We're Dragging The Rest of the World Into Recession, Too
By Susie Madrak Monday Mar 09, 2009 12:00pmGee, you mean untrammelled capitalism isn't inherently good? While there's certainly plenty of blame to go around for both parties, we can credit eight years of deregulation for much of this crisis:
The world is falling into the first global recession since World War II as the crisis that started in the United States engulfs once-booming developing nations, confronting them with massive financial shortfalls that could turn back the clock on poverty reduction by years, the World Bank warned yesterday.
The World Bank also cautioned that the cost of helping poorer nations in crisis would exceed the current financial resources of multilateral lenders. Such aid could prove critical to political stability as concerns mount over unrest in poorer nations, particularly in Eastern Europe, generated by their sharp reversal of fortunes as private investment evaporates and global trade collapses.
In its report, released ahead of a major summit of finance ministers in London this week, the World Bank called on developed nations struggling with their own economic routs to dedicate 0.7 percent of the money they spend on stimulus programs toward a new Vulnerability Fund to help developing countries.
[...] In November alone, the IMF parceled out $50 billion to nations in crisis -- the most the institution has ever spent in a single month. With more nations, particularly in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, facing serious trouble, the IMF is preparing to hand out tens of billions more. It is hoping to raise more funds from Western nations and other cash-rich countries such as China and those in the Middle East.
The concern now, however, is that the scope of the crisis may be so vast that even an extra $150 billion may not enough. Some fear that nations in Western Europe such as Austria, Ireland and Spain -- believed to have graduated from IMF lifelines decades ago -- may soon require bailouts, taking funds that would have been spent on poorer nations. It could also prove difficult to raise more money from hard-hit countries including the United States and Britain, where politicians and citizens may decide that charity begins at home.
"I'm worried about what happens when you see that a Greece or an Ireland that might need bailouts," said Simon Johnson, an MIT economics professor and former IMF chief economist. "Where is the money going to come from?"
Login or Register to post comments.
the GOP is of course gonna try to lay the blame squarely on the heads on Clinton and Obama.
9/11 happened 8 months into Bush's term, he clearly ignored terrorism as he hustled SDI, yet the whackos succeeded somewhat in blaming Clinton, or at the very least getting Bush off the hook.
Yet they will try, and are already trying, to make Obama responsible for this, even though reality based people know that this crisis was 10, and actually more like 25 years in the making.
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/223095/924308
but clinton yes---he pushed the repeal of Glass- Stegeall Act, the Telecom Act, Nafta/Cafta, Immigration Act and dithered when Rwanda and Somailian people were being destroyed, bombed the wrong places and let Bin laden go!
But to dragging the World with us...No, it was greed that bought the CDS-MSD and all deriviates to the World....That could only be done with the removal of regulation---and the Congress was ruled by the repub's in 14 of the past 16 years!
CLinton really DID screw up on finances though, I don't really care how many blow jobs he got though.
he really did fuck things up beyond all recognition.
Of course we did.
Our investment bankers sold these shit assets to EVERYONE.
Our cancer has infected the entire planet.
was a major distribution mechanism.
Please remind me why most of those agencies have not been seized by the US government. Most of their employees should be in jail for conflicts of interest and fraud.
These were the ones who were stamping AAA ratings on all sorts of shit. They have destroyed a big deal in confidence in the US economy, which should be criminal.
those are good questions.
The answer...'cause those agencies are manned by the proxies of the powers that be...they are calling the shots.
This is the result of deregulation...and turning government over to the folks that government is supposed to protect the public FROM.
the big problem that deregulation brought was that... we ended up in a situation where the commission the rating agencies were receiving, were tied to the rating itself. Thus there was no incentive for said agencies to provide bad ratings!
Now, why would anyone trust US debt rating anymore. Esp. given that the same rating agencies are pretty much untouched to this day, but the US justice system. This is going to present a clear problem in restoring confidence in the US economy, and since we depend so dearly in foreign debt... it places us in a very serious pickle.
To this day, the Obama administration is mum about these agencies.
