Bedtime for Capitalism?

Politics and other such topical creams.
eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 22595
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: Carrboro/Alamut

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by eumaas » 18 Sep 2008, 12:12pm

Maybe I didn't make it clear, but what I said was a joke. :naughty:

If you want to understand China, it's best to study the Confucians, Legalists, and "primitive capitalist accumulation" as it occurred in Europe. Maoism has no relevance in modern China except as a dissident movement. Taoism as anything other than superstition is also dead. China is just the same old shit paired with a modern monolithic bureaucracy.
"The only thing that really occurs to me that I can say on this is to point out how fascinating it is that the Hassan-i-Sabbah archetype keeps turning up over and over again ... He disappears up into the mountains and is never seen again. Believe me, he'll never be seen again. He'll live forever because of that."

BostonBeaneater
User avatar
Autonomous Insect Cyborg Sentinel
Posts: 6849
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:24pm
Location: Between the moon and New York City

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by BostonBeaneater » 18 Sep 2008, 12:16pm

eumaas wrote: China is just the same old shit paired with a modern monolithic bureaucracy.
It's that monolithic bureaucracy we need to be afraid of.
Image

Wolter
User avatar
Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Woody Allen
Posts: 49222
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!
Contact:

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by Wolter » 18 Sep 2008, 12:19pm

BostonBeaneater wrote:
eumaas wrote: China is just the same old shit paired with a modern monolithic bureaucracy.
It's that monolithic bureaucracy we need to be afraid of.
I'm afraid of both that AND the same old shit.
"There's something more honest, he believed, about traditional methods of mass starvation, labour camps, and machine gunning millions to death. Stalin was a vinyl guy who sneered at Truman converting everything to compact disc." - Thomas Jefferson

"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"

IkarisOne
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 2841
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:09pm

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by IkarisOne » 18 Sep 2008, 12:26pm

eumaas wrote:Maybe I didn't make it clear, but what I said was a joke. :naughty:

If you want to understand China, it's best to study the Confucians, Legalists, and "primitive capitalist accumulation" as it occurred in Europe. Maoism has no relevance in modern China except as a dissident movement. Taoism as anything other than superstition is also dead. China is just the same old shit paired with a modern monolithic bureaucracy.
The only sacred texts the Chinese hold to come from the University of Chicago.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 22595
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: Carrboro/Alamut

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by eumaas » 18 Sep 2008, 12:30pm

IkarisOne wrote:
eumaas wrote:Maybe I didn't make it clear, but what I said was a joke. :naughty:

If you want to understand China, it's best to study the Confucians, Legalists, and "primitive capitalist accumulation" as it occurred in Europe. Maoism has no relevance in modern China except as a dissident movement. Taoism as anything other than superstition is also dead. China is just the same old shit paired with a modern monolithic bureaucracy.
The only sacred texts the Chinese hold to come from the University of Chicago.
Friedman's an influence, but he's a propagandist for capitalism. it's best understood from an outside perspective. And I don't think I'm wrong in stating that Confucian and Legalist ideas are current when it comes to governance. It's a combination of ancient and modern.
"The only thing that really occurs to me that I can say on this is to point out how fascinating it is that the Hassan-i-Sabbah archetype keeps turning up over and over again ... He disappears up into the mountains and is never seen again. Believe me, he'll never be seen again. He'll live forever because of that."

Wolter
User avatar
Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Woody Allen
Posts: 49222
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!
Contact:

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by Wolter » 18 Sep 2008, 12:32pm

eumaas wrote:
IkarisOne wrote:
eumaas wrote:Maybe I didn't make it clear, but what I said was a joke. :naughty:

