Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

Monty wrote:  Conservatives believe that the market functions best when unregulated and unencumbered. So, obviously, when the market tanks, they will have a personal stake in blaming anything other than the market itself failing....Democrats believe that the market functions best when regulated and overseen.

 

This is, of course, a vast simplification, and also inaccurate as written.  

 

It is not that Republicans generally don't belive that markets should be unregulated and unencumbered; rather, they believe that the most effective regulation and encumberment arises from the process of the free market itself and not from government bureaucrats, some of whom may never have run so much as a lemonade stand in their lives, thinking they know how to run the economy and businesses.  They believe that any regulation the government does should be the minimum essential.  They understand that any self-regulating mechanism will have some "sway" or "slop" in it, but that self-correction is usually more effective and efficient than government regulation.

 

Democrats generally believe that they know better than anybody else how virtually every aspect of life should be run, and they should enforce their theories through the power of the gun, which in the end is the only power government has.  (Come right down to it, and if you keep resisting government dictates, somebody will come after you with a gun to force you into compliance.   That's the ultimate source of all government authority; our guns are bigger and more numerous than yours.)

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

I agree with quite a bit of this Eman. I was just discussing something like this at work today. My parents lived in an apartment when they first married and saved to buy a house. When my brothers got married, same thing. But i notice that a lot of people my age, wanted to leave their parents house after college and live the same lifestyle that they left. As if their parents just started out with everything! They want their dream houses in their 30's, not waiting until 50's or 60's like many of our parents ( actually my parents are still in their first house, they just added and improved over the many, many years.)

I think these are the same people that have to have a McMansion built with a mortgage they can't afford. I have these former friends that actually accepted money from their retired parents ( retired on teacher's incomes, not wealthy people) to buy a very expensive house in the burbs that they absolutely didn't need.What self-repecting adult with well-paid job, accepts money from retired people to pay for a dream, not a necessity.

And the parents that entertain their kids in the car with the built in DVD players, make me cringe. When my brothers and I were stuck in the car for hours on trips, we entertained ourselves and used our imaginations. Some times we read books.

 

I also like the idea of the graduated corporate tax. I hate when I have to drive out of the city to shop because there are hardly any stores in the city b/c they can't compete with the chains.

As for building codes- don't know enough about them.


Everyman wrote:

Monty wrote (his posting in italics, my replies in plain text)

 

I think the thing to bear in mind about this is that the explanation for the banking crisis is pretty much the fault of a lack of regulation, both in nonexistence and non-enforcement, which tends to make an ideological dog's breakfast of the whole thing.

 

 I don't agree.  IMO the primary explanations are:  a) greed and self-indulgence on the part both of the bankers and of the public, b) a lack of moral character and self-expectations of honesty and integrity in too many people, c) ignorance and laziness on the part of the public which is in large part encouraged by the government trying to take over virtually every aspect of personal decision making, and d) too much emphasis on growth at any price.  

 

a) Greed and self-indulgence: pretty obvious.  But it's not just the bankers who wanted to make as much money as possible.  It's the homeowners who wanted to own a house they couldn't afford, the people who want to own a better car than they can afford, people like my son who want the highest tech gadgets NOW instead of saving for them.  People who take on debt to satisfy their immediate cravings when realistically they have little or no chance to pay back that debt if things in their lives don't go perfectly.  Yes, the bankers were at fault for pushing "liar" mortgages, but people were also at fault for taking them.  Yes, the credit card companies were at fault for pushing too much credit on people who were only marginally credit worthy, if that, but nobody held a gun at people's heads to force them to take and use the cards.  

 

 

b) a lack of moral character and self-expectations of honesty and integrity in too many people.  Linked to the first, but identifiably separate.  

 

We have a culture that encourages conspicuous consumption.  Where we teach our children, or fail to correct them if somebody else teaches them, that it is important for them to wear designer shoes, designer jackets, have the coolest phone, etc.  Nobody in my generation had a cell phone. They are NOT necessary for growing up to be intelligent and responsible adults.  Nobody in my generation had a TV in their bedroom.  They are NOT necessary for growing up to be intelligent and responsible adults. We wore plain Levi jeans, Keds, and clothing with the maker's name inside, not outside.  

 

We have too many parents who refuse to say no, to set boundaries, to expect, nay demand, responsible behavior from their children.  Of course the children to off the deep end, want everything NOW, want the latest, coolest clothes, gadgets, etc.  

