“The Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen faster under President Obama than under any new president in at least 90 years.”
They’ve finally done it!
“…the wipeout of dividend income by companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index this year already has surpassed what was eliminated in all of 2008.”
The rich are no longer getting richer!
Hats off to our friends on the progressive left as you mark this long sought after achievement. (Is there nothing that Obama can’t do?)
And the success doesn’t stop there. After all those years complaining about corporations and their “obscene profits”, well, there’s no longer much doubt that things are finally going your way. So, a toast to you and that “social science” degree in this brave new era of obscene losses. It couldn’t happen to more deserving folks!
Update – angry responses from the left in the comments help me to realize that I shouldn’t be so flippant. It’s just that with access to 5 sections of mixed bush/farmland and a lifetime’s supply of 30-30 shells, the words “impending economic collapse” stir the same sort of emotional response around here as “longer hunting season”.
Obama may be President however he is not calling the shots. That would be Pelosi and Reid.
No sarcasm intended, I honestly did not think there were people like bill stewart still around. Billy, if you’re under thirty, enjoy yourself and keep on believing. Reality will set in all too soon.
And he’s such a fine example of his kind – Marxist dialectic? Who believes in this crap anymore? Once upon a time it seemed plausible to me, but that was the height of the Cold War and the USSR seemed like a powerful rival; little did we know it was a rotten facade waiting to be kicked in.
Much to the chagrin of the stewarts of the world, the United States will eventually recover, despite the antics of President Flameout.
me no dhimmi – what ‘mode’ of mine are you talking about and, why is it a ‘cop-out’?
As for Obama being or not being a Marxist, I maintain that he is not. He does not follow any political theories; he doesn’t think about theories, about the infrastructure of operation, about their agendas. He has only one agenda, which is to control how people interact with him.
Socialism, unlike capitalism, is a strategy that rejects the individual as a self-empowered, self-organized, responsible person and instead, renders the individual dependent on a Higher Authority, the government and its bureaucracies. And, socialism can set up a Sovereign Leader who Rules by His Will. That’s why Obama works within the socialist agenda. But he, intellectually, isn’t interested in socialism for the good of the country. Or in Marxism.
I don’t think that you understand the distinction I am trying to make – between someone who acts according to his belief in the value of a political ideology..and someone..who uses a political ideology..because it is the only one in which he, psychologically, can function.
That’s why, as Rick points out, it’s Pelosi and Reid, and others, who are devising the policies and programs. Obama has no interest in or ability to do such tasks.
I agree that the US economy is mixed. As I said, there is no country in the world that is completely capitalist, i.e., with all parts of its economy privately run. The ratio is what is important – and the fact that a robust capitalist economy ought to focus on the strength of small and medium businesses.
Thank goodness I read Ayn Rand before I went to university which was a great vaccine against leftist professors. A great booster shot later on was Alexandre Solzhenitsyn. So don’t be sorry you didn’t go to university if you hadn’t been innoculated before!
Hee hee RE: the update…kinda of how we thought in the last couple of years.
Ditched the burbs as soon as we found what we were looking for. Have no debt except the mortgage and upcoming kids post secondary education.
(thankfully the kid picked a hands on skill and not a fluff&puff university course)
The combined pasture woods acreage we have will be very handy, especially with our new efficient wood stove. Solidly build bungalow, south east exposure with new highest rated windows, a point drain system and it’s easy to heat and the woods provide shade in the summer so the heat is not a problem then.
Experimenting with finding out what the deer like best, so far rotting apples are a sure draw.
Have a big wood shed, hen house, penned yard, and big garage that for some reason the floor doesn’t freeze, may be the natural spring that’s beneath it, but we were certainly surprised by that, even if the big door is open the floor never freezes.
Deep well and septic system.
So, we too will pass on gimmicky t-shits and buy “more” ammo and maybe some more young apple trees.
Good luck on the t-shirt sales though Bill.
Yours, atheistically.
He does not follow any political theories.
ET: Just, exactly, how do you know this? ‘Cos he hasn’t told the American people that he wanted to “transform” the American economy [read: deliberately destroy the market economy and replace it with socialism]. G-d, even Samuelson is now admitting that Obama lied — did a bait and switch.