The cover the ratings companies used to grant the AAA ratings was that securities were "insured" through credit default swaps. Of course, it wasn't actually insurance because insurance is regulated and requires things like adequate reserves. So companies like AIG simply called it something else and, in AIG's case, transfered the CDS operations offshore.
I just think that without being able to manipulate the ratings. The massive credit swaps and derivative trading could not have taken place.
To me the whole lot should be thrown in jail. Cancel the CDs and derivatives, and start from scratch. Most of the pain of such actions would affect that top %. Instead we're hurting everybody else, in an attempt at throwing more money at a bottomless pit just so that the people at the top don't have their precious living standards jeopardized.
It is criminal, plain and simple.
Deregulation accellerated under Bush, but it actually started under Robert Rubin during the Clinton administration. Both parties are beholden to Wall Street, both parties are shovelling money to the banks that created and are profitting from this crisis and both parties really seem to have the same agenda with the exception of a very few individuals.
And globally all banks seem to have the same idea: print more money and give it all to the banks, who then sit on the money. When the collapse really hits, and believe me it hasn't hit yet, they will be the only parties with any money left and able to buy up real assets for pennies on the dollar.
And the American public seems totally apathetic and sheeplike, which is dangerous for all of us. Not surprizing, because the mainstream media has totally failed the public.
Clinton did it!!
I knew it! I knew it!!
In order to better help you grasp the point ...
BOTH PARTIES EMBRACED THESE POLICIES, BOTH PARTIES CONTINUE TO ADVANCE THESE POLICIES AND BOTH PARTIES KNOW THE END RESULT WILL BE THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE OF THE AMERICAN AND WORLD ECONOMIES, WHICH WILL THEN BE USED TO ADVANCE A WHOLE NEW FINANCIAL "SYSTEM" THAT WILL IMPOVRISH THE AVERAGE WORKER WHILE LEAVING GLOBAL FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE ELITES UNSCATHED.
Note that Madoff is ready to plead which will sweep that whole scandal under the carpet. Then he goes to a golf-camp jail for the elites when he should be thrown into a real prison with hardened criminals. That alone is a glaring example of the double standard operating these days, as is the "too big to fail" banks and the "too small to save" homeowners.
Hoping for things to change without holding our elected officials accountable will change nothing. In fact it plays right into the hands of those who wish to re-engineer American society.
Because deregulation is only a small part of the story. The bigger story is lack of enforcement. 6 years of repub congress and 8 of bush telling the relevant agencies to let it slide.
All our problems caused by deregulation might have been caught and corrected earlier had repubs and bush done their jobs.
But that does not excuse the fact that the GOP held both houses during most of the 90s. Remember the "contract" with America?
Not saying the Dems are an innocent party in this mess. But most of the blame for this mess lies on the GOP's court.
Saying "everybody sucks" or "everybody done it" is usually the initial reaction of those with the most guilt.
That being said, situations like these are why we need more than 2 main political parties in this country. In the end both parties end up tainted, and thus lacking any moral higher ground to clean each other's mess.
you left out the Republican Congresses and Presidencies of the 80s and early '90s.
The party of accountability....the bucks stops at Clinton.
that is an unfortunate fact.
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/223095/924308
Stop pokin' my Willie!!
the corporatist Clinton and crew were good guys. GATT, NAFTA and deregulation say otherwise. Clinton signed the deregulation law of phil gramm in 2000, after the election, BTW.
And didn't Phil Gramm's wife work for one of the big banks at the time?
Washington is a gravy train, a pig's trough of entitlement where left and right are used to divide and conquer this country again and again and again.
deregulation law of phil gramm in 2000
Oh...and wasn't there that blowjob thingie goin' on, that the GOP was hawking all over like it was the end of the world.
The United States had a president named Ronald Reagan. He was a B movie actor turned corporate front man. Archaeological evidence also indicates that he wasn't to fond of regulation.
Just because the Clintons espouse the same economic philosophy doesn't mean they started it.
P.S. Stop with the allcaps; it's a dead giveaway for RW trolls.
find out more about the
DLC
DSCC
and
DCCC.
Then have a look at the Democratic Party disenfranchised - Kucinich, H.Dean , any other progressive.
