Eleven reasons America is the new socialist economy

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Text

11 reasons America's a new socialist economy
How free market ideology backfired, sabotaging capitalistic democracy

By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last update: 11:47 a.m. EDT July 22, 2008

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Welcome to the conservative's worst nightmare: The law of unintended consequences. Why? Nobody wants to admit it, folks, but the conservatives' grand ideology is backfiring, actually turning the world's greatest capitalistic democracy into the world's newest socialist economy.
A little history: The core principles of conservative economic ideology are grounded in Nobel economist Milton Friedman's 1962 classic "Capitalism and Freedom." Too late to stop President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, those principles became the battle cries energizing conservatives since Reagan: Unrestricted free markets, free enterprise and free trade; deregulation, privatization and globalization; trickle-down economics and trickle-up wealth to an elite plutocracy destined to rule the new American capitalist utopia.
So what happened? Are you guys nuts? Hey, I'm talking to all you blind Beltway politicians (in both parties) ... plus the Old Boys Club running Wall Street (into the ground) ... plus all you fat-cat CEOs (with megamillion parachutes) ... and all your buddies scamming everybody else to get on the Forbes 400. You are proof of Lord Acton's warning: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
It's backfiring! You folks turned our America from a great capitalistic democracy into a meddling socialist economy. Still you don't get it. You're acting like teen addicts tripping on an overdose of "greed-is-good" testosterone while your caricature of conservative economics would at best make a one-line joke on Jay Leno.
Here are 11 reasons your manipulations are sabotaging the great principles of leaders like Friedman and Reagan:

1. Dumber than a fifth grader with cognitive dissonance
Kids know what it means. They know most adults today can't see past the end of their noses. Liberals tune out candidate McBush for being lost in the past. Conservatives can't hear Obama without seeing that turban.
Cognitive dissonance simply means most brains cannot see past their own narrow ideologies. They dismiss any data that contradicts their old ideologies. Whether you're a conservative Republican or liberal Democrat, you only hear what you already know is "true." All else is tuned out.

2. Where did all the leaders go with their moral character?
Friedman's economics requires leaders of moral character. Did it run into Lord Acton's warning: "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely?" Former Ford and Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca said yes in "Where Have All the Leaders Gone?"
Friedman's great conservative principles have been commandeered by myopic ideologues whose idea of leadership is balancing the demands of self-interest lobbyists with the need for campaign donations. Unfortunately, a new "change" president won't be enough; there are 537 elected officials in Washington controlled by 42,000 special interest lobbyists.

3. Fed and U.S. Treasury adopted Enron accounting tricks
Bad news: Enron failed several years ago because of its off-balance-sheet accounting scam. The Fed's doing the same thing: Dumping Bear's $30 billion liabilities onto the taxpayer's "balance sheet." Next Treasury proposes adding $5.3 trillion more from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Unfortunately clever accounting tricks by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke aren't going to fool foreign lenders analyzing America's creditworthiness. Worse-case scenario: U.S. Treasury bills with less than a triple-A rating.
With 90 banks on the brink and already too many bail-outs, our so-called leaders are running out of magic bullets. So now the taxpayer's "balance sheet" has become the all-purpose "dumping ground" and it's overcrowding fast as our leaders raise the white flag of socialism.

4. Deregulation creating new socialist housing system
Back in 1999 a Democratic president and Republican Congress were in love with a fantasy called the "new economics." Enthusiastic lobbyists invented the brilliant idea of dismantling the wall between commercial and investment banking: They killed the Glass-Steagall Act that was keeping the sleazy hands of short-term hustlers out of the pockets of long-term lenders.
Flash forward: We lost 85-year-old Bear Sterns and $32 billion IndyMac. Lehman's iffy. And 90 banks. With the virtual takeover of Freddie and Fanny, Wall Street's grand experiment with free-market ideology is backfiring, having socialized the housing market. They have nobody to blame but their self-centered greed.

5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs
One look at Forbes lists of fat cats and you know the 21st Century doesn't just belong to Asia, it belongs to everyone but America. Why? Once again, remember Warren Buffett's famous "Farmer's Story" in Fortune: "We were taught in Economics 101 that countries could not for long sustain large, ever-growing trade deficits ... our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4% more than they produce -- that's the trade deficit -- we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own."
Friedman was right: Congressional spending is the biggest cause of inflation, and, wow, those conservatives sure did love blank-check deficit spending the past eight years!