 

If parents taught and practiced simple honesty, responsibility, virtue, values, emphasized that it is who you are that matters and not what you own, taught simplicity, and the like, we would not be in this financial mess.  

 

c)  ignorance and laziness on the part of the public.  We expect government to take care of us, and if things go wrong we look to government to solve the problems, not to ourselves.   Every government program costs each one of us money, not only in paying for the government to create and maintain the program, but in increasing the prices we pay for goods to pay for the makers to comply with those programs. Take building codes.  Our community has a "owner-builder" ordinance where you can get a permit to build your own home and you don't have to comply with the building codes.  You decide what is a safe building and what isn't.  For thousands of years people have been building homes, cathedrals, castles, prisons, without a single building code in place because people looked out for what was being built and took responsibility for their work.   But when some buildings fell down, government came in said not "you should have looked more carefully at the home you were buying and made sure it was safe," but "Oh, poor dear, we'll pass some laws so everybody has to pay a lot more for their homes because you coulnd't be bothered to make sure the one you were buying was safe."  So our economy takes a huge hit, while the owner-built no-code houses in our community are generally the safest, best built homes because the people building them care about making them beautiful and safe. 

 

d) too much emphasis on growth at any price.   We have rejected "Small is Beautiful" in preference for "Bigger is better."  One of the lessons of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is that capitalism works best when there are many smaller competing companies.  Conglomeration is the enemy of a vigorous, healthy capitalism.  The answer to this is, fortunately, simple: a graduated corporate income tax.  Levy a minimal income tax on the mom-and-pop hardware store, a moderate tax rate on the small regional hardware chain, and a high tax rate on Lowe's and Home Depot.  I shop at WalMart rather than the corner drug store because I can get the identical product significantly cheaper at WalMart.  If WalMart were taxed at a high enough rate, those prices would become much more equal, and the service benefits of the local store would outweigh the pennies I would save driving to WalMart.  


 

A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

This part I don't agree with so much. I think the Republicans want regulations, just of different things than Democrats. In general they may want less regulations in the market, but more regulations in one's personal life, ie, who one can marry, have sex with, rights over a woman's reproductive system.

Everyman wrote:

Monty wrote:  Conservatives believe that the market functions best when unregulated and unencumbered. So, obviously, when the market tanks, they will have a personal stake in blaming anything other than the market itself failing....Democrats believe that the market functions best when regulated and overseen.

 

This is, of course, a vast simplification, and also inaccurate as written.  

 

It is not that Republicans generally don't belive that markets should be unregulated and unencumbered; rather, they believe that the most effective regulation and encumberment arises from the process of the free market itself and not from government bureaucrats, some of whom may never have run so much as a lemonade stand in their lives, thinking they know how to run the economy and businesses.  They believe that any regulation the government does should be the minimum essential.  They understand that any self-regulating mechanism will have some "sway" or "slop" in it, but that self-correction is usually more effective and efficient than government regulation.

 

Democrats generally believe that they know better than anybody else how virtually every aspect of life should be run, and they should enforce their theories through the power of the gun, which in the end is the only power government has.  (Come right down to it, and if you keep resisting government dictates, somebody will come after you with a gun to force you into compliance.   That's the ultimate source of all government authority; our guns are bigger and more numerous than yours.)


 

A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

Two brothers got bad colds.

 

One went to see his Republican doctor.

 

One went to see his Democratic doctor.

 

The Republican doctor told the patient to go home and wait it out, that his self-regulating body would take care of itself, that he might feel miserable for a week or two but that letting the body do its thing would be the best course.

 

The Democratic doctor tut-tutted and said that the patient needed massive intervention.  He prescribed aspirin, cough syrup, antihistimines, and several other remedies to fight the cold.

 

At the end of two weeks, both brothers felt fine.

 

The Republican doctor said, see, self-regulation works.  For many problems do the least necessary and let the body take care of itself.

 

The Democratic doctor said, see, my regimen of massive intervention worked. It cured the cold. It proved that strong interventionary measures are the right solution.  Now to avoid future colds not only for this patient but for the whole country we need to make this regimen permanent.  We need to pass laws requiring every person to take doses of aspirin, cough syrup, antihistimines, and other  medicines so that nobody every has to suffer a cold ever again.  