I believe you used the phrase “capitalist mode” in your non-refutation of a syllogism which you mistakenly attributed to me. “Capitalist mode” gives you wiggle room. Do you say a woman is in “pregancy mode” or just pregnant, or not.
I understand your thesis about his pathological narcissim, having read pieces on this well before you posted on it. But to use your phrase, “why does it have to be either-or”? You seem to be denying his marxism because he’s a narcissist out for personal power.
I understand Socialism ET. BTW, have you ever read von Mises Socialism.. It explains not only why it doesn’t work, but why it CAN’T work. A masterpiece, easily accessible for a intelligent high school student.
Again, all I was trying to say was that Bill Stewart made a very fallacious, but wildly popular, argument that the financial meltdown was due to failure of the free market, which is patently wrong. Just as it was wrong in FDR’s day!
I know you believe this too, so, er, let’s just agree to agree.
Capitalism is the best system because the money flows to those who handle it best without regard to race, color or creed.
The USA has had the most advanced capitalist system in the world to day.
The problem that is presently occurring is that the real capitalism is trying to do its job and trying punish those who have made huge mistakes and made reckless gambles with vast amounts of money.
AIG – $220 billion assets, $440 billion liabilities.
Unfortuantely, we are watching the greasy political process interfere with the admninstration of justice, capitalist style.
There are many companies who would have already been put out of business by Mr Market but these companies have friends in politics who have prevented this from happening.
Can you say Paulson, of the recently departed Bush bunch?
He wasted billions of tax payer dollars on Wall Street when some of those banks should have had dirt over them already.
There is no easy way out to the other side.
There is simply too much unresolved debt still to be accounted for, and taxpayers everywhere will have a line that the gubmints had better not cross.
Every socialist in the world loves a fiat currency because it means there are essentially no restrictions on govt spending/debt.
I expect we will see an increase in real conservatism in the next few years.
The hurrier we go, the behinder we get.
I have stated before that I believed that Obama was a Marxist. My belief was based on who his influences were during his pre – presidential years as a youth and university student. I also was influenced in my thinking by passages from his books (both of which I am convinced were ghost written). I am now positive that he is just winging it. His belief system is very simply that of a successful slacker, life’s a full contact sport, no one gets out alive, it’s not whether you win or lose, it’s how good you looked trying. He’s a transparent narcissist. No wonder his marks are sealed.
Me no Dhimmi you’ve proven yourself repeatedly to big but One Big Dhummy, so I won’t even respond to your comment, compounding your ignorance by reference to Steyn only makes things worse, but suffice to say that if one buys that vanilla ice cream at McDonald’s vanilla and dog feces tend to be indistinguishable.
Tim in VT, my understanding is that the invisible hand refers precisely to a something that is beyond “the sum of all of the decisions made by the parties involved”, something that ultimately ensures that unregulated self-interest will “naturally” lead to the benefit of all individuals. It’s a marvelous harmonizing principle that converts greed into a public good. Kind of like the concept of God’s grace and forgiveness.
btw I reject your premise that there is a self-evident naturally occurring law of supply and demand that is either self-regulating or needs to be centrally regulated. So if you’re asking me what regulates today’s markets, I would say that it’s “the sum of all of the decisions made by the parties involved”, a long as we agree that there are no invisible market faeries converting greed into the public good that leads to the perfect society.
ET,
I agree with most of what you cite about capitalism and market economies.
I would also agree that there is “absolutely no historical deterministic law, where one economic mode ‘naturally and lawfully’ follows another one”. Wow, you’re almost sounding like a constructivist here, and I agree with you. Also, yes, my hope that socialism will follow capitalism relies upon a certain kind of messianism/utopianism just as my calculated speculation that such will happen relies on a Marxist reading of economic history. However, I don’t believe it to be an exercise in divination to suggest that the capitalist mode of production is also not natural nor eternal and will likely be supplanted, no to mention to suggest that capitalism is far superior to feudalism, as feudalism was superior to slavery.
