The Economy

[The Scotsman]

COMPLETELY ludicrous - if the banks are not bailed out NOW, THE WHOLE ECONOMY STOPS - then your working stiff not only doesn't have a house, he doesn't have a job!!!!!!!!!!!!!

forgive me Libs but isn't that what the American people wanted! Surely capitalism is the economists version of the darwinian concept of survival of the fitttest! If the people had wanted a federally regulated safe banking system and financial institutions that operated within a structured accountable regime then you would have had one - and this would not have happened! Instead you have this amusing situation where those that expound the virtues of the free market system are suddenly doing exactly that which is anathema to them!

Based on the fact that the whole financial system seems to be based on the fantsay of stability; some huge great confidence trick the likes of which has not been seen since Ponzi, all fueled by the the lure of easy money based on beguiling quasi-financial securities. So eventually the whole thing goes phut and we have to throw out a life line. Is this how nature sorts itself out. Lehman got what it deserved it was thrown to the sharks and died. Isn't that captialism?

Isn't it amusing that over the past 10 to 15 years those demi-god financial gurus that have been advancing the cause of open markets and non-intevention and minimal regulation are now the ones who have to go cap in hand to the public for help!

Surely by driving out the weak the strongest will survive

or...............as Dickens wrote

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

 

[Sihouette]

And now this message brought to you by The French Revolution:

"The French Revolution: When The Going Gets Tough, The Poor Eat Cake"

[and no, you're not reading today's front page news of The New York Times just in case the similarities have you confused]

"The immediate trigger for the Revolution was King Louis XVI’s attempts to solve the government’s worsening financial situation. In February 1787, his finance minister, Loménie de Brienne, convened an Assembly of Notables, a group of nobles, clergy, bourgeoisie, and bureaucrats selected in order to bypass the parlements, special courts with the power to register royal edicts, who saw themselves as upholders of traditional constitutional constraints on the monarchy. The Controller-General of Finances, Charles Alexandre de Calonne, asked the Notables to approve a new land tax that would, for the first time, include a tax on the property of nobles and clergy. The assembly did not approve the tax, but instead demanded that Louis XVI call the Estates-General, a representative assembly of the estates of the realm, last called in 1614. On 8 August 1788, the King agreed to convene the Estates-General in May of 1789. By this time, Jacques Necker was in his second turn as finance minister.

As part of the preparations for the Estates-General, cahiers de doléances (books of grievances) were drawn up across France, listing the complaints of each of the orders. This process helped to generate an expectation of reform of some kind.

There was growing concern, however, that the government would attempt to gerrymander an assembly to its liking."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

the King's younger brother the Comte d'Artois, and other conservative members of the King's privy council urged him to dismiss Necker [the finance minister, just like McCain urged the firing of our current "finance minister] On 11 July, after Necker suggested that the royal family live according to a budget to conserve funds, the King fired him, and completely reconstructed the finance ministry at the same time...

..Paris was soon consumed with riots, chaos, and widespread looting. The mobs soon had the support of the French Guard, including arms and trained soldiers, and the royal leadership essentially abandoned the city.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm feeling like our current situation is AN EXACT REPLICA of France before it plummeted into utter turmoil and social upheaval...dare I say "revolution"? Oh yeah, that's what they named it and for good reason.

The second quote from the same article may be a preview of the future if thing aren't done differently this time.. Human behavior is stunningly predictable when certain elements are injected, certain outcomes can be expected...banked on actually..

For those of you who enjoy the stability [and profits] from a calm democracy, you might want to do a quick brush-up on the fine details of The French Revolution just before France collapsed.

It took them a very very long time to recover...

 

[Sihouette]

The immediate trigger for the Revolution was King Louis XVI’s attempts to solve the government’s worsening financial situation. In February 1787, his finance minister, Loménie de Brienne, convened an Assembly of Notables, a group of nobles, clergy, bourgeoisie, and bureaucrats selected in order to bypass the parlements, special courts with the power to register royal edicts, who saw themselves as upholders of traditional constitutional constraints on the monarchy

You know, I don't care how long or agonizing it may be for the bourgeoisie or the tycoons to sit out to allow our special committees to render a longterm and viable financial plan that includes Trickle-Up economics, instead of trickle-down. We must take careful stock and require each member of Congress voting on this pivotal and historical issue to read and study the exact details leading up to The French Revolution.

Not surprisingly, the government of France then was slowly bled of its wealth by unnecessary and overweaning wars taken on by Louis XVI. [Just say "Dubya" if "Louis XVI is too hard to pronounce]. And reckless, irresponsible dispersal of wealth to an elite few at the expense of the masses was the final nail in its coffin.

Let me repeat that: reckless, irresponsible dispersal of wealth to an elite few at the expense of the masses was the final nail in its coffin..

 

[BigRob]

You know, I don't care how long or agonizing it may be for the bourgeoisie or the tycoons to sit out to allow our special committees to render a longterm and viable financial plan that includes Trickle-Up economics, instead of trickle-down. We must take careful stock and require each member of Congress voting on this pivotal and historical issue to read and study the exact details leading up to The French Revolution.

