Perusing the web earlier today, I noticed a column from Matthew Rothschild titled "Reid and Obama Abandon the Jobs Front". What caught my attention was the opening salvo: "What planet are Harry Reid, Barack Obama and the Democrats on?". This has been the right question for some time. One wouldn't have guessed a year ago that the Obama Administration would be so disconnected from Main Street.
I have come to the conclusion that there are 2 possible answers for this aberration. One, that Obama's campaign for the presidency was just great marketing. That he was a true DLC'er at heart and that he and Hillary Clinton ran a kind of "good cop; bad cop" strategy during the Democratic primaries. That no matter who won the White House, the Democratic party would be in control(?), and the Clinton White House wouldn't have looked any different than Obama's. And since the Democrats are the new Republicans, they were not going to let anything as quaint as campaign promises get in their way of repaying their corporate masters and their cronies on wall street. The second possibility is that the Democrats are using all this phony "bi-partisan" b.s. to keep the public angry about gridlock and use it as a campaign tool to make even bigger gains in Congress in 2010 against the "Party of No". To virtually destroy the Republican Party. Could you imagine that? How would the Democrats rule (compromise)? Who would they capitulate to? Oh yeah, their corporate bosses.
Of the two, I am inclined to believe the former. I can't see the Democrats wanting to risk losing any seats in Congress (Massachusetts?) on some wildly imaginative campaign stunt. Either way, it comes down to the fact that Main Street is so far from the Washington "Belt-Way" that even though the economy and the infra-structure are still crumbling, the Democratic Party doesn't seem to notice. They do, however, seem to have their finger on the pulse of Wall Street and the wealthy campaign donors that will be able to make or break elections, thanks to the Supreme Court.
I wonder what it's going to take.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Bailed Out For a Job Well Done.
I, like everyone else, have been noticing all the outrage in this country concerning the impending bonuses for the executives of Wall Street's largest banks. As if there was the odd assumption that all men were created equal. Why all the fuss?
"How can they justify their exorbitant compensation packages after bringing the economy to the brink of ruin?"
Well, it seems to me that "maximum profit" is their justification. They have been living lavishly for so long that they are obviously entitled to more of the same. If anyone expects the "Banksters" to hold their addiction to bigger and bigger bonuses in check, their expectations are completely unrealistic. This is, after all, a Capitalist Democracy. I assume that means it is only a Democracy if one has capital. And banks have plenty, I assure you. Big banks that are corporations are required to make as much money as possible for the benefit of their share holders, has anyone noticed the Dow lately? They're doing a great job. Why ruin it because of the little guy?
That capital also buys a considerable amount of lobbying, which as anyone knows, gives the banks the opportunity to shape governmental policy. I wonder what Sen. Dodd (D-CT) will be doing to occupy his time when he is no longer a Senator from Connecticut. Maybe he has a good enough resume to get himself a lobbying position or a lucrative CEO gig with one of the investment banks he was supposed to be regulating all this time. We'll have to wait to see, but I suspect HE won't be unemployed for very long.
People also believe that these banks acted improperly when they were pushing the economy over a cliff. I think they deliberately forced the government into a corner and got what they wanted all along. Free tax payer money! Remember the S&L scandal in the 1980's. They succeeded, that is why they are handing out the big bonuses and talking about "retaining talent". They didn't mismanage anything. Remember, when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is remaining, no matter how improbable, has to be the truth. Is there another explanation for their behavior? No, these people are smart enough to rob a bank and not get caught. Incompetence is a popular distraction for the masses, and why not abdicate responsibility? It seems to be quite profitable as long as one has the right connections.
Ah, the connections. Has anyone noticed that the last few Republican administrations have had a lot of the same players. All the way back to ol' Prescott Bush. I believe he made his money in banking (with Nazis, I might add). It seems to me, whenever a Bush is close to the reigns of power, bankers seem to have a scandal or two. At least now, under Pres. Obama, they are too big to fail. I wonder who our current "commander-in-chief" speaks to more, Elizabeth Warren or Lloyd Blankfein? It all comes back to the lobbying. Henry Paulson, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, etc., etc. The bankers, like all corporate sectors, get their guys in every time. The head of Greenpeace will NEVER be appointed to head the E.P.A. Why? Because there isn't any money in it. Same for the banking industry. The bankers are deeply embedded in both the Democratic and Republican Parties. They will get their way no matter who's in office. Didn't Clinton repeal Glass-Steagall?