6. Banking system in meltdown, minting penny stocks
The Friedman conservatives apparently understand Joseph Schumpeter's "creative destruction." Yet, our free-market ideologues can't seem to accept that America is now on the "destructive" downside leg of the cycle, in the economy, markets, trade, politics and, yes, sadly, even with their conservative ideology.
You don't have to be smarter than a fifth grader to figure out that our leaders are clueless about the reality of our crumbling banking system, with many banks trading as penny stocks, while the Fed still panders to conservative pre-election politics rather than getting serious about inflation.

7. Ideologues preach savings, but still push spending
A core principle of conservatism is frugality, saving for the future. Grandparents raised me, struggled during the Depression, passed on strong ideals.
Somewhere over the past generation conservatives forget frugality. This distortion peaked in 2003 when consumers were told to spend, not sacrifice, and fuel the economy even as government spent excessively on war. That was a clear breach of every conservative leader's position in earlier wars.
As a result, in one brief generation, as the power of conservative ideologues grew, America's savings rate dropped precipitously from 11% in 1980 to less than zero today.

8. Warning, the market's under 2000 peak, losing money
Imagine you're on Jeff Foxworthy's fabulous show competing to see if you really are smarter than a fifth grader. Question: "If you put $10,000 in the market in March of 2000 when the Dow peaked at 11,722, how much money would you have today if the market's 10% under 11,722?" So you guess $9,000.
But then two fifth graders raise their hands: One asks if the CPI inflation rate should be considered? If so, maybe $5,000 is closer to the right answer. The other kid wants to know if you're buying stuff in Chicago or Singapore.
The truth is, the best answer for most adults is: "You've lost a hell of a lot of money in the market under the grand conservative ideology the past eight years."

9. Inflation and dollars: Is Zimbabwe the new model for the U.S.?
The Los Angeles Times ran a photo of a Zimbabwe $500 million bank note, worth $20 at noon, less at dinner. Why? Inflation's there is running 32 million (yes million!) percent annually. The German company printing their banknotes finally cut them off.
Things may be worse in America, psychologically. Our ideological obsession with "growth" is not working because there is too much collateral damage, namely inflation. Our dollar has lost substantial value to the euro because our dysfunctional leaders are convinced that a trade policy funded by debt makes sense.
Now we owe China $1.3 trillion, sovereign funds want equity not cheap dollar IOUs, and still our clueless Treasury and the Fed continue debasing our currency, printing money like Zimbabwe.

10. Free-market health care failing 47,000,000 Americans
Big Pharma loves free-market conservatism and no-compete Medicare drug programs. Nobody else is happy. Taxpayers get stuck with the bill.
"The Coming Generational Storm" tells us that without massive reforms and big lifestyle changes for taxpayers (especially retirees), within a couple short decades America's entitlement programs will eat up the entire federal budget. Medicare is the biggest cost item in your future, over $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities.
Conservative ideologues naively believe the answer is more pay-out-of-pocket insurance plans, even with 47 million already uninsured because they can't pay. Here as in so many areas of our economy, free-market junkies really are suffering a severe case of cognitive dissonance, as blind to the facts about the uninsured as they are to their outdated free-market fantasies.

11. Conservative free-market policies inflated oil 300%!
Yep, oil inflated 300% in eight short years under the "leadership of two oil men." But, you can't blame them. We put the foxes in the henhouse, knowing full well "real" oil men love digging holes on the supply side, supporting ethanol subsidies and blaming speculators -- it's in their genes! Talk about cognitive dissonance; real oil men thrive on cowboy images of Marlboro Men in Hummers, Navigators and F-150 trucks.
Net result? Another perfect example of "creative destruction" in action as conservative ideology meets "law of unintended consequences," driving GM, the symbol of America capitalism, closer to bankruptcy ... while turning America into a socialist economy.

This article pretty much says it all, so my comments will be brief.
Who saw this coming? I did, along with many others.
Who is at fault? Conservatives who stopped being conservative except in name pushing a free market that was not free except in name.
What is the real fault? Cognitive dissonance. Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush and pushing McCain under the notion that these politicians are small government proponents.
What caused the cognitive dissonance? The fantasy that politics is a team sport, with your side and my side, and that one had to stick with the team or face shame.
Where did conservatives go wrong? When they stopped being conservative, see #7 above. Their spend and waste attitudes naturally went all the way to the top.