Not surprisingly, the government of France then was slowly bled of its wealth by unnecessary and overweaning wars taken on by Louis XVI. [Just say "Dubya" if "Louis XVI is too hard to pronounce]. And reckless, irresponsible dispersal of wealth to an elite few at the expense of the masses was the final nail in its coffin.

Let me repeat that: reckless, irresponsible dispersal of wealth to an elite few at the expense of the masses was the final nail in its coffin..

Remember when "trickle-up" economics was tried in the USSR? How did that work out?

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

The US empire is coming to an end.

Shame

 

[Sihouette]

I imagine that greed and corruption will prevail no matter which type of cloak of governance a political body wears...Russian or American or French or [insert name of country here]

The bottom line is that we must at least make an attempt to re-establish a solidity to the backbone of the economy: the working middle class.

If we ignore them in favor of bailing out rich and/or irresponsible people making bad investments..in order to preserve their rich lifestyles so they won't have to take the fall, just like Louis XVI tried to do in spite of the writing on the wall, then we will be facing conditions of unprecidented [in the US] social upheaval and you can kiss your beloved democracy and it's free-market parasite goodbye..

I'm just giving you a history lesson pal. I didn't make up the details of the French Revolution. They happened, frighteningly identically to what's happening right this very minute in American politics.

 

[BigRob]

I imagine that greed and corruption will prevail no matter which type of cloak of governance a political body wears...Russian or American or French or [insert name of country here]

The bottom line is that we must at least make an attempt to re-establish a solidity to the backbone of the economy: the working middle class.

If we ignore them in favor of bailing out rich and/or irresponsible people making bad investments..in order to preserve their rich lifestyles so they won't have to take the fall, just like Louis XVI tried to do in spite of the writing on the wall, then we will be facing conditions of unprecidented [in the US] social upheaval and you can kiss your beloved democracy and it's free-market parasite goodbye..

I'm just giving you a history lesson pal. I didn't make up the details of the French Revolution. They happened, frighteningly identically to what's happening right this very minute in American politics.

Who exactly do you think owns stock? Only rich people?

 

[Sihouette]

No, I think gamblers own stock.

Gamblers and rich people. I have sympathy for only those people who were told that money market accounts were safe and not a gamble, because they trusted they weren't gambling.

And now of course we find that someone decided to gamble that money for them.

Let heads roll...save the middle class or watch America disappear.

How much free-market fluidity do you think there will be when cities are burning and chaos rules? You my friend, you need a plan...

 

[BigRob]

No, I think gamblers own stock.

Gamblers and rich people. I have sympathy for only those people who were told that money market accounts were safe and not a gamble, because they trusted they weren't gambling.

And now of course we find that someone decided to gamble that money for them.

Let heads roll...save the middle class or watch American disappear.

So everyone with a 401K, an IRA (which is just about everyone in the country) is a gambler?

Day trading sure is a gamble, but when you go long in the market, its not that hard to turn a profit.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

No, I think gamblers own stock.

Gamblers and rich people. I have sympathy for only those people who were told that money market accounts were safe and not a gamble, because they trusted they weren't gambling.

And now of course we find that someone decided to gamble that money for them.

Let heads roll...save the middle class or watch America disappear.

How much free-market fluidity do you think there will be when cities are burning and chaos rules? You my friend, you need a plan...

on your quote you have for a signature...

you do know that most likely she never said that right? And who ever did say it was not talking about cake like a birthday cake, but rather a different form of bread in France right?

 

[Sihouette]

you do know that most likely she never said that right? And who ever did say it was not talking about cake like a birthday cake, but rather a different form of bread in France right?~ Pocketfullofshells

Yes, I read wiki's account of that statement too. So I know that the jury is still out on the matter...

However, it serves its purpose of illustrating elite aristocratic ambivalence to the woes of the masses of poor, and the inherant danger of doing so..

If you gut the middle class, revolution happens. It's a formula that you can hang your hat on.

 

[PLC1]

Well it takes time to get over strep, It took me 3 weeks to get over the really bad part and another week or two till I was back to my old self. And I only missed 1 and a half days of work.

I am not glad they pay the 900 to my health insurance, I want my money. I would rather put that money tax free right into a health savings plan. Since I only go to the doctor when i need surgery it could stay there till I have my next surgery. We have a free clinic with my school district that you could go to if you want. They diagnose your issues and give flu shots if you want one. Take lab tests, all of the small stuff.

I have worked for the same company for 18 years and have seen a doctor twice, both times went in for surgery. I had to pay out of pocket over 3 thousand dollars after my insurance for one surgery and about 2 thousand for the other. Had that 900 dollars a month gone into a health savings plan for the last 18 years it would have added up to $194.400 plus interest. Both of my surgery’s put together did not come to that.

Also, we have to pay a monthly fee plus a co pay. $50.00 a month for 18 years that was deducted from my pay check for my monthly health insurance payment was $10,800.00 that I would have been happy to put into a health care savings account.

