now consume an unlimited amount of cash from the U.S. Treasury. The companies have been losing billions each quarter to serve President Obama’s political goal of modifying troubled mortgages. They can lose still more by serving Mr. Schumer.
…
How about a little bashing of the rocket science financiers whose idiot savantary prevented them from seeing what was coming?
* The Wall Street Journal
* BOOKS
* JANUARY 22, 2010
The Minds Behind the Meltdown
How a swashbuckling breed of mathematicians and computer scientists nearly destroyed Wall Street
By SCOTT PATTERSON
On Thursday, President Barack Obama proposed new rules to curb a number of Wall Street’s risky—and highly profitable—trading activities. One target: The secretive trading operations within banks that use large doses of leverage, or borrowed money, to make huge bets on the market. Wall Street says the regulations are unnecessary, and since the financial crisis struck, most banks have cut back on these trading outfits. But when the downturn first hit in the summer of 2007, several of them were among the first to suffer, and collectively they lost billions over a matter of days.
A small group of brainy math whizzes are emerging as the unlikely group who nearly brought down the finance industry. As WSJ’s Scott Patterson reports, a group called “The Quants” developed complex systems to trade securities such as mortgage derivatives, which were at the heart of the crisis.
In his new book, “The Quants,” Wall Street Journal reporter Scott Patterson suggests how this new breed of mathematicians and computer scientists took over much of the financial system—and the damage they inflicted in the 2007 meltdown.
…
Black swan guano bomb nails quants! And it took no advanced training in mathematics to see it coming — anyone with their eyes open and their brains engaged should have noticed it.
* The Wall Street Journal
* BOOKS
* JANUARY 22, 2010
The Minds Behind the Meltdown
…
PDT, one of the most secretive quant funds around, was now a global powerhouse, with offices in London and Tokyo and about $6 billion in assets (the amount could change daily depending on how much money Morgan funneled its way). It was a well-oiled machine that did little but print money, day after day.
That week, however, PDT wouldn’t print money—it would destroy it like an industrial shredder.
The unusual behavior of stocks that PDT tracked had begun sometime in mid-July and had gotten worse in the first days of August. The previous Friday, about half a dozen of the biggest gainers on the Nasdaq were stocks that PDT had sold short, expecting them to decline, and several of the biggest losers were stocks PDT had bought, expecting them to rise. It was Bizarro World for quants. Up was down, down was up. The models were operating in reverse.
The market moves PDT and other quant funds started to see early that week defied logic. The fine-tuned models, the bell curves and random walks, the calibrated correlations—all the math and science that had propelled the quants to the pinnacle of Wall Street—couldn’t capture what was happening.
At the time, few quants realized what was happening, but over the next few days a theory would emerge: The U.S. housing market was unraveling, leading to big losses in the mortgage portfolios of banks and hedge funds. One or more of those hedge funds needed to raise cash quickly to make up for the losses, and needed to sell assets quickly to do so. And the easiest-to-sell assets of all were stocks, those held in portfolios highly similar to quant funds across Wall Street.
…