If you want to understand China, it's best to study the Confucians, Legalists, and "primitive capitalist accumulation" as it occurred in Europe. Maoism has no relevance in modern China except as a dissident movement. Taoism as anything other than superstition is also dead. China is just the same old shit paired with a modern monolithic bureaucracy.
The only sacred texts the Chinese hold to come from the University of Chicago.
Friedman's an influence, but he's a propagandist for capitalism. it's best understood from an outside perspective. And I don't think I'm wrong in stating that Confucian and Legalist ideas are current when it comes to governance. It's a combination of ancient and modern.
The Confucian and Legalist thinkers paved the way for authoritarianism in the first place.
"There's something more honest, he believed, about traditional methods of mass starvation, labour camps, and machine gunning millions to death. Stalin was a vinyl guy who sneered at Truman converting everything to compact disc." - Thomas Jefferson

"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 71084
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by Dr. Medulla » 20 Sep 2008, 10:00am

Clio, she loves the irony that this is coming under a Republican party that loves to label all foes as socialists and Marxists.
Image
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

IkarisOne
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 2841
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:09pm

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by IkarisOne » 20 Sep 2008, 12:10pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:Clio, she loves the irony that this is coming under a Republican party that loves to label all foes as socialists and Marxists.
Image
The irony is that it's essentially correct. Only it will be a soft and squishy socialism for the rich and social Darwinism for the rest of us. Or maybe not. Maybe this is all some very elaborate master plan. Didn't Gorbachev predict the ultimate victory for Marxism in his farewell address? All of these Wall Street sharks are loose cannons- a lot of them come out of nowhere and join the billionaire's club. Maybe all those upstarts were being set up for a big fall.

Whatever the case, it all stinks on ice.

darter
Bang Ice Geezer
Posts: 247
Joined: 18 Jun 2008, 9:02am
Location: Pepperland

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by darter » 20 Sep 2008, 11:12pm

No, there is always the next Greater Fool. We will spiral ever upward (monetarily, I mean, by adding zeros to our accounts) and even though the West will sink somewhat, relative to the Chinese and Russians, and be dealt humiliations by their armies, we (the West) will end up roughly where Joe Strummer found punk, amid high inflation, high unemployment and high taxation. So at least the music outlook looks favorable. Anyway, the events of last week didn't create any losses - the events merely revealed that for the last eight to twelve years we have been silly imposters who lost our wealth years earlier. Maybe decades earlier. So now it's time to put a patch on the old winter coat and wait for these calamities to visit our old and emerging foes.

IkarisOne
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 2841
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:09pm

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by IkarisOne » 21 Sep 2008, 1:36pm

Many Economists Skeptical of Bailout http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200809 ... tico/13689

Many of the same economists and opinion-makers who'd provided a bipartisan sheen of consensus to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's previous moves have quickly begun casting doubts on the wisdom of a policy that would allow Treasury to purchase without oversight hundreds of billions of dollars of difficult-to-price assets from financial institutions.
ADVERTISEMENT

Under the proposal, Paulson would not have to report to Congress until December, and the only safeguard for taxpayers was a provision that the “Secretary shall take into consideration means for — (1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and (2) protecting the taxpayer.”

Skepticism toward the plan reflected more than the predictable desires of the left to spread the wealth to Main Street or of the right to reject government bailouts, although those sentiments were also expressed.

"We need to take a bold move. In that sense I think Paulson is right," Luigi Zingales, a Professor at the University of Chicago School of Business who wrote a widely circulated short essay titled "Why Paulson is Wrong,” told Politico.

Zingales fears that the Treasury bailout would effectively turn the entire financial sector into a Government Sponsored Enterprise, complete with the same murkiness and moral hazard that sunk Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. “It might achieve the final outcome, but it will do so at an enormous cost," he said. "All the troubles we’ve seen with Fannie and Freddie would be seen again and again across the entire financial sector."

President Bush is “asking for a huge amount of power,” said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University who was among the first to predict the crisis. “He's saying, ‘Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy.” (Roubini told the New York Times that despite these concerns, he also thought the plan could help stave off a recession.)