What is a revelation is that wheat doesn’t grow in the arctic. Who knew? For me, the mode of production is tied to material survival and a kind of prioritizing the economy in the underpinning of societies more than anything. Then yes the ecology, demography, and technology interact in the process of subsistence.
I completely disagree with you that 1) “Marx had no knowledge of the ecological realities of different societies, of causes of population size; and of the relation of economic mode to these first two variables.” Not only was Marx was very accomplished economic historian, he also had a dialectical understanding of the relation between the mode of production and society (as opposed to a common misunderstanding of Marx as an economic determinist) that allows us to see common underpinnings of societies without obscuring their uniqueness.
I also completely disagree with you that “Socialism rejects the individual and therefore, can only function in non-surplus producing, No Growth economies.” This bastardization of socialism is wholly inconsistent with Marx’s understanding of human freedom and socialism.
Back to the troll penalty box…
me no dhimmi – ‘capitalist mode’, to me, means an economy that operates in the mode of capitalism. You are reading something into it that I didn’t put there! I don’t understand what you mean by ‘wiggle room’ in that phrase.
The reason I say that Obama isn’t a Marxist, or a follower of any political theory, ideologically, is because he’s never, ever, written or said a word about such ideologies or theories. Unlike you, I think that this lack is important.
I’m saying that he aligns himself with people who are ideologically socialist – only because socialism is a structure that reduces the power of individualism and locates all political and social power within a small elite Set. That Obama sees himself as elite, and his governance as all powerful, is obvious in his speeches. And in his past history of being the editor (not the author)of a journal, and of being a community organizer for ‘victims’. But he himself is not a believer in the ideology of socialism as ‘the best way for a nation to exist’.
I didn’t mistakenly attribute the syllogism to you. You are the one who set it up as a syllogism and I pointed out that is was, as a logical format, invalid.
And yes, I agree with you that Bill Stewart is wrong – the economic problem is most certainly not due to any failure of capitalism. After all, the housing mortgage free for all was not a capitalist activity but a socialist one, where the govt told the banks to lend to people who couldn’t afford houses.
“my understanding is that the invisible hand refers precisely to a something that is beyond ‘the sum of all of the decisions made by the parties involved'” Bill Stewart.
First, thank you for answering the question, your answer is enlightening. I get it now, you are arguing with a straw man. I have been hanging around on conservative blogs for years, have many discussions with my conservative friends, and I have never once met a person who believes that the “invisible hand” is anything more than a metaphor, that it has a separate existence. I am pretty sure that most of the conservatives that you guys argue with are ones you make up in your head.
ET: Thanks, I know we agree 100% on Obama.
I respect (and mortally fear) your command of logic, but you DO occassionally slip: because he’s never, ever, written or said a word about such ideologies or theories.
Again, you don’t know that. All his records — ALL — have been sealed. We don’t even have his thesis (we have Hillary’s). His academic records, even his law clients. AND, if you were a marxist and at the same time desirous of doing a soft coup on the American government, wouldn’t you make sure that you didn’t have this public conversation you seem to find necessary? AND, let’s not forget the cult of personality he ran with MSM’s help. That is something entirely new for the US. This is not just well left of centre liberalism (Ted Kennedy); this is something much different (marxism, politically entrepreneurial marxism).
Has Hugo Chavez written such dissertations? How about Castro, Che? Again, I’m using the word in the looser populist sense. I’m not that interested in how much of the doctrine he’s ingested. For one thing, clearly he’s too much of a lazy bastard dilletante (sp?) to have read the dreary Communist Manifestfo.
This may sound paraoid, but I’m also becoming more and more alarmed at the possibility that he is indeed a Manchurian candidate of some kind.
You often mention Pelosi, Reid. In my opinion — if you’ll excuse the inelegant language — they’re just loser schmucks. Think Soros — there’s the MAN. Think about an Islamic country(ies). Think of all that undocumented foreign money he raised (even shutting down the address verification system for credit card donations).
Judging by your remarks (and a couple others) I get the feeling that to be a Marxist you must live in a garret, and read all that dreary stuff over candlelight. But not really, eh? Just as you don’t have to have read about and written dissertations on capitalism, to be a capitalist.
