"Stuff yourself boys, it’s all free, it’s all free," barks Pleasure Island’s eerie, mechanical carnival clown in Disney’s animated "Pinocchio." It’s easy to imagine that clown hovering over Manhattan, urging on a generation of MBA’s as they caper and dance their way down Wall Street.
The economic devastation inherited by Barack Obama presented him with a bad guy problem. He needed to restore confidence, but the bad guys remained, in the eyes of the media and other elites, the go-to confidence men (so to speak). So total is their domination that those who wrecked the economy could and did extort leading roles in the attempted recovery.
There was seemingly no escape from Pleasure Island without the help of the very people who helped build it. Imagine Timothy Geithner and Robert Rubin as Pinocchio’s "Honest" John and Gideon, hustlers paid to trap the innocent. Lawrence Summers is Lampwick.
Where have you gone Jiminy Cricket? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
There was, of course, another route. Obama could have looked outside Pleasure Island for people to aid in our nation’s escape. It would have been hard, and the reason for the difficulty needs mentioning.
At bottom, the problem is the great and almost un-crossable distance between the American people and elite who govern them while pocketing 90 percent of the nation’s wealth for themselves. Smug and comfortable even as the economy crashed, the madmen at the top knew they could not be forsaken. If Obama turned on them, they’d just show him and the people who elected him what real economic ruin was.
I have never believed it takes experts to run an economy. Just about everything a century’s worth of economic experts believed is wrong, so it’s kind of hard to justify their importance. Humans are not "rational actors" who perform like friction-free machines in pursuing their self-interest. There is no benign invisible hand of the market. There is no such thing as a free market through which such an invisible hand could assert its beneficent influence.
What the elite have done, though, is thoroughly indoctrinate us about the need for (no surprise) the elite. Inexpert as most economists have been, I am not suggesting we don’t need experts in a variety of fields. The mistake is giving experts control. Once they control both knowledge and practice, it’s hard to dislodge them from their aeries.
This is the circumstance Obama faces. There has been a great deal of responsible, important criticism of some of the bad guys Obama chose to play with. Should he have risked the wrath of Wall Street and chosen his team from outside Pleasure Island? We know the mainstream media would have had a field day about such an administration’s "inexperience" and unrealistic idealism.
It would have been tough, and maybe impossible. America was all too happy with its Pleasure Island days. We didn’t listen to the stories our parents told us about hanging out with the wrong crowd. We’ve been too willing to let them tell us what to do, even when they said, "Give us all of your money."
"Give a bad boy enough rope and he’ll soon make a jackass of himself," Pleasure Island’s prefect says in Pinocchio. True, but to the rich jackasses at the top, it hasn’t really mattered. It’s up to us to make it matter.
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

ai ai
I hope he turns up soon. After I wrote this piece I went to the grocery store and there at check out was a special edition of Pinocchio — the 70th anniversary edition!! Now, that’s long enough to learn what happens when you cavort with the evil ones.
I don’t know about Pinnochio, but there sure as hell are a lot of SPINocchios around,as enablers.
Okay, the neologism needs universal usage!
It seems we have stopped revealing them for who they are. We’re not supposed to stare. We don’t regulate. We don’t investigate. And when we accidently do see something bad, we accept all kinds of excuses. Here, here, pay a little fine and it’s all good. And then we remove any remaining legal impediments, making it all ”perfectly legal.” We just let it go on and on and on. I’m so sick of it. I don’t believe there will be any regulatory reformation. And if there is, it will only eventually be dismantled again.
“Give a bad boy enough rope and he’ll soon make a jackass of himself,”
or – “Allow a bad boy to *steal* enough rope, and he’ll make jackasses of us all.”
It is demoralizing. It could be paralyzing. But we can’t let that happen.
and here I thought this was Disney product placement /s
This is the circumstance Obama faces. There has been a great deal of responsible, important criticism of some of the bad guys Obama chose to play with. Should he have risked the wrath of Wall Street and chosen his team from outside Pleasure Island? We know the mainstream media would have had a field day about such an administration’s “inexperience” and unrealistic idealism.
It would have been tough, and maybe impossible. America was all too happy with its Pleasure Island days. We didn’t listen to the stories our parents told us about hanging out with the wrong crowd.
Yeah, but leaders lead and the fact is that Obama isn’t leading here – he’s propping up the new status quo and that’s a problem that will undermine all the other stuff he claims to want to do.
Even capitalist popular culture can become a handy diagnostic.
Mr. Obama,tear down that Wall…Street.
That is the danger he faces, and it’s why I wish he’d made other choices. There’s still time. As John Anderson explains in his post below. Roosevelt, too, had to adjust to his too-conservative early efforts.
