For the last few months now we have seen the unfolding of the inevitable result of monetary deregulation, unbridled and insane speculation, cover ups by the mainstream Media and lastly, the specter of hope and change as embodied in the new President Elect, Barack Obama. Does the latter have the ability to turn around decades of carpetbagger capitalism and bring the power back to the people ?
Not in the sense that has been alluded to in the vacuous electioneering slogans or the tear jerker acceptance speeches. An Economic recovery means that the economy works, not just that the Financial sector is back on track to wreak even more havoc and continue to reap their rewards off of the backs of working people. The electorate is expecting things to go back to the way it was. Big houses, Big cars, Big wages to pay for all the Big and expensive luxuries that are an integral part of the "American Dream". Wasn't it Donald Rumsfeld who said "The American way of life is not up for negotiation!" Such Hubris is the fatal ingredient in the expectations that have been loaded on to Obama's back. Things can never be the same until the way wealth is earned has been changed from the ground up. Gone are the days of borrowing your way to wealth. This was always an unsustainable system.
There is no getting away from the basic fundamentals of a system which marries work, production, saving and growth. Period. Borrowing trillions of dollars from other countries to "jump start" the economy by injecting "liquidity" and "credit" in to it's heart is no cure for the inability of people to borrow even more money. Banks lend money. Banks are the problem. Banks need to be let go in to chapter 11 to detox and then recreated in to something resembling a rational business venture under public scrutiny.People have to earn the money in a functioning economy, pure and simple. Because of the propogation of a credit based economic model, people who actually still have jobs are working, many with 2 or even 3 jobs, for seven days a week in an effort to pay off a mortgage of say, $100,000 while living in a house worth say, $40,000. Is this productive work ? Is this how an economy grows in to a healthy, self sustaing organism ? Obviously not.
If we take it back to the 1950's , after the second World War, we see an entirely different model of consumption and production. People were inclined to save, to put money by for the things that they aspired to. There was a culture of prudence that has dissappeared in modern times. The expectations back then were based on the principle that, if you wanted something, you had to work for it. The idea of going in to debt and paying 20% interest would have seemed insane. The economy could grow under this rational influence. It flourished like a rice paddy after the rain. It fed on the fruits of financial wisdom and a steadier hand on the economic tiller. It was a system where goods were manufactured and surpluses were exported. If there was a need for something, it got "Made in the U.S.A.".
These were more balanced times and market corrections could be made while preserving the integrity of the system because the fundamentals were still extant. What we have now is a system that was deliberately spun out of control for the benefit of the few who controlled the money supply and the means of production. We saw the acceleration headlong in to the miasma of derivatives, credit default swaps, mortgage backed securities and all the rest of the lethal arsenal of the Financial Profiteers. Along with this departure from real money came the search for bigger profits at any cost. Why employ an American worker when you can get 20 exploited foreigners for the same price ? Looks good on a balance sheet and a P/E ratio. But, who makes their money in the stock market ? Not Mabel Jones in Boise, Idaho who's raising 6 children alone after her husband died of work related asbestos poisoning and all the family savings went on medical bills or Joe Kubek in Greensburg, Kansas, whose small farm could not compete with the Agribusiness giants or John Mulzer in Silicon Valley, California, who lost his high paying job in software development and got thrown out of his house with little or no chance of finding another job to get back on his feet. These are the people who need the help, the bailouts, the largesse and the support of their elected officials. If these are not the people who are the absolute number one on the list of priorities right now, then all the flags, the parades and the speeches have been for nothing.
Aided by the occupants of public office who came through the revolving door on Wall St., this rush to riches was instigated with ever increasing ferocity. Paul Volcker and Lawrence Summers both hail from the banking cartel of the Federal Reserve and the World bank. Summers , while working for the World Bank, quite liked the economic savings to be made by exporting toxic waste to third world countries because the population didn't live that long anyway. Volcker was instrumental in deregulating the markets and unleashing the curse of derivatives. Come to think of it, the latter was under the auspices of a Democratic president. Oh yes, these are exactly the guys that are needed to bring sanity back in the front door and kick out Mr Bad from the arena. Barack Obama is telling the American people that it is possible, with some monopoly money, to bring back the good times of credit laden consumption. One, he cannot possibly be serious and two, how long does he think he can continue to take money from other countries without having the means to ever pay it back. By surrounding himself with the omnipresent clique of liars and crooks he has singularly distinguished himself by reneging on his election promises before he's even sworn in. He knows perfectly well what would be required to reconstruct, (not "jump start") the U.S. economy, and Hell will freeze over long before he would ever say it.
