Posts by WH
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I guess you hold an election with the country you have. I watched the second debate with two Californian conservatives. Both said they wouldn't vote for Obama on the grounds that they feared for his life if he was elected, although I came to suspect there was more to it than that.
-
And what happens if you take the second derivative?
He mails you another copy of his book...
-
And there are actually legitimate concerns, that are no less legitimate because the born-again fiscal conservatives raising them aren't exactly free of electoral self-interest.
I think you're right to say that there are legitimate concerns about the bill, but you might agree they are not being articulated by the people in the article I was quoting from. Newt Gingrich has called the Bush Administration's TARP "socialism", so what is the authentic conservative's solution to the problem?
Boehner's letter to Pelosi includes the following:
"Instead of injecting taxpayer funds into the market to produce liquidity, private capital can be drawn into the market by removing burdensome regulatory and tax barriers that are currently blocking private capital formation. In short, too much private capital is sitting on the sidelines during this crisis, and it is well past time to unleash it."
Yeah, lets unleash all that sidelined private capital. The power of the market and "fiscal conservatism", yay. Cow patty, boo.
More seriously, there is an interesting discussion going on about mark to market accounting. Where is that guy when you really need him?
-
If you haven't seen them already, David Letterman's takes on McCain's no show (nights one and two) are very funny.
This from yesterday's WaPo:
The new [far left/far right] majority isn't worried about ephemeral things such as 700-point drops in the Dow. "No, I'm not," Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) declared after the vote. "The market may be down, but the Constitution is up!"
Indeed, if economic calamity results, there will be many proud authors. Begin with Gohmert, who disrupted proceedings before the first arguments yesterday. "I would move to adjourn so we don't do this terrible thing to our nation," he said. His motion went down, 394 to 8.
Another proud architect of the defeat: Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), who had an earthy perspective on the bill. "Madam Speaker, this is a huge cow patty with a piece of marshmallow stuck in the middle of it," he declared. "I'm not going to eat that cow patty."
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), another opponent, found a precedent in Russian lit. "The choice is stark, and it was put forth in the book by Dostoyevsky, in 'The Brothers Karamazov,' " he said.
Are these the people you'd want making your financial decisions?
-
My favourite is Hitchens' double bluff irony impasse. All of the meaningless hoaxes are good, but I especially like the letters to gunsmith and Richard Dawkins.
The assets are worth whatever the market is willing to pay
I've finally got around to reading Globalisation and its Discontents, which I'm really enjoying, if that is the right word. Its hard not to be a little cynical sometimes.
-
The crisis seems to have given Chase Me Ladies a new lease on life.
A financial system that is still capable of giving them mortgages, 401K, capital for businesses to grow and provide jobs, that sort of thing.
I understand that is the goal of the bailout, Jarno. I'm asking about the value of the assets the US Government will receive in exchange for its funds. It is a question of how the bailout might be structured so as to maximise public benefit.
I'm also a bit bemused by the distinction between taxpayers and companies/banks/investors
I really do think that the public/private distinction is a straightforward one in this context.
-
I wonder what the American taxpayers are going to get in return for this proposed "bailout". If it were my money, I'd be looking to get as much as I possibly could in return for my lazy trillion dollars. I'd be wanting some shares in return for taking these CDOs and derivawhos (is that even a word?) off certain people's balance sheets. Where is my ambassador of kwan?
This seems to involve so many trends - the specialisation of the Western economies in services, the hollowing out of manufacturing and outsourcing, falling real wages for some workers and a transfer of wealth to the top of the income distribution, unaffordable and regressive tax cuts, anti-regulatory, anti-government and anti-tax ideology, perversely incentivised and absurdly high salaries, bonuses and share options.
There's probably a good poem in there somewhere, but maybe the stick figures said it best.
-
More credit crunch for fun and profit:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/opinion/15krugman.html?hpConservatives rejoice in their idiotic cultural politics while the institutions that comprise American power are diminished and eclipsed.
-
Sorry for being off topic, but the WaPo and NY Times are doing Palin's record this weekend. There are feature articles about parts of her record in each and opinion pieces by Thomas Friedman and David Ignatius about McCain's choice. You can only hope it reverses on McCain as much as it seems to deserve to.
-
I think the Democratic convention was a great success. Obama will win fair minded people over eventually (just as Bill Clinton left office with 70% approval ratings) and having respected individuals make the case for him will help the undecided and the wavering feel more at ease.
It's unscientific of course but electoral-vote.com shows a post-convention bounce in the swing states. It never pays to make predictions, but I'm starting to think Obama will win this. He should have the better ideas and the stronger delivery in the debates, and will be nice to start talking about policy, even if it is only in soundbites.
There's a great Paul Krugman column in the NY Times today (I can't link but the full text is on Real Clear Politics).