Going back a couple of weeks.
http://762justice.com/2009/02/23/putin-obama-idiot-for-adopting-socialism/
I’m assuming Bill Stewart is NOT a troll but, using penny’s immortal phrase a “young person” seeking instruction.
Echoing Tim in VT, Bill Stewart, you really didn’t understand the invisible hand. Hint: it ain’t a Joo-banker.
Adam Smith’s famous quote:
It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.
The invisible hand, Bill, is that thing which has me help you, and you me, even if we don’t know each other. And even if we did, not because we are setting out to help each other, rather to help ourselves. Enlightened self-interest. This is how we achieve spontaneous order — something all elites hate, as it deeply offends their urge to centrally plan our lives, because they know what’s best for us.
Tim in VT,
I get it too. Some are creationists and some read the bible allegorically. If all you’re looking for is an idiosyncratic metaphor that describes the sum total of decisions made by interested parties in the market, why not simply call it market activity or something less ominous and with less history than “the invisible Hand”?
btw trust me, there are many people who actually believe that an ethical force ever so slightly nudges the direction of the marketplace towards the betterment of society.
Right wing Libertarians and free speechers tell me this routinely when I ask them about the self-regulating part of the “self-regulating market”. When asked how they can be sure that a self-regulating market won’t simply result in a Hobbesian race to the bottom, they calmly reply that the Invisible Hand is behind the economy, or that the invisible force of Reason will ultimately dispel all forms of unreason in an unregulated marketplace of free speech. If it’s made of straw, I’d like to hear your meaty response to the question.
ET be careful, I think One Big Dhummy is smitten with you.
me no dhimmi – look, if you are a follower of a particular ideology, then, there ought to be some evidence of your adherence to that theory. In print or in oral speeches. With regard to your continued insistence that Obama IS a Marxist, there is no evidence.
And contrary to your method of arriving at conclusions, which seems to rely only on your own wish ‘that it be so’, I rely on objective evidence. And this evidence would exist even before he decided to run for the Senate and to run for the Presidency. There is no evidence.
You ignore my point that there is no evidence of his following, for its ideological nature, any political theory. The only reason he is embedded with the socialists is because it, as a way of structuring a society, sets up an Elite Set of Guardians and a Sovereign. Obama can function only within such a framework. If he’s surrounded by individualists – he becomes extremely anxious.
Castro is most certainly a committed communist and that’s obvious in his speeches. Chavez is a self-declared socialist, a self-declared Trotskyite, someone who has praised Marxism and who, like Obama, prefers socialism because it enables a governing Elite and a Sovereign. It was Chavez, by the way, who said that the world faced a choice between ‘bararism and socialism’ ..as our friend Bill Stewart wrote on this thread.
No, I doubt if Obama is a brainwashed Manchurian president. He most certainly is severely dysfunctional in the psychological sense; his pathological narcissism means that he MUST set up infrastructures where he is in total control of others.
Put that pathology into a presidential power and he will try to control everyone and reduce the power of the population. Note also, that even now, Obama is not interested in the policies and programs that enable this control – he leaves that to Congress. He has, as Krauthammer pointed out today of FOX, no interest in the analysis and structuring of policies and programs.
He left the ‘stimulus packag’ to Pelosi and Reid. He’s left Stem Cell programs to Congress – his changing this bill simply gave him more political control over research.
No, one doesn’t have to live in a garrett to be a Marxist, but there has to be some evidence of a commitment to the ideological theory to be a Marxist. Obama isn’t committed to any ideological theory for its political nature. Again, he’s embedded with socialism only because he, psychologically, can’t function in a political milieu that operates with the freedom of the individual.
And no, you don’t have to read dissertations on capitalism to be a capitalist. BUT, you do have to, in words and actions, reveal your support for the duties and responsibilities of the individual, the operations of the free market, the right of private property, the necessity for small and medium businesses, the necessity for a strong middle class with the money for private investment. All of these actions would show a commitment to capitalism. Obama obviously shows none of this behaviour.
BUT, if I’m a politician, and not just a businessman, then I have to articulate my actions in words. Obama’s words are most certainly socialist (not Marxist), but, my claim is that even his words don’t examine the socialist infrastructure and its social/economic results. He doesn’t think through policies and programs.