No, the banks didn't fail. They won! They won the largest lottery in history. Now all they have to do is figure out how to do it all over again. I shouldn't be too difficult, once Americans forget about this bailout like they did with the S&L bailout. That's right, they will win again. The only ones who failed were the American people. Asleep at the wheel and allowing the foxes to guard the hen house. Notice that we were the ones that were punished. In America we love to kick a guy when he's down, and that doesn't stop with ourselves. The end justifies the means, so the banks win and we lose. The deregulation and upper income tax cuts worked for the wealthy bankers, but definitely not for the average American. I wonder what the result would be if we taxed the wealthy and tightened regulations a little. Maybe we'll experience another era in history people seemed to have forgotten about, The 1990's.
"How can they justify their exorbitant compensation packages after bringing the economy to the brink of ruin?"
Well, it seems to me that "maximum profit" is their justification. They have been living lavishly for so long that they are obviously entitled to more of the same. If anyone expects the "Banksters" to hold their addiction to bigger and bigger bonuses in check, their expectations are completely unrealistic. This is, after all, a Capitalist Democracy. I assume that means it is only a Democracy if one has capital. And banks have plenty, I assure you. Big banks that are corporations are required to make as much money as possible for the benefit of their share holders, has anyone noticed the Dow lately? They're doing a great job. Why ruin it because of the little guy?
That capital also buys a considerable amount of lobbying, which as anyone knows, gives the banks the opportunity to shape governmental policy. I wonder what Sen. Dodd (D-CT) will be doing to occupy his time when he is no longer a Senator from Connecticut. Maybe he has a good enough resume to get himself a lobbying position or a lucrative CEO gig with one of the investment banks he was supposed to be regulating all this time. We'll have to wait to see, but I suspect HE won't be unemployed for very long.
People also believe that these banks acted improperly when they were pushing the economy over a cliff. I think they deliberately forced the government into a corner and got what they wanted all along. Free tax payer money! Remember the S&L scandal in the 1980's. They succeeded, that is why they are handing out the big bonuses and talking about "retaining talent". They didn't mismanage anything. Remember, when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is remaining, no matter how improbable, has to be the truth. Is there another explanation for their behavior? No, these people are smart enough to rob a bank and not get caught. Incompetence is a popular distraction for the masses, and why not abdicate responsibility? It seems to be quite profitable as long as one has the right connections.
Ah, the connections. Has anyone noticed that the last few Republican administrations have had a lot of the same players. All the way back to ol' Prescott Bush. I believe he made his money in banking (with Nazis, I might add). It seems to me, whenever a Bush is close to the reigns of power, bankers seem to have a scandal or two. At least now, under Pres. Obama, they are too big to fail. I wonder who our current "commander-in-chief" speaks to more, Elizabeth Warren or Lloyd Blankfein? It all comes back to the lobbying. Henry Paulson, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, etc., etc. The bankers, like all corporate sectors, get their guys in every time. The head of Greenpeace will NEVER be appointed to head the E.P.A. Why? Because there isn't any money in it. Same for the banking industry. The bankers are deeply embedded in both the Democratic and Republican Parties. They will get their way no matter who's in office. Didn't Clinton repeal Glass-Steagall?
No, the banks didn't fail. They won! They won the largest lottery in history. Now all they have to do is figure out how to do it all over again. I shouldn't be too difficult, once Americans forget about this bailout like they did with the S&L bailout. That's right, they will win again. The only ones who failed were the American people. Asleep at the wheel and allowing the foxes to guard the hen house. Notice that we were the ones that were punished. In America we love to kick a guy when he's down, and that doesn't stop with ourselves. The end justifies the means, so the banks win and we lose. The deregulation and upper income tax cuts worked for the wealthy bankers, but definitely not for the average American. I wonder what the result would be if we taxed the wealthy and tightened regulations a little. Maybe we'll experience another era in history people seemed to have forgotten about, The 1990's.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)