That is more than enough to cover my medical expense. Not everyone might want to do it the way I want to, but it is my money, I should be able to do this if I wanted to

If my math is right and it should be, that is $205,200.00 that should have been mine before interest. My surgery's together cost less than 30,000.00. Can you see where I was screwed ?

Not really. You're one of the lucky few who have first class medical coverage with a minimum of out of pocket expenses. Most people would have paid a lot more than you did.

Your two surgeries that only cost $30,000 were a bargain as well. You must not have had to undergo extensive rehabilitation, nor a whole lot of time in the hospital.

As for putting the money into a tax free medical account, there is nothing wrong with that, so long as you have coverage for catastrophic bills while your account is building. What would you have done had you been faced with a couple of hundred grand during the first few years that the savings account was building?

Another thing to consider is the escalating cost. If your employer is paying $900 a month now for employee health coverage, that doesn't mean that the cost has been that for the past 18 years. 18 years ago, health insurance cost a small fraction of what it does today, after all. In another 10 years, we'll look back on that $900 as a real bargain, if we can even afford insurance at all by then.

We've seen health insurance increase by over 30% a year many times in the past. Another 30% will bring that $900 to $1,170. If the increase were to level out to an average of only 10%, which is a real stretch, then the cost in 10 more years would be over $3,000 a month.

Obviously, the challenge is to bring cost increases down. How are we going to pay over $3,000 a month for health care in just 11 more years? And yet, past increases have been more than that hypothetical 10%.

Maybe a tax free medical account with a catastrophic coverage policy is the way to go, I'm not sure. What is for certain is that what we're doing now is not the way to go.

 

[Sihouette]

What California is doing with Healthy Families is a pretty good idea. It has some flaws but the basic idea of every financially able person (one with a job) has like $15 per family member withheld (or paid) each month to cover any and all medical expenses with a $5 co-pay (which is usually more than the actual cost of most prescriptions to be manufactured) at the pharmacy.

So there is a pool of money coming from taxing the working sector that replenishes a common medical pool. Statistics show that if people feel free to not worry about medical expenses, they get more preventative checkups and cost far less in the long run to insure. So we'll have a net gain in overall public health, while still maintaining a pool that isnt' draining other areas of government.

It isn't rocket science. A chunk of that common pool must go to health education to teach young people to develop good nutritional habits and to refrain from habitual destructive behaviors like eating junk food, smoking, drinking excessively and doing drugs....obvious stuff like that. And then just watch the health costs come down and quality of life come up. When quality of life comes up, so does the GNP.

Again, it's not rocket science. Socialism in small doses actually improves the health of a free-market capitalistic society....like duh...

Basic human needs like food, energy, shelter and health should never be made part of a profiteering endeavor. Strict regulations controlling those aspects of capitalism should be enforced with an iron fist (yes, I said iron fist). But the rest of industry should feel free to party down and profit as much as they can.

It is amoral and unhealthy for the market to dictate who lives and who dies. Unbridled greed will insure that it kills itself in the end.

 

[Sihouette]

Congress instead of adjourning this week to campaign, should campaign in the most effective way possible right from Capitol Hill. If they pass a "Trickle-Up" economic plan..filibustering until the GOP submits if necessary...they could not only accomplish more than they ever could on the campaign trail, they would force the GOP into an untenable position, since the GOP stands to gain the most by going out and lying more to the American public about how great their tycoon-bailout plan is.

They could answer the GOP's predictable cries of "hurry, America is in trouble!!" to "Why do you want to rush and make a mistake? Do you want to hurt american working poor?" The GOP has its work cut out for it trying to sell the "rush" mentality to a voting public that is sick of having duct tape put on their needs and longterm wellbeing..

If the democrats succeed in keeping the GOP in this headlock until they allow a rescue of the worker, instead of Wallstreet screwups, the paydirt will be massive votes this Fall for themselves as incumbants, newly aspiring democratic candidates and the presidental nominee as well. They could literally kill like 20 birds with one stone by staying in session about this budget thing to be settled sanely. And who would benefit? Everyone but the GOP. Too bad.

The GOP wants the rush, the panic because they know what they're asking for is horse-apples. They know if the people have long enough to think about the ramifications of bailing out Wallstreet at the expense of Mainstreet (oh, and how) they will balk and they won't get to recover their precious assets they lost when their gambles failed.

The democratic party is in a unique position right now where they have the GOP by the shorthairs. If the GOP insists on sticking it to the common man, they'll lose the election. Basically, if the dems play their cards right, they can get so much relief for their constituents that campaigning will be a joke...they won't even need to.

Stay....stay in session...linger...hang out...discuss...strategize...trickle up...paydirt...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yes, I read wiki's account of that statement too. So I know that the jury is still out on the matter...

However, it serves its purpose of illustrating elite aristocratic ambivalence to the woes of the masses of poor, and the inherant danger of doing so..

If you gut the middle class, revolution happens. It's a formula that you can hang your hat on.

I just knew that, what did the wiki thing say? nevermind I will just go read it lol