Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - financial times on the current economic situation

Locobot · 08-07-2008, 02:53 PM

I had no difficulty in accessing the articles, read the first two skimmed the third so far. The articles are written with the kaleidascopic lens of economic theory, so self-referential, so short-sighted, so inbred. They seem to completely miss the big-picture issue, a surplus of investment capital which lead to lower and lower standards for the disbursement of all that $$$. Swindlers at every level of the investment "industry" ignored any common sense instinct they may or should have had and pushed on using the most lax standards available.

But what does a surplus of investment capital actually mean? What's the big-picture there? There is a stratified top-heavy concentration of wealth that is entrenched and supposedly insulated from risk. People want to see their money grow without taking chances and without doing any work. Its the great Valhalla that the financial world offers, something for nothing, limitless growth, I=P r t. It's as hollow as any religion once the fat gets cooked away. Gene pools at the top of the economic ladder have little to fear, it's the middle class that gets pulled in and are the first to feel the sting when the great Ponzi schemes start to unravel.

What about the U.S. government's decision to drop $100 bills into a warzone by the metric ton with little or no protection in terms of physical guards or ethical oversight? Missed where the Financial Times mentioned that, probably a typo. Bread costing $5 a loaf couldn't have anything to do with Republican cronies being paid millions and millions to truck "sailboat fuel" to Babylon could it? I know, I know, big chunks of that money also went to paying enemies not to attack us. Guess what happens when that revenue stream dries up. You have an enemy that still has all the same religious ideological reasons for hating you, but now they're well equipped thanks to the piles of cash you've been tossing their way.

08-07-2008, 02:53 PM	#3 (permalink)
Locobot is awesome!	I had no difficulty in accessing the articles, read the first two skimmed the third so far. The articles are written with the kaleidascopic lens of economic theory, so self-referential, so short-sighted, so inbred. They seem to completely miss the big-picture issue, a surplus of investment capital which lead to lower and lower standards for the disbursement of all that $$$. Swindlers at every level of the investment "industry" ignored any common sense instinct they may or should have had and pushed on using the most lax standards available. But what does a surplus of investment capital actually mean? What's the big-picture there? There is a stratified top-heavy concentration of wealth that is entrenched and supposedly insulated from risk. People want to see their money grow without taking chances and without doing any work. Its the great Valhalla that the financial world offers, something for nothing, limitless growth, I=P r t. It's as hollow as any religion once the fat gets cooked away. Gene pools at the top of the economic ladder have little to fear, it's the middle class that gets pulled in and are the first to feel the sting when the great Ponzi schemes start to unravel. What about the U.S. government's decision to drop $100 bills into a warzone by the metric ton with little or no protection in terms of physical guards or ethical oversight? Missed where the Financial Times mentioned that, probably a typo. Bread costing $5 a loaf couldn't have anything to do with Republican cronies being paid millions and millions to truck "sailboat fuel" to Babylon could it? I know, I know, big chunks of that money also went to paying enemies not to attack us. Guess what happens when that revenue stream dries up. You have an enemy that still has all the same religious ideological reasons for hating you, but now they're well equipped thanks to the piles of cash you've been tossing their way.