Obama HAS to be in an elitist position; he has to be in a position where he is a member of the Elite Set of Guardians – where everyone else is just a meek and adoring, or frightened, follower. I’m saying that Obama’s agenda is not based on his assessment of ‘the best way for a society to operate’, but is based on his psychological need of ‘the only way for Obama to exist’. And that way is to dominate and reduce the freedom of everyone, and make everyone dependent on the State Guardians.
Now, such an agenda based on a psychological pathology, is, quite frankly, far more frightening than your scenario that Obama is a closet Marxist or a brainwashed intruder.
One big Dhummy: “The invisible hand, Bill, is that thing which has me help you, and you me, even if we don’t know each other.”
Given the level of fear and hatred of the Left, Islam, Progressives generally, I’m assuming the Invisible Hand has been exorcised from this particular marketplace. Because generosity and respect for differing opinions is not the metier round here.
But just so I can sleep tonight ;-), you are concurring with me that the Invisible Hand is not simply a metaphor for the sum total of market decisions. but an imperceptible, almost supernatural exterior Benevolent force (which was why I referenced the Christian God and concept of grace and forgiveness) that guides the market.
Ezra Benson once said, “If you succeed, I am a failure.”
Many often don’t know or convenientily forget the sacrifice in succeeding.
And don’t ever forget there’s alot of responsibility in the signing of a paycheque.
Randu: “Oh Kate, I just love watching you slam university education.”
Hey, Randu: I’ve got two university degrees, which have helped me find work that pays much better than working in retail, but I don’t kid myself that having a university degree is any indication of intelligence (present company excluded, of course).
In fact, I know a lot of people with university degrees who are pretty dumb and couldn’t have an informed discussion — heck, ANY discussion — on most topics.
Kate’s slamming universities has everything to do with the lowering of their standards and their knee-jerk lib-left-socialist biases. Universities have become sell-outs to big bucks; they expanded crazily in the past 30 years to capitalize on government grants and subsidies, letting pretty much anyone into their “hallowed” halls — how about hollow halls?
Most universities have gutted true education and become diploma factories. Every student carries with him/her a dollar amount that the universities are after. ‘Used to be you could be really proud of a university degree, and now it has about the same cache as a high school diploma did 40 years ago — only $60,000 more expensive. It’s no guarantee of smarts, just that you paid your highly inflated tuition and got at least 50 on your papers and tests.
Some prize.
Yikes, by the way, me no dhimmi, and I know that it matters not a whit to anyone but myself, but the syllogistic logical fallacy in one of your posts wasn’t ‘undistributed middle’, but ‘undistributed minor’ premise or ‘illicit minor’. Ah well.
bill stewart – I disagree with you that ‘capitalism’ is superior to ‘feudalism’. They each operate in different population levels and can’t be compared in a linear scale of..what kind of progressive scale could be used…?
Why should the capitalist mode be supplanted?
And no, I don’t agree with you that Marx has a ‘dialectical’ or any understanding of the relation between the mode of production and society. He was woefully ignorant of the relation between ecology,geography, technology and population demographics. Ever read his outline of the ‘Asiatic mode’? Heh. Rubbish.
And yes, he was a linear determinist, a believer in historicism and ‘economic destiny’. And his simplistic reductionism of everything to groups, and to conflicts between these groups (classes). Certainly, I agree with Marx’s hope for a decrease in state influence, but certainly not its vanishing, for we are both individuals and social beings, and our political structures must reflect and enable these two seemingly opposite natures.
I also disagree with his classless society, with his utopianism, and also, disagree with you that socialism doesn’t reject the individual. I consider that it does, for it groups them into classes, or other holisms.
Everytime the Oweriginal makes a statement/decision I think of the cover of LedZep4.
Great summary of Marxism, ET. Historicism. Class warfare. Dreary, stuff. The iron law of wages. That wages above subsistence would drop when the population rose. And all along totally ignoring the very real rise in living standards as he sat in the British Library. The Labour Theory of Value. He couldn’t prove it. Knew he couldn’t. Left it to Engels to sort out, which he couldn’t. A dishonest charlatan. A bum. A lazy bastard.