I read over at Kos today that Dr Dean had joined a lobbying group.
"Deregulation accellerated under Bush, but it actually started under Robert Rubin during the Clinton administration."
Well not according to that radical knee jerk Liberal David Frum.
I quote:
"The collapse of liberalism brought Reagan to power. Indeed, the turnaround began even before his election, as neoclassical economics began to win converts even among some Democrats. Gerald Ford launched the deregulation of the economy by repealing New Deal controls on gold ownership and stockbrokers’ fees. After suffering losses in the congressional elections of 1978, Democrats in Congress joined Republicans in deregulating transportation industries. Congress compelled a reluctant Jimmy Carter to pave the way for deregulation of the prices of oil and natural gas (which Reagan would accelerate in 1981).
When Reagan arrived in Washington, he cut taxes, supported the Federal Reserve in its anti-inflation struggle, revised labor laws to restrain the excessive power of trade unions, and generally set a tone reassuring to business and investment. His actions were matched by ideological cognates around the world: Margaret Thatcher in Britain, Brian Mulroney in Canada, and Helmut Kohl in Germany. In true tribute to their success, they were eventually imitated, in part, even by left-of-center parties in Australia, New Zealand, France, and elsewhere."
Unfettered free market shit, no trade restrictions. and now it's domino time? No one could have EVER seen this coming.
/sarky bitch talk.
I know it's the current fashion to bash capitalism, but do you even know what 'capitalism' is?
capitalism != lack of regulation
(and for the republicans here):
socialism != excessive regulation.
Capitalism (or free market) needs government to be a minimal yet effective referee for players (you and me) to benefit from it. This is not the cold war.
You cannot say that what has existed for the past 30 years in American resembles capitalism when you have so much government interference (fed, fannie mae) and you cannot say doing business is fair when the crappy legislation that idiotic congressman destroy good legislation (glass-steagall) and insert crap legislation (many examples here).
The bottom line is that every time "capitalism" has evolved in a "lack of regulation" environment, it has overstepped the bounds. And to consider "fannie mae" an example of government interference, while passing in silence all the devastating impact of deregulated/unregulated components of the financial services industry, proves how short-sighted you are. Or, to perhaps put things more succinctly: "capitalism" doesn't need regulation, but "capitalists" sure do.
How is it you don't realize that you're agreeing with me?
Whether a system is "capitalist" or "socialist" has nothing to do with regulation. A completely deregulated capitalist system is known as laissez faire capitalism. A regulated capitalist system is known as "most of the world."
Dude, you're agreeing with me too, but sound like you're not.
My contention is the following statement in the post implying that capitalism is bad.
"Gee, you mean untrammelled capitalism isn't inherently good? "
Of course (like you're saying) what should be said is that not enough of the right *regulation* is how we got into this mess, but isn't that obvious?
As is demonstrated by this thread, it really looks like Republicrats agree with each other, but they start from two different extremes: zero vs. absolute regulation.
My only point is that if you believe that capitalism and socialism are determined by the amount of regulation you don't know what you're talking about.
... and realize I was incorrect. I thought you were equating these systems with the amount of regulation. I see now that you were not.
My apologies. I should have noticed that earlier.
edgumacated?
Judging from the comments, some people may not know that != means "does not equal" ..
I didn't know that.
Capitalism doesn't mean lack or regulation, it never existed in America since the 1800's and only for a few years. Socialism for the rich is what we are seeing now, its a Neo-Feudal system that existed since 1913. It was created because we have a private central bank called the Federal Reserve.
There's a shorter word for this, oh knowledgeable one. It's called fascism. Socialism means to even things out. Rich people getting money from the gov is not an attempt to even things out. Rich people getting money from the gov is fascistic. Look it up. In fact, you're looking fairly non-credulous all over the board. You should actually check words before you use them
Did you read what Neo-Feudalism is? Its when a certain class of people are protected and sheltered by the government (ie rich bankers. They have a different set of rules..infact few rules at all. Do you think if I did what Madoff did I would be sitting in a luxury condo now?
