Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
jorgelito--i'm really not clear on why you impute all these odd motives to what i put up. i've made myself pretty clear--in this context, the only position i see as reasonable is a social-democratic one. this is a mixed economy. trick is that neoliberalism is also a mixed economy--there is no such thing as a "free market" outside the purple prose of ayn rand or the dreams of 18th century political economists---the problem with neoliberals is that they are ideologically and aesthetically opposed to "regulation" so they don't think in those terms---which sets up the incoherent, reactive nonsense you've seen over the past few weeks from the administration--which has intensified an already problematic situation--which was enabled by the administration and its predecessors since reagan.
since markets presuppose regulation, it seems more coherent to think of them in those terms and operate with a perspective that sees in regulation constraints that can be used to direct socio-economic activity---and if you think that way, it becomes easier to address social problems that follow from economic activity. for example, neoliberal-land typically does not even include space for wondering about the relationship between massive consumer debt--of which the shit mortgage problem is but an expression--and the avoidance of the implications of the processes of--say---outsourcing of production. like the good dr bindujeet put it, much of the us is a factory town without the factory at this point. that's not coherent as a social arrangement, that's not coherent as a form of capitalism, and the **only** way it's acceptable is if you think "markets" are like the weather and the consequences of market relations inevitable.
that's delusional, though: if that were true, capitalism would have collapsed by 1870.
it looks like the state is undertaking *both* options: the sec banned shortselling AND there's some theater going on to create the Magic Debt-Absorbing Machine.
more on this later.
|
Sorry to keep picking on you roachie, it's just that you have been one of the more vocal ones on this subject and I wanted to hear more elaboration and elucidation on your part. But yeah, thanks for the response, that's pretty much what I was looking for. I would like to hear more when you get a chance.
-----Added 19/9/2008 at 03 : 45 : 24-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by abaya
The references bother me, because they are being made by people whom I never knew to be interested in any kind of reading (we went to high school together, the ones I am talking about), and all of a sudden they're pulling out Fountainhead references like they've been following Rand for the last decade. I'm not convinced that they've actually read the book--hey, I haven't, either--but it seems to have become a Republican hand-me-down point that my friends use when I'm arguing with them. I have the same feeling of "offense" when they throw the Bible at me, in a political way.
From what I remember in Anthem, no, there is not baby killing and all the rest... anyway, that's not what offends me. It's just that people are quoting her, I feel, without actually reading the book. Kind of like the whole "I can see Russia from my island" thing. Just more disingenuity that pisses me off.
Or maybe I'm just on cynical override these days...
|
Ah, ok. I was just wondering. Seemed a bit odd (a lot of Ayn Rand references lately). It's piquing my curiosity to the point of me ordering all of her books to see what the fuss is about.
-----Added 19/9/2008 at 03 : 48 : 07-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
I would have grabbed a really big stick and gone out for blood had I been president, just like I would be doing right now. These kinds of failures are completely unacceptable and you have to scare the shit out of the next generation of congresspeople and captains of industry so that they do their best to avoid it. The president isn't just a figurehead, he (or she) has real clout and has a lot of weight to toss around be it in government and the private sector.
|
You and Teddy Roosevelt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Start with letting the OFHEO do their job. The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight was built specifically to ensure that government sponsored enterprises function correctly. Congress stopped the OFHEO from doing their jobs with Fannie and Freddie because they were concerned about messing up the housing boom (talk about a lack of foresight, yikes). Fast forward 3 years and *surprise!* the tax payers are dropping billions on someone else's mistake.
|
In short, the big boys take a financial shit and the rest of us little guys are left to wipe their ass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Let's just share that one.
|
Ok
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
You running for office?
|
No. I'm just trying to smooth out some of the rough edges around here (mostly caused by me) and improve communication.