And finally, what is the solution? Bootstraps, of course. We have to tighten our belts and get to work. The entitlement mentality of the pseudo-conservatives is going to be the most difficult part to deal with, as they don't want to give up their boastfully wasteful lifestyles, or their needless wars just to proclaim that America is tops of the world, but without that kind of change, our nation will fall further into socialism, and it will be the conservatives paving the way, no liberals required.

edit: I would also like to add that I, like the author, am a huge fan of Milton Friedman, RIP. I also see these turn of events as nothing less than a stark betrayal of everything he stood for.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

I think this article is mostly fame bait. Especially this line:

"Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush"

LOL Im not sure, other than those who were appointed by him, are praising him. It certainly isnt his base.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

That's because the transformation is taking place right now. The government is on a buying spree with your future tax dollars. Don't you follow the financial news?
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: blackangst1
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

I think this article is mostly fame bait. Especially this line:

"Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush"

LOL Im not sure, other than those who were appointed by him, are praising him. It certainly isnt his base.

And most Conservatives aren't "pushing McCain"


but obviously the answer to all this is to elect a liberal who will advance the same agend being talked about here. ;)
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Vic

This article pretty much says it all, so my comments will be brief.
Who saw this coming? I did, along with many others.

Who is at fault? Conservatives who stopped being conservative except in name pushing a free market that was not free except in name.

What is the real fault? Cognitive dissonance. Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush and pushing McCain under the notion that these politicians are small government proponents.

What caused the cognitive dissonance? The fantasy that politics is a team sport, with your side and my side, and that one had to stick with the team or face shame.
Where did conservatives go wrong? When they stopped being conservative, see #7 above. Their spend and waste attitudes naturally went all the way to the top.

And finally, what is the solution? Bootstraps, of course. We have to tighten our belts and get to work. The entitlement mentality of the pseudo-conservatives is going to be the most difficult part to deal with, as they don't want to give up their boastfully wasteful lifestyles, or their needless wars just to proclaim that America is tops of the world, but without that kind of change, our nation will fall further into socialism,

and it will be the conservatives paving the way, no liberals required.

edit: I would also like to add that I, like the author, am a huge fan of Milton Friedman, RIP. I also see these turn of events as nothing less than a stark betrayal of everything he stood for.

It's a crime that the Republican party even still exists.

Sadly I still see them keeping the whitehouse this November.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: blackangst1
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

I think this article is mostly fame bait. Especially this line:

"Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush"

LOL Im not sure, other than those who were appointed by him, are praising him. It certainly isnt his base.

And most Conservatives aren't "pushing McCain"


but obviously the answer to all this is to elect a liberal who will advance the same agend being talked about here. ;)

And now the flamebait comes in.

Read again, CAD. I think your cognitive dissonance has gotten the best of you.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
Those currently in chatge of both parties are taking the economy to hell. The democrats are just using a faster car.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: blackangst1
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

I think this article is mostly fame bait. Especially this line:

"Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush"

LOL Im not sure, other than those who were appointed by him, are praising him. It certainly isnt his base.

And most Conservatives aren't "pushing McCain"


but obviously the answer to all this is to elect a liberal who will advance the same agend being talked about here. ;)

And now the flamebait comes in.

Read again, CAD. I think your cognitive dissonance has gotten the best of you.

If "Conservatives" weren't pushing for McCain, Dobson would've said vote for Obama but he didn't.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: lupi
Those currently in chatge of both parties are taking the economy to hell. The democrats are just using a faster car.

Except the Republicans have been the ones behind the wheel? :confused:

See point #1 above. Partisan blame is pointless here, and only distracts from the issue and the challenge of finding a solution. So IMO if you want to point partisan fingers, then point them at the side with the most hacks.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: lupi
Those currently in chatge of both parties are taking the economy to hell. The democrats are just using a faster car.

Except the Republicans have been the ones behind the wheel? :confused:

Don't you find it baffling that Republicans can't admit they have been the ones in the driver's seat causing all this?

Sean Hannity is the worst blaming Carter and Clinton for everything.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: blackangst1
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

I think this article is mostly fame bait. Especially this line:

"Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush"

LOL Im not sure, other than those who were appointed by him, are praising him. It certainly isnt his base.

And most Conservatives aren't "pushing McCain"


but obviously the answer to all this is to elect a liberal who will advance the same agend being talked about here. ;)

And now the flamebait comes in.

Read again, CAD. I think your cognitive dissonance has gotten the best of you.

Nope. I am commenting on your comments. It is absurd for you to suggest that Conservatives are "pushing McCain" because that is just not the truth. There are a great many of us that do not like McCain for some of the exact reasons presented in your OP. But I guess if you think that is "flamebait" maybe it's you who has the little problem with cognitive dissonance - either that or you can't handle sarcasm when it's used against BHO.

