|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Sep 22, 2009 9:01 pm |
|
re: re: re: re: re: re: Reforming the banking system? |
| abbeboulah
| |
I give up. So much creative innovation applied to the past (as in: making things up as you go, thinking maybe people don't remember?) Reagan, if my information is correct, left a sizable debt. If he believed debts had to be paid back, he must have assumed it would be who? Did he know it would be a Democrat whom he would keep from spending as wildly as he had? (Reminder, lest Reagan's Alzheimer affliction was contagious: it was Bush I). When the Democrats (Clinton) 'finally' took over they built up a surplus (this does not mean that he was immune to other Reaganesque mistakes, e.g. in regard to deregulation). Which surplus Bush II promptly squandered within a year, leaving another unprecedented debt to his successor. He may have been more aware to the possibility it might not be another Republican. There is a serious problem with the assumption that it can be paid back, that apparently Obama has inherited together with his Wall street advisors: that it will be paid back through growth. This is the myth that Wall street or whoever runs it has drummed into all of them, in the face of the fact that exponential growth (which the financial system feeds on) is patently unsustainable, which anybody examining a growth curve beyond four quarters or a few years must realize. It will cause bubbles, it will increase the wealth gap, it will explode again. It is this feature and myth, if nothing innovative can be done to correct it, that justifies the nihilistic outlook and conclusion that we must prepare ourselves for 'more calamities, more regulations, more crony-ism, more crises, more of the same'.
Perhaps we should try to really l e a r n from the past and try to avoid what all those folks did that got us into this mess, instead of repeating the same mistakes over and over. Private Reply to abbeboulah (new win) |
|
| |
|
