Comments on: Big Bucks to Bad Actors: Does the Business Press Consider the Human Cost of Economic Rescue? http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/ Firedoglake weblog Sat, 18 Feb 2012 01:21:27 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: masaccio http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954129 masaccio Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:21:19 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954129 <p>I think Krugman respects Bernanke, and following my comment at 20, I think Bernanke has done pretty well, considering. When Bernanke was appointed, Krugman said he was all we could expect from Bush, which I think is not great praise.</p> I think Krugman respects Bernanke, and following my comment at 20, I think Bernanke has done pretty well, considering. When Bernanke was appointed, Krugman said he was all we could expect from Bush, which I think is not great praise.

]]> By: Hugh http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954096 Hugh Wed, 12 Aug 2009 01:55:10 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954096 <p>You are right. What we see has been called crony capitalism and casino capitalism</p> You are right. What we see has been called crony capitalism and casino capitalism

]]> By: Hugh http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954092 Hugh Wed, 12 Aug 2009 01:52:53 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954092 <p>I commented at Naked Capitalism last night on Krugman’s endorsement of Bernanke. As I said there, Krugman said in his last book salon here that he owed his job at Princeton to Bernanke and he has never criticized Bernanke directly anywhere that I have seen. His support of Bernanke without disclosing these facts is unprofessional. If he is going to be biased, he should state those biases up front.</p> I commented at Naked Capitalism last night on Krugman’s endorsement of Bernanke. As I said there, Krugman said in his last book salon here that he owed his job at Princeton to Bernanke and he has never criticized Bernanke directly anywhere that I have seen. His support of Bernanke without disclosing these facts is unprofessional. If he is going to be biased, he should state those biases up front.

]]> By: Hugh http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954059 Hugh Wed, 12 Aug 2009 01:40:52 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954059 <p>Give me $7 trillion and I could not only fix the financial system I would give you a pony. </p> <p>As it is the financial system remains profoundly broken, the money pumped into has been mostly wasted, and it could all go kerblooey again. In fact, it probably will.</p> Give me $7 trillion and I could not only fix the financial system I would give you a pony.

As it is the financial system remains profoundly broken, the money pumped into has been mostly wasted, and it could all go kerblooey again. In fact, it probably will.

]]> By: PJEvans http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954054 PJEvans Wed, 12 Aug 2009 01:39:20 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954054 <p>This applies to the health ‘insurance’ companies, too.<br /> They’re talking about raising premiums 20 to 30 percent, and claiming it’s justified by rising health care costs … but how much of the increase in health care costs is <em>caused</em> by those premiums?</p> This applies to the health ‘insurance’ companies, too.
They’re talking about raising premiums 20 to 30 percent, and claiming it’s justified by rising health care costs … but how much of the increase in health care costs is caused by those premiums?

]]> By: goldstandard http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954007 goldstandard Wed, 12 Aug 2009 01:12:21 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1954007 <p>At least Judge Rakoff in New York isn’t buying it. After he jails Thaine and Lewis, he should go after Bernanke and Paulson. See story at HuffPo.</p> At least Judge Rakoff in New York isn’t buying it. After he jails Thaine and Lewis, he should go after Bernanke and Paulson. See story at HuffPo.

]]> By: TheLurkingMod http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953974 TheLurkingMod Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:09:03 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953974 <p>Teddy is upstairs!<br /><a href="http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/reids-re-elect-reasons-to-be-rocky/" rel="nofollow">Reid’s Re-Elect Reasons to be Rocky</a></p> Teddy is upstairs!
Reid’s Re-Elect Reasons to be Rocky

]]> By: Blub http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953972 Blub Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:49:08 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953972 <p>I agree with you that this started a ways before shrub. Like I said, shrubco strangled capitalism while it was on its deathbed, but it was a longtime getting onto that bed in the first place. The present crisis goes back, I believe, to Eisenhower in many respects - when large segments of the economy (beginning with the military-industrial complex) started becoming “protected” - exempt from the transparency or competition that true capitalism requires. Then, president-after-president relaxed regulations, entrenched and protected entire sectors (defense contractors! coal! insurers! banks! whatever) and the groups that owned them started getting more and more powerful (as illustrated graphically in out-of-control executive pay), mechanisms such as intellectual property protection went from being guardians of opoprtunity into yet another police mechanism allowing official authority to throttle innovation and invention on behalf of its corporate owners and rentiers, anti-democratic forces started to assert themselves in the shadows… the great promise of “free” America died a little bit as a time, until shrub killed off what was left. </p> <p>Now we just have a royal mess to clean up, and the anti-market, anti-democractic forces long festering in the shadows are trying to take center-stage, even as we try to save it all. As that horrifying NYT story yesterday said, if you’re an average college-educated young American (i.e., daddy’s not a CEO and you don’t have a trust fund) and you want a meaningful job, want to start a business with a chance in heck of prospering, have an innovative idea you want to try out and want to get financed, want opportunity and upward mobility? Move to Communist China. </p> <p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/business/economy/11expats.html?_r=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08......html?_r=1</a></p> <p>That’s not a a compliment for China. Its a testament to what we’ve allowed our own country to become.</p> I agree with you that this started a ways before shrub. Like I said, shrubco strangled capitalism while it was on its deathbed, but it was a longtime getting onto that bed in the first place. The present crisis goes back, I believe, to Eisenhower in many respects – when large segments of the economy (beginning with the military-industrial complex) started becoming “protected” – exempt from the transparency or competition that true capitalism requires. Then, president-after-president relaxed regulations, entrenched and protected entire sectors (defense contractors! coal! insurers! banks! whatever) and the groups that owned them started getting more and more powerful (as illustrated graphically in out-of-control executive pay), mechanisms such as intellectual property protection went from being guardians of opoprtunity into yet another police mechanism allowing official authority to throttle innovation and invention on behalf of its corporate owners and rentiers, anti-democratic forces started to assert themselves in the shadows… the great promise of “free” America died a little bit as a time, until shrub killed off what was left.