The Bankers are the modern day nobles, they own the government you live under. Did you see one banker go to prison yet? Socialism for the rich is Neo Feudalism (it could also be considered facsism depending on the way you look at it, I prefer Neo Feudalism), they are being protected from loss while the peasants (us) pay for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neofeudalism
NY Times (OpEd): Subprime Europe
Danny Schechter (Common Dreams): Do Americans Realize How The Crisis Breeds Global Chaos?
The Italian Banks will be ok. Italians are savers. They pay with cash, they don't have mortgages and they are tight with their money. Don't worry about Italy.
we're the world's best lovers too. ;0)
Essatamente!
...retirement funds literally obliterated. Berlusconi's wet dream will mean a big deal of pain for the Italians who are about to retire.
Although, it is nice to know that nobody in Italy has a mortgage, and even after years of crappy economy they have managed to horde wads of cash.
LOL.
Certain regions of Italy are still very provincial. They pay cash for homes and then pass them down to the next generation. Or they build three family homes outright or add onto smaller homes so that there are always three generations living together. This is what keeps the wealth in the families. These Italians (a good percentage of the population) don't have mortgages.
I find it hard to believe most Italians, regarding of region, can afford to pay cash for their homes. Esp. given the downward slope the Italian economy has been suffering for the better part of this decade.
Besides, the situation in a couple of villages... is a far cry as a representative of the common case in Italy.
Trust me, they pay CASH for their homes all over Italy. I already told you Italians are savers. Kids don't leave home when they're 21. They don't pay rent. They stay at home with Mama. If you stayed at home with your Mama, you might be able to pay cash for your house too -- especially now that the homes in the USA have lost their value.
I have lived in Europe. Long enough to be aware of the fact that housing costs were as high, or even higher than in the US. Meaning that most people could not afford to purchase a home with just cash.
In fact, that is the most common complain from Southern Europeans: the ridiculous cost of housing.
Saying that "everything" is fine in Italy, after half of the people have had their retirement funds literally vaporized... strikes me as incredibly out of touch and naive.
VAPORIZED don't have mortgages. Do you GET it yet? Why don't they have mortgages? Because they never left home and they either saved and paid cash or the house was passed down to them or they live with three generations! Why didn't they leave home? Because they didn't get married until they were 35 or 40? Why do they wait until 35 or 40 to get married? Because it's the tradition! Why does Italy have the lowest birth rate in the world? Because they don't marry until they're 35 or 40 and the man is usually ten years older than that. Does it make sense now?
are not going to provide the sources for your claims which I requested like 5 posts ago: what are the percentage of people who buy their homes using a mortgage vs. cash in Italy. That was a very simple request, wasn't it?
How can you make statements like: "everyone who had their retirement vaporized did not have mortgages." What sort of data do you provide to back that up. Do you mean to tell me, that off the millions of Italians who just lost a big chunk of their retirement using Berlusconi's clusterf*ck plan. Not a single one of them had a mortgage?
When I request data or sources of reference, I am not interested in what your perception or opinion of a subject is. Not a hard concept to grasp, is it?
Find your own references about Italy. I live here and I interact with the people every day so that's good enough for me. Those that have lost their pension funds will be much better off having lost them in Italy than if they lost them in the USA. Obviously, you don't know anything about Italian culture or you would not be expecting to hear statistics from Italy that are familiar to you.
I guess there IS a downside to GLOBALISM.
"charity" comes with a high price for many nations. One of the first things to go in order to get these funds is social spending programs which affect the poorest.
It's a racket.
So says Dean Baker in the Guardian:
East Asia's economic revenge
Deregulation has been the mantra since the dawn of the Reagan Era...and now the chickens are coming home to roost.
What good is all the regulation in the world if there is no enforcement? This should be the theme Dems hammer. The idea of regulation pisses off too many people. Dems should make it absolutely clear they want to enforce the rules that Bush admin/Repub congress turned a blind eye too all those years.
Yeah thanks to Repubs, American's don't like the idea of regulation, but they also don't like the idea of people cheating and getting away with it. Link cheating corps/ceo's to complicit Republican governance.
Absent global financial regulation the "free market" has prevailed.
And it's a mess.