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

debbook wrote:  This part I don't agree with so much. I think the Republicans want regulations, just of different things than Democrats. In general they may want less regulations in the market, but more regulations in one's personal life, ie, who one can marry, have sex with, rights over a woman's reproductive system.

 

I think that used to be true more in the past than it is today.  Today liberals (I think a more accurate term than Democrats, since there are some fairly conservative Democrats and some fairly liberal Reublicans) are just as committed to regulating one's personal life, only different asects of it   Speech codes, for example.  Anti-bullying rules in schools.  No talking on cell phones when driving.  Helmet laws, seat belt laws, and on and on.   One very interesting issue recently in our state has been whether the state can require a pharmacist as a condition of keeping his or her license to prescribe drugs which they have a moral objection  to.  This is one where liberals generally say yes, they should be forced to do so, and conservatives say no, that their right of conscience is paramount.  

 

Part of my job includes scanning the laws passed by our legislature every year, and it seems to me that neither party has any monopoly on regulating personal behaviors; they just have different foci for the parts of our lives they want to regulate.  

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

[ Edited ]

Everyman wrote:

Monty wrote (his posting in italics, my replies in plain text)

 

I think the thing to bear in mind about this is that the explanation for the banking crisis is pretty much the fault of a lack of regulation, both in nonexistence and non-enforcement, which tends to make an ideological dog's breakfast of the whole thing.

 

 I don't agree.  IMO the primary explanations are:  a) greed and self-indulgence on the part both of the bankers and of the public, b) a lack of moral character and self-expectations of honesty and integrity in too many people, c) ignorance and laziness on the part of the public which is in large part encouraged by the government trying to take over virtually every aspect of personal decision making, and d) too much emphasis on growth at any price.  

 

a) Greed and self-indulgence: pretty obvious.  But it's not just the bankers who wanted to make as much money as possible.  It's the homeowners who wanted to own a house they couldn't afford, the people who want to own a better car than they can afford, people like my son who want the highest tech gadgets NOW instead of saving for them.  People who take on debt to satisfy their immediate cravings when realistically they have little or no chance to pay back that debt if things in their lives don't go perfectly.  Yes, the bankers were at fault for pushing "liar" mortgages, but people were also at fault for taking them.  Yes, the credit card companies were at fault for pushing too much credit on people who were only marginally credit worthy, if that, but nobody held a gun at people's heads to force them to take and use the cards.  

 

 

b) a lack of moral character and self-expectations of honesty and integrity in too many people.  Linked to the first, but identifiably separate.  

 

We have a culture that encourages conspicuous consumption.  Where we teach our children, or fail to correct them if somebody else teaches them, that it is important for them to wear designer shoes, designer jackets, have the coolest phone, etc.  Nobody in my generation had a cell phone. They are NOT necessary for growing up to be intelligent and responsible adults.  Nobody in my generation had a TV in their bedroom.  They are NOT necessary for growing up to be intelligent and responsible adults. We wore plain Levi jeans, Keds, and clothing with the maker's name inside, not outside.  

 

We have too many parents who refuse to say no, to set boundaries, to expect, nay demand, responsible behavior from their children.  Of course the children to off the deep end, want everything NOW, want the latest, coolest clothes, gadgets, etc.  

 

If parents taught and practiced simple honesty, responsibility, virtue, values, emphasized that it is who you are that matters and not what you own, taught simplicity, and the like, we would not be in this financial mess.  

 

c)  ignorance and laziness on the part of the public.  We expect government to take care of us, and if things go wrong we look to government to solve the problems, not to ourselves.   Every government program costs each one of us money, not only in paying for the government to create and maintain the program, but in increasing the prices we pay for goods to pay for the makers to comply with those programs. Take building codes.  Our community has a "owner-builder" ordinance where you can get a permit to build your own home and you don't have to comply with the building codes.  You decide what is a safe building and what isn't.  For thousands of years people have been building homes, cathedrals, castles, prisons, without a single building code in place because people looked out for what was being built and took responsibility for their work.   But when some buildings fell down, government came in said not "you should have looked more carefully at the home you were buying and made sure it was safe," but "Oh, poor dear, we'll pass some laws so everybody has to pay a lot more for their homes because you coulnd't be bothered to make sure the one you were buying was safe."  So our economy takes a huge hit, while the owner-built no-code houses in our community are generally the safest, best built homes because the people building them care about making them beautiful and safe. 