The REAL answer here is to find good Conservative leadership - something that has been in short supply as of late.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: blackangst1
I dunno. Ive been to two country that are CLEARLY socialist and didnt see too many similarities *shrug*

I think this article is mostly fame bait. Especially this line:

"Even right now, conservatives are praising Bush"

LOL Im not sure, other than those who were appointed by him, are praising him. It certainly isnt his base.

And most Conservatives aren't "pushing McCain"


but obviously the answer to all this is to elect a liberal who will advance the same agend being talked about here. ;)

And now the flamebait comes in.

Read again, CAD. I think your cognitive dissonance has gotten the best of you.

If "Conservatives" weren't pushing for McCain, Dobson would've said vote for Obama but he didn't.

CAD wants to continue perpetuating the myth that the "other side" aka the libuhrals who want to clean up this mess are to be feared worse than the pseudo-conservatives in charge who have done most of the damage.

This is what happens when one gets the bulk of one's political education from talk radio.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: Vic
11 reasons America's a new socialist economy
How free market ideology backfired, sabotaging capitalistic democracy

By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last update: 11:47 a.m. EDT July 22, 2008

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Welcome to the conservative's worst nightmare: The law of unintended consequences. Why? Nobody wants to admit it, folks, but the conservatives' grand ideology is backfiring, actually turning the world's greatest capitalistic democracy into the world's newest socialist economy.
A little history: The core principles of conservative economic ideology are grounded in Nobel economist Milton Friedman's 1962 classic "Capitalism and Freedom." Too late to stop President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, those principles became the battle cries energizing conservatives since Reagan: Unrestricted free markets, free enterprise and free trade; deregulation, privatization and globalization; trickle-down economics and trickle-up wealth to an elite plutocracy destined to rule the new American capitalist utopia.
So what happened? Are you guys nuts? Hey, I'm talking to all you blind Beltway politicians (in both parties) ... plus the Old Boys Club running Wall Street (into the ground) ... plus all you fat-cat CEOs (with megamillion parachutes) ... and all your buddies scamming everybody else to get on the Forbes 400. You are proof of Lord Acton's warning: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
It's backfiring! You folks turned our America from a great capitalistic democracy into a meddling socialist economy. Still you don't get it. You're acting like teen addicts tripping on an overdose of "greed-is-good" testosterone while your caricature of conservative economics would at best make a one-line joke on Jay Leno.
Here are 11 reasons your manipulations are sabotaging the great principles of leaders like Friedman and Reagan:
Cliches and fringe examples of what is wrong, without underlying information. He essentially takes anecdotes and extrapolates.
1. Dumber than a fifth grader with cognitive dissonance
Kids know what it means. They know most adults today can't see past the end of their noses. Liberals tune out candidate McBush for being lost in the past. Conservatives can't hear Obama without seeing that turban.
Cognitive dissonance simply means most brains cannot see past their own narrow ideologies. They dismiss any data that contradicts their old ideologies. Whether you're a conservative Republican or liberal Democrat, you only hear what you already know is "true." All else is tuned out.
Hey, lets take a neat psychology phrase and use it to describe everybody! May or may not be true, depending on the person. However, when given the choice of only two real candidates it's hard to not be selective. Especially when this stuff is so polarized now.

2. Where did all the leaders go with their moral character?
Friedman's economics requires leaders of moral character. Did it run into Lord Acton's warning: "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely?" Former Ford and Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca said yes in "Where Have All the Leaders Gone?"
Friedman's great conservative principles have been commandeered by myopic ideologues whose idea of leadership is balancing the demands of self-interest lobbyists with the need for campaign donations. Unfortunately, a new "change" president won't be enough; there are 537 elected officials in Washington controlled by 42,000 special interest lobbyists.
Lee Iacocca's book was shit. It was a management book in tune with other management books. The line was good, but nothing else. I agree that things need to change, one piece of that is to get rid of the "free market" idea of lobbyists altogether.