I don’t know what Obama will do of course. I do know he has *some* intellectual and psychological foundation for changing course.
The legacy he sees for himself is put at risk by these characters.
His project for the country is put at risk by not winning the banking crisis.
His options for success are narrowing. His options for framing a better course of action are numerous.
IF he changes course, he can certainly easily make a case that the country is not behind this course of action AND that the bailouts have failed AND the current appraoch is clearly weighte in favor of Wall Street AND that credit is still frozen on Main Street AND …..
Or he could just say we have to stop spending without transparency.
Basically, ”we tried it your way boys … I have NO choice.”
But I don’t know what he will do. Or when he will do it.
As the revelations continue, Geithner’s appearance at Congress on Tuesday could be pivotal. Or not. Geithner’s plan has some flaws (even if you ’like’ the plan) that I think will show him to be incompentent even within the confines of his bad choices. That’s got to be a killer. It’s like Gonzales being incapable of running the politicized DOJ ”properly.”
This is a terrific analogy, Mr. S. I vaguely remember the Disney Pinocchio movie (not in its first release!) and it had some seriously creepy characters in it. The whole good triumphs over evil, when you wish upon a star thingie almost didn’t mitigate against that. And here we are again. Could we just purge the bastards and be done with it?
As it is also on topic here: In the previous post’s comments, John Anderson wrote:
The mistakes in largest part being his alignment with the Pleasure Island Boys, Geithner and Summers.
My response: In this, I retain hope Obama will justify the comparisons to Lincoln.
Obama needs to recognize that he and we have been betrayed by Geithner and other advisors. I wish this wasn’t so.
Yes. A purge is in order.
Very much on topic. And this is what we’re pushing Obama to recognize. If he does, it will be an indication that he can access a strength unavailable to all be the best presidents.
Part of this seems so simple to me (but then, I’m a simple soul.) AIG? BoA? Merrill Lynch? All the rest of you? The primrose path stops here!
There are in fact lots of people Obama could have gone to. We often mention Stiglitz, Krugman, Baker, Galbraith, and Roubini, but there are others. Brooksley Born and Michael Greenberger are both great regulators. Gretchen Morgenson has done good reporting. Yves Smith and other financial bloggers are extremely well informed. Meredith Whitney has also recently come to my attention.
The idea here is not that these people would necessarily make up Obama’s economic team, or at least not all of it. But I think all of them would know names of people inside government, Wall Street, academia, unaffiliated who anyone forming a team should talk to. These people in turn would know others, and in a matter of days or a couple of weeks you would have makings of a super-solid team.
As it is, we see none of this outreach going on. Instead we see the positions being filled by what Glenn calls the “go-to confidence men.”
I am disgusted that you would make excuses for this cretinous excuse for a leader. He had plenty of options in choosing his economic team. Certainly such economists as James K. Galbraith, Nouriel Roubini, Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, etc. could not be called ‘inexperienced hacks.’ It is patently obvious that Obama is ‘bought and paid for’ by Wall Street to execute THEIR agenda at the expense of the American taxpayers. There is no other agenda, because this one sucks all the money out of the system and makes any other priority unachievable. He’s already attempting to cripple Social Security in order to pay off the banksters. In my neighborhood, here on the largely African-American South Side of Chicago, Obama is practically worshipped as a saint. If he didn’t have such a massive ego, I’m sure his guilty conscience would overwhelm him.
The disappointing thing about Obi’s econ team is that he left out the outsiders who see things differently. Perhaps he couldn’t bring in a bunch of academics whose hair was on fire because he would be laughed off the island presto subito. So perhaps he went with the insiders and in private told them to stop the nonsense. They might have said, yeah boss, but we need to clear up (settlements) some deals out there so the street is not gonna be pissed at you Obi. If they clam up, the deal is over. The top managements will survive the hell in the crash, everyone else will be selling apples.
What say you?
“I have never believed it takes experts to run an economy.”
Um, right, amateurs have done such an excellent job.
“Just about everything a century’s worth of economic experts believed is wrong, so it’s kind of hard to justify their importance.”
Sic transit Keynes, Paul Samuelson, Krugman, Galbraiths, et al.
This was the thinking that got us into this mess. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry was sure they knew “common sense” solutions. “Cut taxes, give us more money. If we hold onto our money, everything will be fine.” Unnh-unh. Just because there’s malpractice doesn’t mean we give up on medicine. And the cranks and con men have been, for the moment, discredited with the public. So let’s try to teach some real economics while we can. We won’t have too much time. If Geithner, et al, plunge us into a new depression the demagogues will be in charge–a different, but probably equally destructive, crowd. So let’s get as much sensible policy made into law, and integrated into the discipline as we can.