 

d) too much emphasis on growth at any price.   We have rejected "Small is Beautiful" in preference for "Bigger is better."  One of the lessons of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is that capitalism works best when there are many smaller competing companies.  Conglomeration is the enemy of a vigorous, healthy capitalism.  The answer to this is, fortunately, simple: a graduated corporate income tax.  Levy a minimal income tax on the mom-and-pop hardware store, a moderate tax rate on the small regional hardware chain, and a high tax rate on Lowe's and Home Depot.  I shop at WalMart rather than the corner drug store because I can get the identical product significantly cheaper at WalMart.  If WalMart were taxed at a high enough rate, those prices would become much more equal, and the service benefits of the local store would outweigh the pennies I would save driving to WalMart.  


Eman, I have to compliment you on your platform, or in these cases, soap box.  I love soap boxes, since I've spent a lot of time on them, myself, and I can hear your passion ringing true.  I like what you say, mainly because it gets to the root of all of these issues.  Unfortunately, we can't turn back the clock and live when life was more simple.  What's done is done, and trying to convince people otherwise, it's a hard row to hoe.  But, it's being nudged, now.

 

Some of these problems, as I think we've talked about before, is ~where, really, does all of this respsonibility lie, now~.  As greed has been the biggest issue, it has harbored more greed in people. 

 

Media promotion of that, "bigger is better", which makes everyone think life will be better, is a false notion that is constently being sold to everyone, through advertising.  I've always said, it's advertising that creates these monsters.  Businesses will hire the best to sell their products, no matter what that product is, including banks! The banking business is definately not non profit! Sales people are trained to psychologically sway the buyer, no matter what the product is.  It truely is a mind game that all businesses use, from the mom and pop store, to the corporate giants.  So you can't wholey blame the masses of people who fall for this game.

 

Re-training the consumer is difficult, as far as I've seen.  It's hard to reverse a huge rolling ball that weighs more than you do.  We want, and need, security in our lives, and when it's handed to us on a silver platter, it's taken greedily, especially when there is none to begin with.  Working for something has to, as you've said, come from somewhere, and hopefully from the family that still has values.  But these values have gotten skewed over time.

 

It's a different time, in a different age.  I see the news talking about how things seem to be going backwards right now.  I find this interesting.  Now that forward motion is hampered by so many things in our lives these days.  Can't buy that car, can't buy that house, can't find that job....money is gone...no place to go but into a shelter.....a lot of can'ts and don't haves right now.  People aren't buying, and maybe it's a wake up call for everyone to re-evaluate what is really needed in their lives to simply exist.  Simplify.

 

Yes, businesses that replicated themselves on every street corner needn't have had to be there.  These are businesses that are going out of business.  The market is glutenous, and paring down is needed, and again, there is a price to pay for everything.

Time to wake up and see what is going on around us.

 

Message Edited by KathyS on 02-18-2009 07:05 PM
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

KathyS wrote:  Time to wake up and see what is going on around us.

 

I woke up and looked around once.  Once was enough. 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

Just thought this interesting, can't hurt! :smileyvery-happy:

 

Cure for the Common Cold? Not Yet, but Possible  

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

Even though the common cold is not (or very rarely) fatal or serious, if we do come up with a vaccine for the common cold, should the government require everybody to be vaccinated, rather than leaving it up to personal choice, on the grounds that colds are such a health and economic cost to the nation that it is in our best interets to mandate vaccination? 

 

I'm sure that there are some Democrats who will say yes.  


KathyS wrote:

Just thought this interesting, can't hurt! :smileyvery-happy:

 

Cure for the Common Cold? Not Yet, but Possible  


 

 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis


Everyman wrote:

KathyS wrote:  Time to wake up and see what is going on around us.

 

I woke up and looked around once.  Once was enough. 


 

It's not ground hog day, is it? :smileyhappy: 

Tell me about it!  Time to stick my nose back into a book....

and hope I don't fall asleep and have it land on my nose! 

Sometimes you just can't win for loosing!

Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Colds and flus

Heaven forbid it should be mandated...not even the influenze vaccine is mandated!  But a million drugs are still out there to be sold to consumers, to make you think..."mine will make you feel better when the flu virus does hit you"...drug companies, I'm sure, will jump on the band wagon on this one!

 

In my crystal ball....in a land far, far away, I see it as an over the counter drug, within ten years....cough, hack, spit...in the meantime, dose yourself with whatever works for you, and hopefully no serious side effects will develop!