Media Matters:
In the past few days, MSNBC has repeatedly used misleading graphics of the Dow Jones industrial average showing a decline since the beginning of November 2008, suggesting that the drop started with the election of President Obama. In fact, the Dow was on a downward trajectory months before the election, dropping 3,738 points from May 2, 2008, to November 3, 2008.
Read the whole story: Media Matters
We are such trend setters!
I remember reading not too long ago that the FBI agents were called off investigating white collar crimes after the ENRON crime was exposed. They were told to leave white collar crime alone and look for terrorists instead. Bush was probably pissed that his good buddy at ENRON got caught and didn't want any of his other buddies to get in trouble.
I wish I could remember where I read this so I could provide a link, but I just can't.
I take issue with this statement. We have had 25 years of deregulation that brought us to where we are today.
you guys are right on it.
...free market since 1913.
Technically Americans granted "THE FED" the ability to regulate/deregulate our markets with it's fiat paper since the federal reserve act was passed in 1913.
...(and they have done a real crappy job)...if you were ask me..
We have Rep. Ron Paul to thank for this. I wonder how far it will get??
After all we've been through and are heading into, how could any member of Congress not support this legislation:
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc111/h1207_i...
and he does indeed talk a lot.
One of the few people doing anything about it is Kucinich. Who has already brought forth plenty of articles to nationalize the Fed.
Where are the Paultards on that one, eh?
*crickets*
But I can tell you there will be a VERY interesting hearing this Wed. at 10:00 a.m. EST in Congress chaired by Rep. Dennis Kucinich:
http://domesticpolicy.oversight.house.gov/sto...
I guess Rep. Kucinich is a "Paultard" since he is such a big supporter of Rep. Ron Paul on many issues, especially being against our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Whaaaaaa?
I consider Kucinich to be on the sane side of things most of the time. Since Paul is on the correct side of the fence on a couple of things, and for the wrong reasons.Claiming that it is Kucinich the one that supports Ron Paul strikes me as incredibly intellectually dishonest.
Paultards usually can only construct their view of the world with respect to Ron Paul's positions only. Draw your own conclusions regarding if that makes you a Paultard or not.
And unfortunately, [Deleted. Quit making blanket generalizations about people 'on this site.' Not only are they incorrect, they're FLAMEBAIT-Sitemonitor] Jonathan Turley, Oberman's frequent guest, has repeatedly pointed out that if Obama refuses to go after Bush, he in fact becomes an accessory to the crimes by aiding Bush escaping the law.
On this site there is very little admission that Democrats have advanced many of the same policies Bush promoted, have stepped away from holding him accountable for his illegal and unconstitutional actions as president and that Obama, far from being the change so many people were looking for, looks like more of the same in terms of Afghanistan, more war (say in Pakistan), continued use of "harsh interogations", FISA and the Patriot Act provisions, etc, etc, etc. Every time a problem is identified it is because of the Republicans, always their fault, without recognizing the systemic corruption and rot in the entire political process on both sides of the isle. And yes, it goes back to the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Nixon era's even, but the real problem is with the American people who allow themselves to be played again and again and again.
Instead of weighing the validity of ideas -- no matter who expresses them -- too often political discourse starts with which party do you support. If you are a Democrat, then any Republican ideas, and any Republicans, are flawed, sick, wacko. This makes any "discussion" pointless because it quickly decends to name calling. In the meantime the wealth and productive capacity of this country gets destroyed massively by the minute.
BTW, the Fed is a private for profit bank, that's our first problem, which allows them to manipulate the economy and siphon off the real wealth of this nation through inflation and by lending this country its own money at interest. That isn't a Democrat or Republican issue, its a fact. And it is also a fact that the upper echelons of both parties are doing nothing to address that problem because they are part of that problem and are supported politically by that structure.
Insanity is doing the same thing again and again and again and expecting a new and better result. This country has reached a point where the insanity is unmistakable no matter who is responsible. Eventually either there is change or death of the entity that is misalligned from reality. What is unfolding around the world and here in America is unsustainable. What we need to address is what replaces it.
I'm a socialist, NOT a Democrat.
Bernie!
... do you?