3. Fed and U.S. Treasury adopted Enron accounting tricks
Bad news: Enron failed several years ago because of its off-balance-sheet accounting scam. The Fed's doing the same thing: Dumping Bear's $30 billion liabilities onto the taxpayer's "balance sheet." Next Treasury proposes adding $5.3 trillion more from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Unfortunately clever accounting tricks by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke aren't going to fool foreign lenders analyzing America's creditworthiness. Worse-case scenario: U.S. Treasury bills with less than a triple-A rating.
With 90 banks on the brink and already too many bail-outs, our so-called leaders are running out of magic bullets. So now the taxpayer's "balance sheet" has become the all-purpose "dumping ground" and it's overcrowding fast as our leaders raise the white flag of socialism.
This is the problem I have with news reporters and blow-hards discussing finance. They know jack-shit about it.

I am the last one to defend FAS140. However, his assertion is incorrect. FAS140 was enacted *AFTER* Enron blew up to prevent another Enron example. It requires consolidation of special purpose vehicles (SPVs) if the entity has any material benefit from the SPV's, compared to other investors. Enron simply couldn't happen with FAS140.

Fin46, which came after FAS140, was use to remove assets from the balance sheets of companies. However, it wasn't the fact that banks owned the assets that forced them to consolidate them, it was the fact they couldn't find any investors. They abosorbed them to remove any chance of a rapid market disruption. It wasn't the SPV's fault for them not using asset-lability term management.

BSC's 30BN may or may not be on the govt's balance sheet. It depends on how much money is lost.

Again, this guy talks out of his ass. The GSE 5.3TR in debt is already financed, locked in, in the door, on the balance sheets. The marginal guaranty from the government would cost a fraction of the 5.3TR, but he doesn't mention that because it wouldn't create a froth.

What's funny is that the way to prevent this situation was decried as "socialist", regulation was lambasted over and over.

4. Deregulation creating new socialist housing system
Back in 1999 a Democratic president and Republican Congress were in love with a fantasy called the "new economics." Enthusiastic lobbyists invented the brilliant idea of dismantling the wall between commercial and investment banking: They killed the Glass-Steagall Act that was keeping the sleazy hands of short-term hustlers out of the pockets of long-term lenders.
Flash forward: We lost 85-year-old Bear Sterns and $32 billion IndyMac. Lehman's iffy. And 90 banks. With the virtual takeover of Freddie and Fanny, Wall Street's grand experiment with free-market ideology is backfiring, having socialized the housing market. They have nobody to blame but their self-centered greed.
Regulations are a form of socialized economics. I agree that G-S should never have been dismantled. As far as "losing" BSC and Indymac, that's the way the cookie crumbles. 90 banks? Wow, BFD.

5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs
One look at Forbes lists of fat cats and you know the 21st Century doesn't just belong to Asia, it belongs to everyone but America. Why? Once again, remember Warren Buffett's famous "Farmer's Story" in Fortune: "We were taught in Economics 101 that countries could not for long sustain large, ever-growing trade deficits ... our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4% more than they produce -- that's the trade deficit -- we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own."
Friedman was right: Congressional spending is the biggest cause of inflation, and, wow, those conservatives sure did love blank-check deficit spending the past eight years!
Agreed.

6. Banking system in meltdown, minting penny stocks
The Friedman conservatives apparently understand Joseph Schumpeter's "creative destruction." Yet, our free-market ideologues can't seem to accept that America is now on the "destructive" downside leg of the cycle, in the economy, markets, trade, politics and, yes, sadly, even with their conservative ideology.
You don't have to be smarter than a fifth grader to figure out that our leaders are clueless about the reality of our crumbling banking system, with many banks trading as penny stocks, while the Fed still panders to conservative pre-election politics rather than getting serious about inflation.
When does trading at penny stock levels (which banks are there?) equate to our banking system crumbling? When BOA or JPM crumbles, with a total of 1TR in deposits, I'll start thinking the system is crumbling. Until then, more hyperbole.

7. Ideologues preach savings, but still push spending
A core principle of conservatism is frugality, saving for the future. Grandparents raised me, struggled during the Depression, passed on strong ideals.
Somewhere over the past generation conservatives forget frugality. This distortion peaked in 2003 when consumers were told to spend, not sacrifice, and fuel the economy even as government spent excessively on war. That was a clear breach of every conservative leader's position in earlier wars.
As a result, in one brief generation, as the power of conservative ideologues grew, America's savings rate dropped precipitously from 11% in 1980 to less than zero today.