 


Everyman wrote:

Even though the common cold is not (or very rarely) fatal or serious, if we do come up with a vaccine for the common cold, should the government require everybody to be vaccinated, rather than leaving it up to personal choice, on the grounds that colds are such a health and economic cost to the nation that it is in our best interets to mandate vaccination? 

 

I'm sure that there are some Democrats who will say yes.  


KathyS wrote:

Just thought this interesting, can't hurt! :smileyvery-happy:

 

Cure for the Common Cold? Not Yet, but Possible  


 

 


 

Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006

Re: Colds and flus -p.s.

[ Edited ]

KathyS wrote:

Heaven forbid it should be mandated...not even the influenze vaccine is mandated!  But a million drugs are still out there to be sold to consumers, to make you think..."mine will make you feel better when the flu virus does hit you"...drug companies, I'm sure, will jump on the band wagon on this one!

 

In my crystal ball....in a land far, far away, I see it as an over the counter drug, within ten years....cough, hack, spit...in the meantime, dose yourself with whatever works for you, and hopefully no serious side effects will develop!

 


Everyman wrote:

Even though the common cold is not (or very rarely) fatal or serious, if we do come up with a vaccine for the common cold, should the government require everybody to be vaccinated, rather than leaving it up to personal choice, on the grounds that colds are such a health and economic cost to the nation that it is in our best interets to mandate vaccination? 

 

I'm sure that there are some Democrats who will say yes.  


KathyS wrote:

Just thought this interesting, can't hurt! :smileyvery-happy:

 

Cure for the Common Cold? Not Yet, but Possible  


Have I dosed you all enough with metaphor to soothe your savage souls? :smileyhappy:

 

Life is such, when we search the light

the savage beast

will stop our plight

 

Where can we go, when wars are now?

What can we see, between that brow?

 

Take the time, when life is slow

hear your voice

and you will grow

 

Incomplete for now.

K.

 

Message Edited by KathyS on 02-18-2009 08:37 PM
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

[ Edited ]

KathyS wrote:

Unfortunately, we can't turn back the clock and live when life was more simple.  What's done is done, and trying to convince people otherwise, it's a hard row to hoe.  But, it's being nudged, now.

 

 

Especially for you Kathy:smileyhappy:

 

 

From my Pears Soap box:  In the UK Margaret Thatcher, encouraged by 'reaganomics', not only actively encouraged people on low incomes to buy houses, she made local Councils sell publicly funded council houses to them at huge discounts, thereby reducing the national rented housing stock and forcing even more people into buying homes because there were fewer to rent.  Tens of thousands of those same people, still on irregular incomes too low to support regular mortgage payments, were forced into negative equity by subsequent public financial crises and instead of having a comfortable rented council house suited to their income, have been forced to sell and take their families into slum accommodation thus increasing our social problems.  We now have the worst housing crisis in Europe and the lowest number of houses to rent.  People at the low end of the market, socially and financially, are not those with sufficient educaton to understand the ins and outs of stock exchanges and are therefore much more reliant upon government advice and policies.  It is therefore unfair to blame them for what they were encouraged to do by those with far more power, wealth and education.   

 

 

Society today is very complex indeed and mostly beyond the ken of ordinary people, which is why we look to governments to help us.  If governments fail to do this, they should take the blame, along with those, like industrialists and bankers, who advised them.  IMO hitting upon Joe Bloggs is too easy and a cowardly way of apportioning blame in such a crisis.   We cannot put the clock back but governments can at least see that it doesn't run out of batteries, which would ultimately mean that our economies could go into a freefall affecting us all, no matter how upright and prudent we have been.   

 


 

Message Edited by Choisya on 02-19-2009 05:26 AM
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Time Magazine: 25 People to Blame for Economic Crisis

C - the first URL showed an error.  I can't view it.  I like your "Pears Soap box"-Bubbles  Thanks!  :smileyhappy:
Choisya wrote:

Especially for you Kathy:smileyhappy:

 

 

From my Pears Soap box:  In the UK Margaret Thatcher, encouraged by 'reaganomics', not only actively encouraged people on low incomes to buy houses, she made local Councils sell publicly funded council houses to them at huge discounts, thereby reducing the national rented housing stock and forcing even more people into buying homes because there were fewer to rent.  Tens of thousands of those same people, still on irregular incomes too low to support regular mortgage payments, were forced into negative equity by subsequent public financial crises and instead of having a comfortable rented council house suited to their income, have been forced to sell and take their families into slum accommodation thus increasing our social problems.  We now have the worst housing crisis in Europe and the lowest number of houses to rent.  People at the low end of the market, socially and financially, are not those with sufficient educaton to understand the ins and outs of stock exchanges and are therefore much more reliant upon government advice and policies.  It is therefore unfair to blame them for what they were encouraged to do by those with far more power, wealth and education.   