Now we just have a royal mess to clean up, and the anti-market, anti-democractic forces long festering in the shadows are trying to take center-stage, even as we try to save it all. As that horrifying NYT story yesterday said, if you’re an average college-educated young American (i.e., daddy’s not a CEO and you don’t have a trust fund) and you want a meaningful job, want to start a business with a chance in heck of prospering, have an innovative idea you want to try out and want to get financed, want opportunity and upward mobility? Move to Communist China.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08……html?_r=1

That’s not a a compliment for China. Its a testament to what we’ve allowed our own country to become.

]]> By: readerOfTeaLeaves http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953970 readerOfTeaLeaves Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:42:24 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953970 <blockquote><p>We stopped being a capitalist economy sometime midway through shrub’s reign, when advanced capitalism (and the globalization which was supposed to accompany it) was strangled on its deathbed, and the regulatory mechanisms that enable it were thrown out with its corpse. </p></blockquote> <p>Agree with the view that what we’re seeing is not ‘classic capitalism’.</p> <p>Whether you call it ‘vampire capitalism’, or ‘corporate capitalism’, it’s predatory, prone to bubbles, and unstable. I don’t think Adam Smith would recognize it.</p> <p>But I’m more of masaccio’s view that you need to go back to Reagan, and definitely Bush I, to find the roots of the disaster we see today.</p>

We stopped being a capitalist economy sometime midway through shrub’s reign, when advanced capitalism (and the globalization which was supposed to accompany it) was strangled on its deathbed, and the regulatory mechanisms that enable it were thrown out with its corpse.

Agree with the view that what we’re seeing is not ‘classic capitalism’.

Whether you call it ‘vampire capitalism’, or ‘corporate capitalism’, it’s predatory, prone to bubbles, and unstable. I don’t think Adam Smith would recognize it.

But I’m more of masaccio’s view that you need to go back to Reagan, and definitely Bush I, to find the roots of the disaster we see today.

]]> By: Blub http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953969 Blub Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:33:46 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/11/economic-rescue-the-business-perspective-and-the-human-cost/#comment-1953969 <p>this isn’t capitalism. At least not the mature, advanced, free-market, level-playing field form of capitalist country we’re supposed to be. We stopped being a capitalist economy sometime midway through shrub’s reign, when advanced capitalism (and the globalization which was supposed to accompany it) was strangled on its deathbed, and the regulatory mechanisms that enable it were thrown out with its corpse. Under shrub, we reverted to an older, more imperfect model - the crony market economy, where government acts solely to advance the interest of a small coterie of cronies and their public-subsidy-dependent corporations, where an ever-bigger government begins to squeeze out the private sector but provides no service to the public in return, but rather serves as the personal piggy bank and militarized protection racket of a tiny ruling class of thieves and their deluded enablers. This is no more a capitalist economy than a mafia don is a respectable political leader.</p> this isn’t capitalism. At least not the mature, advanced, free-market, level-playing field form of capitalist country we’re supposed to be. We stopped being a capitalist economy sometime midway through shrub’s reign, when advanced capitalism (and the globalization which was supposed to accompany it) was strangled on its deathbed, and the regulatory mechanisms that enable it were thrown out with its corpse. Under shrub, we reverted to an older, more imperfect model – the crony market economy, where government acts solely to advance the interest of a small coterie of cronies and their public-subsidy-dependent corporations, where an ever-bigger government begins to squeeze out the private sector but provides no service to the public in return, but rather serves as the personal piggy bank and militarized protection racket of a tiny ruling class of thieves and their deluded enablers. This is no more a capitalist economy than a mafia don is a respectable political leader.

]]>