Not sure where he gets this, but I found this.

http://www.bea.gov/briefrm/saving.htm

8. Warning, the market's under 2000 peak, losing money
Imagine you're on Jeff Foxworthy's fabulous show competing to see if you really are smarter than a fifth grader. Question: "If you put $10,000 in the market in March of 2000 when the Dow peaked at 11,722, how much money would you have today if the market's 10% under 11,722?" So you guess $9,000.
But then two fifth graders raise their hands: One asks if the CPI inflation rate should be considered? If so, maybe $5,000 is closer to the right answer. The other kid wants to know if you're buying stuff in Chicago or Singapore.
The truth is, the best answer for most adults is: "You've lost a hell of a lot of money in the market under the grand conservative ideology the past eight years."
2000 peak was a joke. Putting money into an obvious over-heated market means you deserve to lose it.

9. Inflation and dollars: Is Zimbabwe the new model for the U.S.?
The Los Angeles Times ran a photo of a Zimbabwe $500 million bank note, worth $20 at noon, less at dinner. Why? Inflation's there is running 32 million (yes million!) percent annually. The German company printing their banknotes finally cut them off.
Things may be worse in America, psychologically. Our ideological obsession with "growth" is not working because there is too much collateral damage, namely inflation. Our dollar has lost substantial value to the euro because our dysfunctional leaders are convinced that a trade policy funded by debt makes sense.
Now we owe China $1.3 trillion, sovereign funds want equity not cheap dollar IOUs, and still our clueless Treasury and the Fed continue debasing our currency, printing money like Zimbabwe.
Ahh yes, the inflation game. Equating our current commodity based inflation to money printing. One of the time honored events in the history of economics ignoramus. I love the hyperbole juxtaposition to create more frothing fear!

10. Free-market health care failing 47,000,000 Americans
Big Pharma loves free-market conservatism and no-compete Medicare drug programs. Nobody else is happy. Taxpayers get stuck with the bill.
"The Coming Generational Storm" tells us that without massive reforms and big lifestyle changes for taxpayers (especially retirees), within a couple short decades America's entitlement programs will eat up the entire federal budget. Medicare is the biggest cost item in your future, over $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities.
Conservative ideologues naively believe the answer is more pay-out-of-pocket insurance plans, even with 47 million already uninsured because they can't pay. Here as in so many areas of our economy, free-market junkies really are suffering a severe case of cognitive dissonance, as blind to the facts about the uninsured as they are to their outdated free-market fantasies.
So, socialist non-free market healthcare is the answer? What about socialist tort reform? What about socialist prescription negotiation pricing? Yes, bitching about "free market" expensiveness while deriding "socialis markets" when socialist solutions are the best options.

Then he frames "unfunded liabilities", but forgets to menton the timeframe and GDP we will gain during that timeperiod. Idiot.

11. Conservative free-market policies inflated oil 300%!
Yep, oil inflated 300% in eight short years under the "leadership of two oil men." But, you can't blame them. We put the foxes in the henhouse, knowing full well "real" oil men love digging holes on the supply side, supporting ethanol subsidies and blaming speculators -- it's in their genes! Talk about cognitive dissonance; real oil men thrive on cowboy images of Marlboro Men in Hummers, Navigators and F-150 trucks.
Net result? Another perfect example of "creative destruction" in action as conservative ideology meets "law of unintended consequences," driving GM, the symbol of America capitalism, closer to bankruptcy ... while turning America into a socialist economy.

GM, the symbol of American capitalism? WTF kind of whacked out shit are you smoking? If that's a symbol of our capitalism, then that's the reason why we're having problems.

Let's see, a fucked up, overbloated, poorly run, company who has only focused on short-term SUV driven profits to spew shitty under-quality, ugly-ass, fucked up land-barges on the stupid gas-guzzling American consumers.

Great fucking job you fucking idiot.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Nope. I am commenting on your comments. It is absurd for you to suggest that Conservatives are "pushing McCain" because that is just not the truth. There are a great many of us that do not like McCain for some of the exact reasons presented in your OP. But I guess if you think that is "flamebait" maybe it's you who has the little problem with cognitive dissonance - either that or you can't handle sarcasm when it's used against BHO.

You can't get out of it that easily, CAD. You helped get us here, and if you're not going to be a part of the solution, then you are still part of the problem. Period.

And seriously, for YOU to accuse anyone of cognitive dissonance is the height of irony. You have your "team," I got it. Except I couldn't give a flying fuck. I'm not interested in teams. I'm not interested in ideologies either. I'm interested in dealing with the real world. If that's too much for you, then the least you could do is get the fuck out of the way.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Oops, I forgot that LK is a respected and heavy published economist with both a JD and a PhD. :roll:

Read the article again, then re-consider your comments.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: Vic
Oops, I forgot that LK is a respected and heavy published economist with both a JD and a PhD. :roll:

Read the article again, then re-consider your comments.