 

 

Society today is very complex indeed and mostly beyond the ken of ordinary people, which is why we look to governments to help us.  If governments fail to do this, they should take the blame, along with those, like industrialists and bankers, who advised them.  IMO hitting upon Joe Bloggs is too easy and a cowardly way of apportioning blame in such a crisis.   We cannot put the clock back but governments can at least see that it doesn't run out of batteries, which would ultimately mean that our economies could go into a freefall affecting us all, no matter how upright and prudent we have been.   

 


 

Message Edited by Choisya on 02-19-2009 05:26 AM

 

Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: For KathyS.

[ Edited ]

Try this one Kathy:smileyhappy:

 


KathyS wrote:
C - the first URL showed an error.  I can't view it.  I like your "Pears Soap box"-Bubbles  Thanks!  :smileyhappy:
Choisya wrote:

Especially for you Kathy:smileyhappy:

 

 

From my Pears Soap box:  In the UK Margaret Thatcher, encouraged by 'reaganomics', not only actively encouraged people on low incomes to buy houses, she made local Councils sell publicly funded council houses to them at huge discounts, thereby reducing the national rented housing stock and forcing even more people into buying homes because there were fewer to rent.  Tens of thousands of those same people, still on irregular incomes too low to support regular mortgage payments, were forced into negative equity by subsequent public financial crises and instead of having a comfortable rented council house suited to their income, have been forced to sell and take their families into slum accommodation thus increasing our social problems.  We now have the worst housing crisis in Europe and the lowest number of houses to rent.  People at the low end of the market, socially and financially, are not those with sufficient educaton to understand the ins and outs of stock exchanges and are therefore much more reliant upon government advice and policies.  It is therefore unfair to blame them for what they were encouraged to do by those with far more power, wealth and education.   

 

 

Society today is very complex indeed and mostly beyond the ken of ordinary people, which is why we look to governments to help us.  If governments fail to do this, they should take the blame, along with those, like industrialists and bankers, who advised them.  IMO hitting upon Joe Bloggs is too easy and a cowardly way of apportioning blame in such a crisis.   We cannot put the clock back but governments can at least see that it doesn't run out of batteries, which would ultimately mean that our economies could go into a freefall affecting us all, no matter how upright and prudent we have been.   

 


 

 

Message Edited by Choisya on 02-21-2009 10:59 PM
Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: For KathyS.

Try again C, you didn't post a link. Get it right or I'll give you a laurel!!:smileymad:

Choisya wrote:

Try this one Kathy:smileyhappy:

 


KathyS wrote:
C - the first URL showed an error.  I can't view it.  I like your "Pears Soap box"-Bubbles  Thanks!  :smileyhappy:
Choisya wrote:

Especially for you Kathy:smileyhappy:

 

 

From my Pears Soap box:  In the UK Margaret Thatcher, encouraged by 'reaganomics', not only actively encouraged people on low incomes to buy houses, she made local Councils sell publicly funded council houses to them at huge discounts, thereby reducing the national rented housing stock and forcing even more people into buying homes because there were fewer to rent.  Tens of thousands of those same people, still on irregular incomes too low to support regular mortgage payments, were forced into negative equity by subsequent public financial crises and instead of having a comfortable rented council house suited to their income, have been forced to sell and take their families into slum accommodation thus increasing our social problems.  We now have the worst housing crisis in Europe and the lowest number of houses to rent.  People at the low end of the market, socially and financially, are not those with sufficient educaton to understand the ins and outs of stock exchanges and are therefore much more reliant upon government advice and policies.  It is therefore unfair to blame them for what they were encouraged to do by those with far more power, wealth and education.   

 

 

Society today is very complex indeed and mostly beyond the ken of ordinary people, which is why we look to governments to help us.  If governments fail to do this, they should take the blame, along with those, like industrialists and bankers, who advised them.  IMO hitting upon Joe Bloggs is too easy and a cowardly way of apportioning blame in such a crisis.   We cannot put the clock back but governments can at least see that it doesn't run out of batteries, which would ultimately mean that our economies could go into a freefall affecting us all, no matter how upright and prudent we have been.   