It's been way too long since the U.S. brought forth a leader that actually talked sense to the electorate. It is way past time for the U.S to bring forth a leader who will be honest with the electorate; the truth needs to be spoken here. It's way past time for vacuous editorialising, empty promises, cronyism, kleptocracy, apathy, death by television, SUV's, mindless faith in Capitalism, the Free Market and the sincerity of politicians. Something has got to give and Barack Obama needs to level with his fellow citizens and guide them through the bleak future that awaits to collect it's dues.
|
by
Andrew Hughes
Member since:
November 27, 2008 Obama needs to tell it like it really is. Nov. 26th, 2008
November 27, 2008 03:44 AM EST
(Updated: November 27, 2008 06:02 AM EST)
views: 75
|
rating: 10/10
(2 votes)
|
comments: 7
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
|
|
More by Andrew Hughes |
||||
About Gather |
Engagement Marketing |
Make New Friends |
Gather Points |
Advertise on Gather |
Gather Press |
Privacy |
Terms of Service |
Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16865, "Oz"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.


Comments: 7
Unless you are referring to "deregulation" it the honest sense, in which case you would be right -- whenever any institution or association is granted coercive monopoly privilege by the state, they have in a sense been "deregulated," as the naturally-occuring structure of behavioral incentives that a free market provides are therefore effectively stifled or removed.
If we had a free market banking system, and the government didn't force the people to trade in the worthless paper of the central banking cartel, then we would likely still be using sound commodity money (probably gold and silver), and banks would not be engaging in the widescale systematic fraud and plunder that we know of as "fractional-reserve banking." An inherently insolvent system of banking practices would not be able to survive without the assistance of government to institutionalize it by force.
But a free market system of money and banking would benefit the people, and would not allow government and entrenched banksters to plunder the public in a covert manner, and thus we'll never see free market money and banking. Not unless more people find it worthwhile to take the time to educate themselves about this most urgently-important subject (the state-licensed and -sanctioned school system certainly isn't going to educate anyone on this subject).
There would be no need for any of the so-called "regulations" of the financial sector we have today. There would need to be only enforcement of common law, such as prosecuting fraud and embezzlement, wherever it may occur.
If a bank contracted with customers to hold funds in demand-deposit accounts, and then turned around and loaned any percentage of those funds to a third party, and then subsequently were unable to honor their contracts (e.g., in the event of a "bank run" or "currency drain") if the original depositor wanted to withdraw but the funds were unavaliable, then this should not merely be regarded as some unfortunate economic anomoly, just some quirky aspect of the market economy; it should recognized by the law for what it is: fraud, aka embezzlement; and prosecuted as such.
Banks should be permitted to loan out only those funds that have been entrusted to them for that express purpose, via time deposit contracts, e.g., CD's, mutual funds, etc. The customer and the bank agree beforehand that the funds being deposited will not be available for withdraw for a pre-specified period of time, by which the bank will be able to recover the loan, plus interest, a specified portion of which will go to the owner of the account.
Demand deposit accounts would simply be a convenience that customers would pay a nominal fee for; not earn interest (as the funds would not be considered "investment capital").
This is the honest, stable way of banking, and it would afford society a sound and stable mechanism for capital markets, consumer loans, mortgages, etc., and also a vital clearing-house function that is the nerve center of any advanced economy -- but without confounding and conflicting the two functions, which is what leads to the inherent instability of the present order, the incessant boom/bust cycles and the insidious regressive wealth redistribution known as inflation.
The nature of money is such that when you get a big enough pile of money you can't regulate or control or in any practical way prevent its theft and misappropriation. The size of the bribes and other offers, the influence that is peddled and so on prevents any meaningful governmental or other institutional control. Even the Mafia and the Catholic Church (two powerful non-government institutions) cannot control such sums.
So either sit back and enjoy being abused again and again or find out how and why it happens so you can take meaningful action to put a stop to it once and for all.
See www.nopom.info or read Invisible Hand.