Hey, and I forgot that you work in mortgage banking at what? A regional bank? A broker? Maybe even a large NA? While I have an MBA and am a CFA charterholder and work at one of the largest banks in the world that's taken one of the smallest writedowns thus far.

Who the hell are you to disagree with me? That is, if I use your own logic.

Being an economist, with a JD and PhD doesn't mean dick, except your an academic with no clue how the real world works. It's obvious he doesn't know shit about accounting rules, but pretends he does.

His dissonance in that article is high. What's sad is that despite all of his education, he can't even see how many ways he is disagreeing with every premise he makes.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Originally posted by: lupi
Those currently in chatge of both parties are taking the economy to hell. The democrats are just using a faster car.

Com'on now, you know the problem is Republican deregulation and Republican bail-outs.
Put the blame where it belongs.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: Vic
Oops, I forgot that LK is a respected and heavy published economist with both a JD and a PhD. :roll:

Read the article again, then re-consider your comments.

Hey, and I forgot that you work in mortgage banking at what? A regional bank? A broker? Maybe even a large NA? While I have an MBA and am a CFA charterholder and work at one of the largest banks in the world that's taken one of the smallest writedowns thus far.

Who the hell are you to disagree with me? That is, if I use your own logic.

Being an economist, with a JD and PhD doesn't mean dick, except your an academic with no clue how the real world works. It's obvious he doesn't know shit about accounting rules, but pretends he does.

His dissonance in that article is high. What's sad is that despite all of his education, he can't even see how many ways he is disagreeing with every premise he makes.

Why are you pretending that I wrote this article?

As for the rest, you seem to be confused about the author's tone and sense of irony. I can't tell if you're taking it too literally, too personally, or what, but you certainly missed the whole point of the article.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Nope. I am commenting on your comments. It is absurd for you to suggest that Conservatives are "pushing McCain" because that is just not the truth. There are a great many of us that do not like McCain for some of the exact reasons presented in your OP. But I guess if you think that is "flamebait" maybe it's you who has the little problem with cognitive dissonance - either that or you can't handle sarcasm when it's used against BHO.

You can't get out of it that easily, CAD. You helped get us here, and if you're not going to be a part of the solution, then you are still part of the problem. Period.

And seriously, for YOU to accuse anyone of cognitive dissonance is the height of irony. You have your "team," I got it. Except I couldn't give a flying fuck. I'm not interested in teams. I'm not interested in ideologies either. I'm interested in dealing with the real world. If that's too much for you, then the least you could do is get the fuck out of the way.

:roll: Yeah I have a "team" - it's Conservatism. And no - I did not help us get here(more than anyone else in America), I have been pushing for better Conservative leadership - those that will stick to Consevative ideals and govern by them. Fixing the problems pointed out by the OP aren't going to happen by electing liberals or RINOs - thus the reason so many of us may have to sit on our hands this fall(unless a Conservative magically starts a run).
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Originally posted by: lupi
Those currently in chatge of both parties are taking the economy to hell. The democrats are just using a faster car.

Com'on now, you know the problem is Republican deregulation and Republican bail-outs.
Put the blame where it belongs.

I wouldn't mind the deregulation if it weren't for the bail outs.

This reminds of a quote from Robert Heinlein's first published work, Life-Line, written in 1939
There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute or common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: Vic
5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs
One look at Forbes lists of fat cats and you know the 21st Century doesn't just belong to Asia, it belongs to everyone but America. Why? Once again, remember Warren Buffett's famous "Farmer's Story" in Fortune: "We were taught in Economics 101 that countries could not for long sustain large, ever-growing trade deficits ... our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4% more than they produce -- that's the trade deficit -- we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own."
Friedman was right: Congressional spending is the biggest cause of inflation, and, wow, those conservatives sure did love blank-check deficit spending the past eight years!
Agreed.

I disagree with you here. Walter E. Williams has this to say:

"Professor Don Boudreaux, chairman of George Mason University's Economics Department, wrote "If Trade Surpluses Are So Great, the 1930s Should Have Been a Booming Decade" (www.cafehayek.com). According to data he found at the National Bureau of Economic Research's "Macrohistory Database" (http://www.nber.org/databases/...y/contents/index.html), it turns out that the U.S. ran a trade surplus in nine of the 10 years of the Great Depression, with 1936 being the lone exception.