 


 

 

Message Edited by Choisya on 02-21-2009 10:59 PM

 

A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: For KathyS & Debs.

ROFL Debs - best laugh I've had today!:smileyvery-happy:   Here is the new link.

 

 

 


debbook wrote:
Try again C, you didn't post a link. Get it right or I'll give you a laurel!!:smileymad:

Choisya wrote:

Try this one Kathy:smileyhappy:

 


KathyS wrote:
C - the first URL showed an error.  I can't view it.  I like your "Pears Soap box"-Bubbles  Thanks!  :smileyhappy:
Choisya wrote:

Especially for you Kathy:smileyhappy:

 

 

From my Pears Soap box:  In the UK Margaret Thatcher, encouraged by 'reaganomics', not only actively encouraged people on low incomes to buy houses, she made local Councils sell publicly funded council houses to them at huge discounts, thereby reducing the national rented housing stock and forcing even more people into buying homes because there were fewer to rent.  Tens of thousands of those same people, still on irregular incomes too low to support regular mortgage payments, were forced into negative equity by subsequent public financial crises and instead of having a comfortable rented council house suited to their income, have been forced to sell and take their families into slum accommodation thus increasing our social problems.  We now have the worst housing crisis in Europe and the lowest number of houses to rent.  People at the low end of the market, socially and financially, are not those with sufficient educaton to understand the ins and outs of stock exchanges and are therefore much more reliant upon government advice and policies.  It is therefore unfair to blame them for what they were encouraged to do by those with far more power, wealth and education.   

 

 

Society today is very complex indeed and mostly beyond the ken of ordinary people, which is why we look to governments to help us.  If governments fail to do this, they should take the blame, along with those, like industrialists and bankers, who advised them.  IMO hitting upon Joe Bloggs is too easy and a cowardly way of apportioning blame in such a crisis.   We cannot put the clock back but governments can at least see that it doesn't run out of batteries, which would ultimately mean that our economies could go into a freefall affecting us all, no matter how upright and prudent we have been.   

 


 

 

Message Edited by Choisya on 02-21-2009 10:59 PM

 


 

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Financial Turmoil evokes familiar responses

Another unfortunate element of the stimulus situation is that the people responsible for overseeing the American auto industry obviously don't believe in the American auto industry -- most of them drive foreign cars. 

 

Full disclosure: I own two American made cars, a Grand Caravan and a Ford F-100.  My daughters drive my last car, a Ford Taurus, and my sons in law drive a GM pickup.  So we are an all-American family, and all these cars have been excellent cars for us. There's no reason why all these political folks should take the tax dollars that Americans pay them and go buy foreign cars with them.  And think that the American auto workers should trust them to oversee their jobs and futures.

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Frequent Contributor
Jon_B
Posts: 1,893
Registered: ‎07-15-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Financial Turmoil evokes familiar responses

[ Edited ]

The question of what an "American car" is, however, is not so simple these days as many American cars are manufactured in other countries (especially Mexico), and many foreign cars are manufactured in the US.  

 

For example, if an American works at one of the several large Honda plant in Ohio, are they  an "American auto worker"?

 

If a Mexican works at one of the large Ford plants in Mexico, are they an "American auto worker"?

 

You certianly have to look well beyond the location of company's headquarters when determining these things. 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 02-23-2009 09:27 AM
________________________________________

Need some help setting up your My B&N profile? Click here!

Looking for a particular book, but can't remember the title or author? Ask about it here!
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Financial Turmoil evokes familiar responses

Yes, there is some globalization, but if you look at the number of huge ships bringing cars from Asia into US ports, you would realize not as much as the foreign companies would have you believe.  (And are there any Volvo factories in the US?  If there are, I'm not aware of them.)

 

You also overlook the questions, where do the profits wind up, where are the highest paying executive jobs, where are the ultimate decisions about the critical issue of allocation of capital made, and where is the primary loyalty to a nation or government.

 

I realize that many people who buy foreign cars defend their decisions on the same basis you put forward, but it's still the case that if most Americans had been purchasing GM, Ford, or Chrysler cars over the past ten years, we wouldn't have the financial mess in our auto industry that we do.  Those who bought foreign cars, whatever their self-justification, added to this crisis.  

 

 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.