The Federal Reserve's only real influence on the economy is the Discount Rate, and the Federal Reserve Rate, requirements for banks reserves, and running the Federal Depositors Insurance Corporation.
The Federal GOVERNMENT, however, has other methods at its disposal.
...to our elected officials, the only power/influence congress has in the face of "THE FED" is not to act...
...but only to "react"
do you?
Have you even read the charter of the Federal reserve.
Do you know who sits on the board? Who has voting power?
I would take libertarians more seriously, if they had at least bothered to understand their talking points.
I am tired of being lectured about the fed by people who don't even know how the fed works. And I am also bored to tears with people talking about the gold standard without a clue about basic monetary theory.
...and wouldnt touch THE FED with a 10 foot pole!!!
seriously Tyler would you really invest in/nationalize "THE FED"? with your own money?
(is that crickets I hear?)
"THE FED" IS ONE BIG ASS TOXIC ASSET (that I sure wouldn't want to own.
the only answer that libertarians can provide to real problems, is making up "lah lah" land scenarios?
No wonder nobody takes you seriously.
Do pray tell, what is Paul proposing to do once he abolishes the fed. Does he expect us to return to a bartering MO once he abolishes the supplier of money?
Wait, wait... I know, Gold Standard! LOL.
I don't think that "deregulation" means what you think it means.
Also crack a book open, and read about the fun and games that were the XIX economic rollercoasters.
I have a different way of looking at reg/deregulation.
I think of a free market as a fair market, governed by the same laws that average citizens abide by...dont steal, dont defraud, or decieve or cheat, no ponzi schemes ...ect ect...
(In my view) any laws or rules added to the list above are "regulations"...
(what we have now is not deregulation, and in my opinion(it's just pure lawlessnesss)
(I'm libertarian)
(and I have better books than you do)
Noo, I could not have guessed that. Not...
You guys are too predictable: Federal reserve, Gold standard, free market, Ayn Rand...
LOL.
You don't know me, don't make any assumptions about the quality and quantity of my books. Since I come from an academic background chances are that you may find yourself bringing a butter knife to a gunfight.
...and If you think fiat currency is better than gold, in the current economic crises that we are having...
Then it is you who brings a butterknife to the gunfight!
...although I will say the gold market is certainly subject to manipulation also...
is how you measure wealth, and not how you generate it. Then we have no point in furthering this discussion.
Gold standard is as arbitrary, in fact as a finite resource may be more prone to manipulation via speculation, meassure as fiat. Or all your super awesome books do not include chapters about the fantastic economic meltdowns that happened during the times of the gold standard?
...all happened under THE FED
Check out 1873 and 1907.
...compared to the crash of 29' and 08'
...not nearly as worldwide back then...
they were actually bigger. Smaller economies, but bigger percentage drops. Basic math really.
Also the crash of '29 happened under the Gold Standard.
...lasted 15 yrs...it lasted longer than any other previous depression.
The crash of '29 was not the depression. The depression developed in the following three years.
Employment with WPA included was below 10% by 1940, numbers are sometimes shown without WPA and that is misleading.
By 1943 unemployment was effecively zero and the WPA was discontinued.
Here is a previous comment.
So what do you think of the NRA?
the real part of the great depression did not start until 3-4 years later when Roosevelt confiscated all gold coin. ...in 1933!
Bullshit.
The Depression developed as Hoover failed to employ effective counterstrategies. Finally towards to end of his administration he was having some positive effect. He was spending money on state employment programs which were creating employment.
It was too late for him to get any credit. Roosevelt's effort was much larger, and effective.
To blame the worst of the Depression on Roosevelt is akin to the wingnuts blaming Obama this very minute for our problems.
Pure Bullshit.
you are obviously far more eloquent and patient that I could ever be.
I am just tired of libertarians who have very little in the way of facts, forcing their perception as reality. It gets tiresome, and for some reason it seems that after Obama got elected. The libertarian trolls are out there in full force.
Notice how quickly you take one idea that someone expresses and spin it out in 5 different directions. You already know who you are talking to before they even say a word. There is no point discussing anything with you because you are judge, jury and executioner before the dialogue even starts.