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 71084
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by Dr. Medulla » 21 Sep 2008, 2:09pm

President Bush is “asking for a huge amount of power,” said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University who was among the first to predict the crisis. “He's saying, ‘Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy.” (Roubini told the New York Times that despite these concerns, he also thought the plan could help stave off a recession.)
That's the part that suggests to me that these fucks still look at every crisis as an opportunity to advance executive rule. I should note that I just started listening to Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine, which argues that Chicago School free market radicals look at disasters, natural and otherwise, as opportunities to privatize and destroy community. That is, what can't be accomplished during more deliberative times is more easily accomplished in a panic, such as after Katrina or 11 September. I'm only a couple hours in and I'm somewhat skeptical of her use of mass psychologically, but the latest stage of the US financial meltdown is a great real time case study as I make my way through the book.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

IkarisOne
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 2841
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:09pm

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by IkarisOne » 21 Sep 2008, 2:12pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
President Bush is “asking for a huge amount of power,” said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University who was among the first to predict the crisis. “He's saying, ‘Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy.” (Roubini told the New York Times that despite these concerns, he also thought the plan could help stave off a recession.)
That's the part that suggests to me that these fucks still look at every crisis as an opportunity to advance executive rule.
Exactly. This has nothing to do with Bush- he was just a prop to keep the nominal conservatives quiet while the Presidency was turned into a monarchial seat.

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 71084
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by Dr. Medulla » 21 Sep 2008, 2:47pm

Has anyone read any columnist or economist arguing for the break up of some of these massive corporations? Seems to me that if a business is regarded as "too big to be allowed to fail," then its very existence is problematic because, as we're seeing, when it's profitable it's laissez-faire and when it's in trouble it activates a government safety net. In essence, its size allows it to hold American taxpayers hostage (tho, more accurately, it's holding a gun to its head and demanding terms). Or maybe I'm just displaying my ignorance of economics here.

edit: Dumb its/it's errors.
Last edited by Dr. Medulla on 21 Sep 2008, 3:43pm, edited 1 time in total.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Purple Hayes
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 3855
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 7:54am
Location: Still scoring from corners..

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by Purple Hayes » 21 Sep 2008, 3:21pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:Has anyone read any columnist or economist arguing for the break up of some of these massive corporations? Seems to me that if a business is regarded as "too big to be allowed to fail," then it's very existence is problematic because, as we're seeing, when it's profitable it's laissez-faire and when it's in trouble it activates a government safety net. In essence, it's size allows it to hold American taxpayers hostage (tho, more accurately, it's holding a gun to its head and demanding terms). Or maybe I'm just displaying my ignorance of economics here.
Spot on..

Like a nationalised company with all profits going to private share holders, Thatcher eat your heart out..
'People like Coldplay and people voted for the Nazi's, you can't trust people Jeremy':- Super Hans

'Hayes ... is one of the most godforsaken places I have ever struck. The population seems to be entirely made up of clerks who frequent tin-roofed chapels on Sundays and for the rest bolt themselves within doors.' - George Orwell

darter
Bang Ice Geezer
Posts: 247
Joined: 18 Jun 2008, 9:02am
Location: Pepperland

Re: Bedtime for Capitalism?

Post by darter » 21 Sep 2008, 10:47pm

I was looking at some numbers on this. If the bailout is $700 B and there are 300M Americans then each American (including babies) will pay about $2400 bucks or about 48 gasoline fill-ups if it takes $50 to fill the tank. (Rough numbers cause I didn't write this down). So a family of four might get about a ten grand hit with this. Other numbers to compare this to is the roughly $350B we spend on education (I think K-12) and the Iraq war is costing what, $150B a year? So we coulda had four more (theoretical) one-year wars for this amount. Or had two free years of education. Or all that free gas.Your choice. Let us assume that because Americans are lazy, detached wankers they will not pay for this but will borrow the money from the Chinese. So let's say the family of four will really pay about double the ten grand. Call it 20 grand. So, if during next five or ten years it seems like you have 2 grand less (per year) than it feels you should have - that's where it went. So, America, I wanna tell you right now that it will not be the fault of the next president when the voter is asked in 2012 whether he is "better or worse off" than four years ago. In conclusion, re-elect Obama, okay?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests