US Presidential Elections thread - the fate of the world to be decided (7 Viewers)
- Thread starter Zlatan
- Start date
- Status
What's weird as she's come from the same state that was the only one that voted against Reagan in '84 and is also the state of one of my all-time favorite federal politicians in modern times, Paul Wellstone (RIP).
I wouldn't call it McCarthyism, though. It's really more of a desperate Hail Mary pass. It's the kind of crazy sh*t someone would say if they're cornered, out of options, and the lights are going dim.
I wouldn't call it McCarthyism, though. It's really more of a desperate Hail Mary pass. It's the kind of crazy sh*t someone would say if they're cornered, out of options, and the lights are going dim.
The Whole Intellectual Edifice
Alan Greenspan’s testimony today before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is likely to be quoted for years. Is there anyone in Washington with a better instinct for the jugular than Henry Waxman, the committee chairman, whose questioning evoked some of Greenspan’s most evocative comments? (I know George already quoted this material, but it’s worth quoting again.)
Greenspan: I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms…
Waxman: In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working.
Greenspan: Absolutely, precisely. You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.
At another point, Greenspan said that his faith in Wall Street’s ability to regulate itself was based on his assumption that rational firms would not expose themselves to self-destructive risks. He also assumed that the markets would “properly price” risky bundles of subprime mortgages, so that investors worldwide would understand that they presented unusual risks. He continued, “The whole intellectual edifice…collapsed in the summer of last year.”
This is poignant, but also evasive. The system of unregulated incentives, compensation systems, and business practices Greenspan oversaw—or at least tolerated without comment—was riddled with obvious conflicts of interest. Why were collateralized debt securities bundling reckless subprime mortgages “mis-priced,” as Greenspan would have it? In substantial part it was because the for-profit ratings agencies, Moody’s and Standard & Poors, blessed them as sound products, largely on the basis of representations made to them by the banks that marketed the securities. Why did the ratings agencies fail to detect the true risks embedded in these securities—a failure of intelligence collection as grotesque as any preceding the invasion of Iraq? Not a complicated question: they were paid for their opinions by the very banks that sold the faulty products. McCain’s language is hard to argue with in this case—that’s structural corruption.
So much for the brilliant idea of deregulation eh.
Alan Greenspan’s testimony today before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is likely to be quoted for years. Is there anyone in Washington with a better instinct for the jugular than Henry Waxman, the committee chairman, whose questioning evoked some of Greenspan’s most evocative comments? (I know George already quoted this material, but it’s worth quoting again.)
Greenspan: I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms…
Waxman: In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working.
Greenspan: Absolutely, precisely. You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.
At another point, Greenspan said that his faith in Wall Street’s ability to regulate itself was based on his assumption that rational firms would not expose themselves to self-destructive risks. He also assumed that the markets would “properly price” risky bundles of subprime mortgages, so that investors worldwide would understand that they presented unusual risks. He continued, “The whole intellectual edifice…collapsed in the summer of last year.”
This is poignant, but also evasive. The system of unregulated incentives, compensation systems, and business practices Greenspan oversaw—or at least tolerated without comment—was riddled with obvious conflicts of interest. Why were collateralized debt securities bundling reckless subprime mortgages “mis-priced,” as Greenspan would have it? In substantial part it was because the for-profit ratings agencies, Moody’s and Standard & Poors, blessed them as sound products, largely on the basis of representations made to them by the banks that marketed the securities. Why did the ratings agencies fail to detect the true risks embedded in these securities—a failure of intelligence collection as grotesque as any preceding the invasion of Iraq? Not a complicated question: they were paid for their opinions by the very banks that sold the faulty products. McCain’s language is hard to argue with in this case—that’s structural corruption.
So much for the brilliant idea of deregulation eh.
Well yes, but it is odd, isn't it? I mean, you would expect them to be rational and take a risk every once in a while, but not like this. It makes no sense at all. But that's what happens to some ideologies: they look good on a rational level, but they fail in the real world. And if they do, you have to change them.
Isn't that also the rationale that says people won't drink more than they can handle, cause they know it's not good for them? Every so often (actually, all the time) the would-be rational instinct gives way to the desire for short term profit. And I think we know all too well that people so easily fall pray to the self destructive as long as they can live in the now and forget about the future.
Greenspan turned out to be an idiot. To simplify what happened, Greenspan kept interest rates low purposely after 9/11 to show that America was still open for business. But those low interest rates allowed for cheap money to roll around the system while in 2002 we should have had a recession due to the "Dot Com" bubble that burst. So instead of a recession at the time, we prolonged our misery by making it easier to borrow and lend, which also created the entire sub prime mess that formed the housing bubble.
So really, the system is essentially a negative feedback loop. We needed better decisions over the past 10 years and we did not get them. But the difference between the current economic crisis and others is that we have this scary current account deficit we may not recover from.
So really, the system is essentially a negative feedback loop. We needed better decisions over the past 10 years and we did not get them. But the difference between the current economic crisis and others is that we have this scary current account deficit we may not recover from.
Did everybody hear about this woman who punched herself in the eye, carved a backwards B on her face, and blamed it on a black Obama supporter? 
http://gawker.com/5067970/woman-mugged-by-obama-supporter
HAHA! DUMBASS!
http://gawker.com/5067970/woman-mugged-by-obama-supporter
HAHA! DUMBASS!
- Status