In fact, all you are doing is showing your own limited thinking and biases. This type of inflexible, polarizing thinking is exactly what is wrong with this country today, and is used against us to harden us against each other while allowing vested interests to advance their agenda by stealth.
Regardless of which side of the political spectrum you are on, we are on, we need to hold our elected officials more accountable and we need to be willing to explore new ideas, even ones we disagree with, before the ability to communicate at all is closed down for us. Our forefathers, which is where much of the wealth of this country that we are living with now comes from, would be ashamed of our inability to communicate more effectively, especially considering they warned us about the conditions we are now experiencing.
Over and over again it seems that conservatives can only operate either via projection or deflection.
Yours was an exercise in pure projection.
The fact that you call stating the truth "divisive" tells me everything I need to know about you.
Happy trolling, btw...
"There is no point discussing anything with you because you are judge, jury and executioner before the dialogue even starts."
"In fact, all you are doing is showing your own limited thinking and biases. This type of inflexible, polarizing thinking is exactly what is wrong with this country today..."
You notice you just contradicted yourself with that classic case of projection not just to your object, but to the general world at large.
What are you, 19?
and return to save the rest of an innocent world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kKZHOx-n3Q&fe...
...would do better to say, ..."go away American FED, we have had enough of your toxic assets and fake fiat money!"
So would Americans...
Wasn't it in April of last year that bush sent out those stimulus checks to try to boost the economy? So they knew almost a year ago things were going down the drain but they waited until just before the election to tell us how far down the drain things had gone. Bush just kept a blanket over the economy until he had a running start for the exit door.
there actually was a President after Clinton (you remember him...the budget surplus president)...and before President Obama).
My my...how those formerly in power have forgotten.
Geeez...I don't seem to remember Republicans jumping up and down over those stimulus checks...which Bush had no plan to pay for...and how they were going to increase the deficit.
If you go back and read this article from April of last year, almost a year ago, you realize that they just thought things were bad then and bush thought 168 billion dollars would fix it. It didn't.
Look when Paulson and Bernanke told him that "the fundamentals of the economy are NOT sound"...just prior to the Nov. Election last fall as he had when Andrew Card whispered in his ear at the classroom that the second WTC building had just been hit.
The future is not looking rosy.
"tharn" just like the rabbits did when they faced doom in Watership Down.
But, whether deer in the headlights or tharn the future is one big clusterfuck.
:)
.
... Prince of a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you..."
I think at some point Bush realized there was not going to be a 3rd GOP term. And they started running a scorched earth campaign. That is why the shit hit the fan at the very end of Bush's term.
He and his cronies have looted the treasury dry, and this whole economic cataclysm is their "farewell" gift to us. These people are psychotic to say the least. Even though they have made off (pun intended) with literally trillions of our dollars, they still need to kick us one more time.
And Nancy Pelosi gave them the immunity to do it. Of course, she and hubby stand to make (another) fortune off of this mess.
And for good measure, there at the very end bush tried to trash every decent envionmental law that he could. I guess he thought he hadn't been enough of a bastard yet.
that was the total douche move from Bush. He just couldn't help himself, he has such contempt for the common American, I can't believe he got away with it.
Bush's attitude at the end of his presidency is one of the main reasons why I tell people hell bent on "moving on and looking forward, let bygones be bygones" to cram it. This bastard has to pay for what he has done to this country, and the world by extension.
One of the very few honest economists, Michael Hudson tells it the way it is on a recent episode of Guns and Butter.
http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/48892
Listened to it all and bookmarked it.
We had better learn self sufficiency quickly.
Great isn't it? He's like the Noam Chomsky of economics. Too bad he isn't more well known.
Hudson is very good. Thank you for the link. He is the only one I have heard talk about the Section 382 scandal. He doesn't get it quite right. Congress allowed the illegal declaration by Paulson but closed it after 1/16/09. Part IV SEC. 1431. Full text of HR 598, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act here.
Here is WaPo.
Here is an update.
-
Hudson was advisor to Kucinich. I like him I also like Galbraith and William Black. They are among the few that use the word fraud without reservation.
Hudson calls the crisis the greatest fraud in human history.