Executive cuff links!
We have endured eight years of law breaking, bending, twisting, tweaking, side-stepping, stomping, disregarding, crushing with no consequences. My understanding of the Republicans (partly via George Lakoff’s take on conservatives) is that this is the party of firm adherence to the rules. Paternalistic. Tops down. No crap, no how. How did all of this get so far out of hand? (Rhetorical) The greater issue is how, literally how, does this get reined in and by whom? Obviously, Obama alone cannot do this. But surely he and his handlers see that this is (as he is fond of saying) a defining moment in history. He has the opportunity to do the radical things that must happen to fix what’s broken now and set in place safeguards to prevent this from ever, ever happening again. Is there more going on under the surface than seems the case to onlookers? And yeah, I mean more good, wise, prudent, thoughtful stuff.
The banksters are trying to escape with their crap game in tact. Most serious economists would shut down the finance sector to what it’s supposed to be: a means of raising capital for industry, not a industry that creates asset bubbles and trades, bets and becomes the niftiest way to make a buck without working.
Those were not common sense solutions. Those were carefully packaged solutions based upon intentional misrepresentations of Keynes et al. As for the rational actor part, even our best economists have only awakened to that error in the last several years. My point is not to ignore the brilliant advice of the Krugman’s of the world, it is to separate needed expertise from a controlling interest in democracy.
We need the people to see exactly how traders and these companies work with the naked shorts and stock manipulation, insider schemes and attacks on companies to drive them into bankruptcy so that they can collect on the CDSs.
I agree. He should have turned to more “outsiders.” And he should have cuffed the insiders.
no, I don’t think so. Why would the good stuff be hidden? We would get a whiff of goodness from somewhere. All I smell
is pooooh.
Indeed. Which makes me realize there are a couple of meanings for “stocks.” I’m only about half kidding when I suggest that the folks at the top of the financial company foodchain who do not forego their bonuses and outrageous compensation spend some time in the good old fashioned Pilgrim-era stocks and let the common folks have a few words with them.
I don’t understand where the crooks are going to go with all the worthless dollars. Are they converting them? Hiding them? What good is useless money going to be? And where will these people hide?
Wrong story. Not Winnie the Pooh. Pinocchio. (Yes, I’m insufferable.)
You may have meant this rhetorically, meaning that we know how, but it’s the most important question because it broadens understanding of what kind of fix is necessary. For instance, major fixes to our political institutions (same day voter registration, election-day holidy, public finance of campaigns) are necessary to bring the people back into decision-making. Unless we address your question, we haven’t addressed the root cause of our malaise.
Not too many people were screaming or running around with their hair on fire about all the “new” financial “products” (doesn’t that sound kewl… like a new flat screen or iPod or something) and how the market works. The market has been completely out of control.
Consider that financial companies are allowed to trade stocks they don’t even OWN. And worse than that they can trade more stocks in a company that even EXIST. They can trade outside the clearing houses where the trades are tracked.
The entire system is completely corrupt and needs to trashed. And the players charged with fraud!
I like the way you think!
Frank Rich’s column in today’s NYT is good. This situation looks like Obama’s “Katrina Moment.”
If Obama’s reading Frank Rich and Glenn W. Smith and John Anderson this morning, he’s getting the message. Now, will he take decisive action to correct his mistakes?
Dubai.
They are holding them with the notion that they can buy up anything a fire sale prices. And monopoly goes on.
funny, too.
As far as I’m concerned we will be no where near a new day on any of this until there are investigations and indictments. At this point, the last thing the banksters want is transparency for any number of bad reasons, so Obama goes along with that and now we have Obama protecting possible criminals. He’s getting into real trouble there.
These people aren’t so special. Liddy the other day coudn’t find his way around a single page of tax accounting for AIG.
They cannot be trusted. And they don’t care about that at all. And they don’t care about the common good and they never will. I think Obama has to be hurt before he gets this. Again he can recover, but he’ll be hurt first before he treats them as they deserve.
I absolutely, totally agree. How do “civilians” enter into the fray? Because until that happens, it seems to me we will be duped, reduped, and duped again. I confess to being part of the learned helplessness brigade with respect to understanding, following, critiquing what has gone before.
I remember a few years ago when I was very young and callow I was talking to a local business man who I had happened to come to know as part of a circle of volunteers I had joined.