During those 10 years, we had a significant trade surplus, with exports totaling $26.05 billion and imports totaling only $21.13 billion. So what do trade surpluses during a depression and trade deficits during an economic boom prove, considering we've had trade deficits for most of our history? Professor Boudreaux says they prove absolutely nothing. Economies are far too complex to draw simplistic causal connections between trade deficits and surpluses and economic welfare and growth."

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Great fucking job you fucking idiot.

I like your style! :D
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: Vic
Oops, I forgot that LK is a respected and heavy published economist with both a JD and a PhD. :roll:

Read the article again, then re-consider your comments.

Hey, and I forgot that you work in mortgage banking at what? A regional bank? A broker? Maybe even a large NA? While I have an MBA and am a CFA charterholder and work at one of the largest banks in the world that's taken one of the smallest writedowns thus far.

Who the hell are you to disagree with me? That is, if I use your own logic.

Being an economist, with a JD and PhD doesn't mean dick, except your an academic with no clue how the real world works. It's obvious he doesn't know shit about accounting rules, but pretends he does.

His dissonance in that article is high. What's sad is that despite all of his education, he can't even see how many ways he is disagreeing with every premise he makes.

Why are you pretending that I wrote this article?

As for the rest, you seem to be confused about the author's tone and sense of irony. I can't tell if you're taking it too literally, too personally, or what, but you certainly missed the whole point of the article.

I am not pretending that you wrote it, why are you defending it like you did? "Omg, I want to polish his knob, he has a PhD and JD...blah blah blah".

His sense of irony is conflicted by his inability to be consistent in application and incorrect in the discussion, time and again. It's poorly written and full of half-assed trash. If that's the best satire/irony he can come up with, perhaps he should go back and get another PhD so you can get all misty-eyed over it.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: QuantumPion
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: Vic
5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs
One look at Forbes lists of fat cats and you know the 21st Century doesn't just belong to Asia, it belongs to everyone but America. Why? Once again, remember Warren Buffett's famous "Farmer's Story" in Fortune: "We were taught in Economics 101 that countries could not for long sustain large, ever-growing trade deficits ... our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4% more than they produce -- that's the trade deficit -- we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own."
Friedman was right: Congressional spending is the biggest cause of inflation, and, wow, those conservatives sure did love blank-check deficit spending the past eight years!
Agreed.

I disagree with you here. Walter E. Williams has this to say:

"Professor Don Boudreaux, chairman of George Mason University's Economics Department, wrote "If Trade Surpluses Are So Great, the 1930s Should Have Been a Booming Decade" (www.cafehayek.com). According to data he found at the National Bureau of Economic Research's "Macrohistory Database" (http://www.nber.org/databases/...y/contents/index.html), it turns out that the U.S. ran a trade surplus in nine of the 10 years of the Great Depression, with 1936 being the lone exception.

During those 10 years, we had a significant trade surplus, with exports totaling $26.05 billion and imports totaling only $21.13 billion. So what do trade surpluses during a depression and trade deficits during an economic boom prove, considering we've had trade deficits for most of our history? Professor Boudreaux says they prove absolutely nothing. Economies are far too complex to draw simplistic causal connections between trade deficits and surpluses and economic welfare and growth."

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Great fucking job you fucking idiot.

I like your style! :D


I think that using the 30's as an example is a bit out of context. Sustained deficits cannot exists indefinitely, eventually the debt burden, whether public or private, will destroy the deficit country.

I try.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
:roll: Yeah I have a "team" - it's Conservatism.

And no - I did not help us get here(more than anyone else in America),

I have been pushing for better Conservative leadership -

those that will stick to Consevative ideals and govern by them. Fixing the problems pointed out by the OP aren't going to happen by electing liberals or RINOs - thus the reason so many of us may have to sit on our hands this fall(unless a Conservative magically starts a run).

Bahahahaha I needed a laugh

and how is McSame going to be "better Conservative leadership"?
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
I am not pretending that you wrote it, why are you defending it like you did? "Omg, I want to polish his knob, he has a PhD and JD...blah blah blah".

His sense of irony is conflicted by his inability to be consistent in application and incorrect in the discussion, time and again. It's poorly written and full of half-assed trash. If that's the best satire/irony he can come up with, perhaps he should go back and get another PhD so you can get all misty-eyed over it.

Your bias is too apparent sometimes, LK, and clouds your vision. Maybe the economy would collapse into dust without these bail-outs. But that doesn't mean that we have to like them. Or that we should fool ourselves into believing that we haven't just postponed the consequences.