Some more reading:
09/25/2008 - Hudson, Thinking the unthinkable: A debt write down, and jubilee year clean slate
02/10/2009 - James Galbraith: Bailed-Out Banks Should Be Declared Insolvent
02/13/2009 - Robert Kuttner and Michael Hudson - Democracy Now
02/17/2009 - Hudson. The Oligarchs' Escape Plan
02/23/2009 - Hudson, The Language of Looting
02/17/2009 - William Black: "There Are No Real Stress Tests Going On"
again. : )
Wow, great interview. This guy's knowledge is really mind blowing.
Why not?!? We can just print up some more extra money!
The only problem with printing tons of money is the devaluation of what's already out there, but then it's the rich people that are sitting on all that, right? ;)
Printing tons of money is inflationary. But inflation is good for debtors (and bad for creditors). Find some way to take care of those on a fixed income and we've got a plan.
Capitalism = the haves capitalizing on the have nots , Reagan's trickle down = the very wealthy get wealthier and piss on you .What's funny is that this time in their unbridled greed the haves did themselves and each other in too . From our government to Wall Street and the entire financial system , all is so corrupt that the entire system is broken beyond repair . Socialism ? Hey , bring it on , I'll "suffer" and enjoy watching the right go beserk .I have no reservations about Obama but unfortunately he cannot do all by himself , this is only the beginning , worse is yet to come .
I'm with you.
A modicum of social democracy can only serve to civilize and tame the ravages of unbridled capital run amok.
An economic system based on exploitation and greed was bound to fail eventually and it has big time. We need a modern day Adam Smith or Karl Marx who can create the 3rd great system of production that respects all people as equals and allows for progress not yet imagined.
We never actually had capitalism in America since a few years in the 1800's. We have had a central banker owned fixed economy. Its real different.
You mean when the average person was crammed into disease ridden tenements, working 18 hours a day, six days a week for "survival wages," under unsafe conditions?
Oh yeah, let's bring that back.
Korea is now the 12th or 13th largest economy. Last month, production dropped 26%. A 2% growth forecast has been revised to an 8% shrinkage for 2009. In recent years growth has been steady around 5%. This is happening everywhere around the world. Japan is in the same boat. Both are huge trading partners with China (now moreso thab with the YSA.) Not too good, is it?
The Dems look "forward" rather than prosecuting.
...what did you think terms like "Move on.org" and "progressive" meant anyway?
Thats why people have to stop voting for both the dems and the repubs.
The only people worth anything in either party was Kucinich and Paul.
I would like to drop the PUKIE's euphamisms - all of them. This is not a 'recession' (used to dampen alarm) THIS IS A DEPRESSION caused once again, by the PUKIES/RICH.
My head hurts.
Ok, what I don't understand is that America seems determined to keep its dollar from crashing and from the sounds of it, the currencies of the rest of the world (euro, pound) are worse off and so other countries will continue to buy US treasuries keeping the dollar afloat. Now, people are predicting gold will soar, but if the dollar stays high, how will this happen?
I don't recall any of these other countries bitching when the gravy train was working in their favor. No they we're very happy the US was sending them dollars. They loved our business, in one breath they happily took our dollars and said thank you! In the other breath they laughed at us, called us fools for not saving and living beyond our means scorning this country effectively biting the hand that fed them.
There were loads of warnings out there for years by a number of names that have been dropped here again and again. Anyone who warned got called Dr. Doom's and pessimists, to those of us who read what they said and recognized their logic and repeated their warnings we got accused of drinking the Kool-aid, Doom and Gloom loons etc.
So to those who kept pissing on us who tried to say something I say to you; YOU WERE WARNED WHAT MORE DID YOU EXPECT?! You made your own house of cards! So own up and take responsibility for your own backyard mess!
"buying our toxic assets, which were our main export recently, in order to artificially prop up the value of our dollar" as "riding the gravy train."
We obviously have a vastly differing definition of what riding the gravy train means.
I'm talking about exports from China, the EU, etc. and they loved the sales. As far as investments, oh they have no room to talk, Russia and and the EU got wrapped up in even riskier investments than the US did we went nowhere near.
Login or Register to post comments.