He was a nice person to work with, with some quirks as we all have, some of which were about being the ”biggest” man in the group. I said I thought HONESTY was a simple and wonderful business practice, a foundation for all kinds of success. I thought of him as honest, of course, like me.
He said he had never thought of that and found it a very curious idea. I’m still stunned. And I still wonder how dishonest he really was. And how unaware he must have been. I came to see him as emotionally empty, but that is another story, perhaps not unrelated.
I think he’s not unique at all.
You have a head start on many, ’cause you are obviously engaged, thoughtful, and outspoken. We just need a few million more of our friends and neighbors to catch up!
Honestly, the empowerment of others is the critical point. We have to guard against demoralization, feel that we matter, and convince others that they matter too. Read Vaclav Havel’s essay, “Power of the Powerless,” written before the Wall came down. William Greider’s new book, “Come Home America,” is less inspiring, but more relevant and even elegant.
First the “surge”{Iraq],then the “splurge”[bailout/heist],now the “urge to purge.”
Didn’t mothers use to give their children a great, big dose of castor oil as a “spring cleaning”,so to speak?
Hey,Spring is here!
The goings on of the finance sector are way over the heads of the people. This is part of the problem of getting them involved. They can only process really simply concepts, like being paid bonuses when doing poorly. They don’t understand how these deals are made, trades settled, and so forth, fee arrangements and the role of lawyers and contracts. Insurance pays claims, insureds pay premiums.
Why does everything have to be insured
Why should anyone / company be allowed to take out a policy on something they have no stake in?
How can you sell something you don’t have? And why is that allowed? Imagine seeing a “fore sale” sign on a car – $1,000. And then making a deal with someone to see a car for 2,000, collecting the money and they go buy the car. Some call that being clever and capitalism. Others have another word for these sorts of deals – shady schemes and that how stocks are traded every day.
According to John Kenneth Galbraith, (father of James K,) there are two schools of economists. Those you name above are of the practical economists, they deal in real economic principles and their cause and effect on the people’s and the country’s well-being. The other school of economists are the elite, theorist economists whose economic ideas have nothing to do with reality or the actual effects of their theories when put into use.
IMHO, Obama’s current economic team definitely fits into that latter pathetic category.
What went on behind the scenes or in Obama’s mind that caused him to choose the (IMHO) wrong-headed group is anybody’s guess. Was he aware of the cost to his personal integrity when he accepted the huge campaign contributions from the Wall Street bankers?
Can he look down the road to the America that he is committing his own daughters and their children to live in?
I voted for him and tried to believe in his ‘hope’, frankly because there was no better choice in candidates. (Lordy, Phil Gramm as Secretary of Treasury??). Sadly, unless he abandons his current economic team and their air-head theories, I’ll have to be among those who throw him under the bus.
O.T. [Caveat to mods-acquarius 74 and i were discussing a subject on another thread-I went back to post links,but thread was closed.
May I post it here?Being new,I’m not sure of procedure.]
@48 acquarius74:
I found the links for UBS(Gramm was lobbyist there),and Shenzhen Bank.
Shenzhen bank’s primary stockholder is Newbridge Capital-DiFi’s hubby’s firm.
If you type UBS and Shenzhen bank into a search engine, there is a cornucopia of info.Also, Newbridge Capital and Shenzhen Bank.
BTW, Shenzhen Bank has an interesting afilliation with UBS Bank-who had a LOT of insolvency issues of late ,in the worldwide shadow banking meltdown-dark liquidity,indeed._________________________________________
“Mr. Richard C. Blum (Co-chairman)
Chairman, Blum Capital Partners
Mr. Blum currently serves as a director on numerous boards, including CB Richard Ellis, Korea First Bank, Northwest Airlines Corporation, Playtex Products Inc. and URS Corporation. He also serves as a director of Glenborough Realty Trust, Inc., and is Co-Chairman of Newbridge Capital. He is a former director of the following public companies: National Education Corporation, Taft Broadcasting Corporation, Advanced Systems, Inc., Triad Systems, Inc., Sumitomo Bank of California, Princeville Development Corporation, and the Shaklee Corporation. Mr. Blum is the founder and Chairman of the American Himalayan Foundation, and is Honorary Consul to Mongolia and the Kingdom of Nepal.”
——————————————————————————–
Bloomberg.com: China Shenzhen Bank to Raise $568 Million in Share Sale (Update3) … TPG, through unit Newbridge Capital LLC, remains as the largest shareholder in the Chinese …
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pi…..xWpJycU7cA – Similar pages
Shenzhen bank plans to issue yuan bonds Shenzhen Development Bank, nearly 18 percent owned by U.S. investment firm Newbridge Capital, also said it plans to issue a hybrid bond with the same …
paper.sznews.com/szdaily/20070618/ca2695075.htm – 12k – Cached – Similar pages
Ubs Reports Fourth Quarter Loss Chf 81 Billion Excluding Msn … Ubs Reports Fourth Quarter Loss Chf 81 Billion Excluding Msn Moneycentral, Bank News, … UPDATE 2-China Devt Bank says no plan to buy Shenzhen Bank – CNBC …
banking.vietnammarkets.com/news/bank-news/ubs-reports-fourth-quarter-loss-chf-81-billion-excluding-msn-moneycentral.h… – 17k – Cached – Similar pages
China Business News – BizChinaUpdate – UBS Sells Bank Of China Stake UBS AG has sold its stake in Bank of China as the three-year lockup period ended. The Swiss bank earned reportedly a profit of USD400m from the investment. …
http://www.bizchina-update.com/content/view/1775/2/ – 64k – Cached – Similar pages
UBS – Investment Bank lead manager on a RMB 6.5 billion multi-tranche issue for Shenzhen Development Bank, China’s second largest sub-debt deal. …
http://www.ubs.com/1/e/investors/08q1/0016/0021.html – 92k – Cached – Similar pages
Asia Sentinel – The UBS Irony “UBS, the largest bank in Switzerland, agreed on Wednesday to divulge the names of well-heeled Americans whom the authorities suspect of using offshore …
http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php…..Itemid=148 – 90k – Cached – Similar pages
Thank you, Gitcheegumee. It will take me some time to study your links.
Pelosi’s husband is a real estate wheeler-dealer, right? How did he make out during the Big Bubble?
Been doing some studying of my (ugh) senator Cornyn and his backers. First among them is CONTRAN, owned by Harold Simmons who dreamed up leveraged buy-outs and is openly termed one of the big corporate raiders.
We need real campaign finance reform in the worst way.
Sorry, but I have nothing to offer on Peolsi. One I SHOULD have gotten around to FIRST,actually. Mea culpa.
My sympathies to you re : Cornyn.
I fear that “real” anything is approaching quixotic as a goal, at this point.
The revelations about the Diebolt machines self-deleting,and the extensive info on Bradblog and Velvet Revolution aboutelectronic vote manipulation {man-in-the-middle]does not bode well,sadly,imho.
I am aware of the two schools of economics; I spent a short time at the University of Chicago school of economics but I could not stomach it. You should see today’s Chicago Tribune magazine (I would post a link but I am functionally illiterate on the computer) detailing Obama’s ties to the University of Chicago. I could not read the article, I confess. The cover shows a drawing of Obama with his UC buddies, Austan Goolsbee and Cass Sunstein. His University of Chicago connection was enough to raise my suspicions about the Obama candidacy. Plus, I like the way the media portray him as this distinguished law professor when he was only a part time lecturer.
Here is link to a 53 minute YouTube interview with John K Galbraith, economist, statesman, writer of more than 20 books and father of James K. Galbraith.
“I have never believed it takes experts to run an economy.”
My heart soared upon reading that.
Then why did Keynes talk about “animal spirits?”
Cutting taxes and saving is “common sense” for a good fraction of the US population.
I wish you’d said that in the first place. There’s plenty of demagogues willing to step up and tell us why they know best, and they’re dangerous. Rush Limbaugh is a moderate among these. In electing Obama, we seem to have more-or-less rejected an authoritarian solution to our problems, but if Obama doesn’t deliver, the authoritarians will be back, and matters could get very bad indeed.
It has always struck me as a kind of cosmic irony,on a stupendous scale, that those in positions of power to determine the economic destiny of others, have never been destitute themsleves.
Thank you for your very disturbing post. Back when Obama was campaigning I noted the U of Chicago bit but paid no particular attention. Then when he began picking his cabinet, I noticed that many had been of the U of C crowd or the Chicago political crowd. Then I noticed that Paulson had spent some time in the Chicago unit of Goldman Sachs. I must pursue this thread and see where it leads…..
I’m old enough to remember the Al Capone stories, but was naive enough to think those mobster days were of the past.
I’ll search your ref and see if I can provide the link. (learned how myself only a short time ago, thanks to 2 fine people who walked me thru it)
Here is the link to online ChicagoTribuneMagazine article about Obama, the Univ of Chicago, its grads in his cabinet, and the Chicago School of Economics (de-regulation per Milton Freidman). I’ve only read 2 pages (some of which disturbs me) but will reserve judgment until I finish it.
It all becomes a lot clearer when you get it straight that Obama is one of the bad guys, not the messiah you hoped he would be.