Evidence. Well, as discussed before, I have only circumstantial evidence that Obama is a marxist, but lots and lots of it. As you know, circumstantial evidence is not ideal, but you can go to jail for life on it, if there’s enough of it. You’ve got the easy side of this debate: ya see, I can’t make you prove he is NOT a marxist. You can’t prove a negative, right?
One little exercise would be to try and find anything he’s suggested that would be inconsistent with marxism. I once made some young person very mad at the Coyne site for saying Trudeau was a communist. I soothed his tender feelings by suggesting he was as communistic as he could be — within our system, which he was not going to be able to overthrow, but which he would have loved to be able to do. But he WAS a communist, no doubt about that. I know from people who know: they had quite the CSIS file on the bastard.
I see Obama along those lines.
And while I mostly agree with your take on Obama, I feel you are dead wrong in your theory that he is not a ideologue!
“When asked how they can be sure that a self-regulating market won’t simply result in a Hobbesian race to the bottom”
I don’t believe in unregulated capitalism. I do believe in the law of supply and demand. I do believe that markets tend to allocate resources rationally, I also believe that without a governing morality that does not exist in the market, that it would result in a race to the bottom. This is why I am not a libertarian, though I do sympathize with them.
If you run into somebody who believes that some kind of divine intelligence guides markets, you have my concurrence that that person is an idiot.
The problem with Obama is that he thinks he knows better than the market which direction the economy should grow, and this has always led to disaster in the past. You might point to Europe and say that they have done just that, but look at the “French Exception”, they maintain their standard of living through the vestiges of their colonial empire, exploiting ancient political connections through bribery, selling out the local citizens, or Germany, which runs permanent trade deficits with the US, great strategy that has turned out to be. Once the US gives up, which engine is going to pull the train of dead weight European socialist states? China? They don’t want the job. Russia? I can’t see how. Europe? Only if they turn right. This worldwide socialism you dream of will really mean worldwide poverty.
I don’t think that Obama is a socialist. I think that he is, like France, Italy, Germany, even the UK a little, fascist. The “third way”. Global Warming is about implementing fascism. The govt will impose confiscatory taxes, borrow steeply, print money, and issue huge contracts to businesses like GE to build wind turbines to meet the new crisis, climate change. If this is not green fascism, I don’t know what is.
Bill Stewart, I think perhaps you misunderstand some of us.
There are people in the world (like me) who don’t like being told what to do. They don’t like paying money to bureaucrats who at best waste it, at worst use it to further reduce what freedoms are left.
Communism is the most extreme end of the range of things I don’t want to put up with in my life. So I have little use for people who promote it because its more “rational”, or more “efficient”, or more “moral”.
I disagree. I think the more well meaning people interfere with my decisions, income, belongings and behavior, the more it p1sses me off.
Frankly I don’t give a rip how inefficiently my freedom distributes wealth. Its my wealth, I’LL be the one who decides how it gets distributed thanks very much. I’ll defend my freedom and seek to increase it, at your expense if need be. So you can pretty much stand clear or brace for impact, baby.
Hope this clears things up for you.
I love that update Kate.
no, me no dhimmi, the problem with your attempt to ‘prove’ that Obama is a marxist is that you not only don’t have any circumstantial evidence, but you have NO evidence. That’s my whole point.
As for my argument that he is not an idealogue, my reasoning is that there is NO evidence that he is.
I prefer to base my conclusions on evidence.
ET: There is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that strongly suggests (that’s what circumstantial evidence does, right, it suggests, it doesn’t prove) that he is a Marxist, although I’ll admit he’s not a marxist scholar, or a scholar of anything from what I can see. Over a 12-year academic “career” he wrote no scholarly articles or books. NONE.
If you’d prefer “neo-marxist” or “socialist” or per Jonah Goldman a “liberal fascist” or “hard left radical” or “Fabian socialist” I’m OK with those.
I tell you what: as soon as I hear something from him or see some action which is inconsistent with Marxism, I’ll give it up.
Somewhere, today, I came across a Obama statement to the effect that there was no reason that income taxes couldn’t be as high as 100% as long as government provided sufficient value for that money. That’s quite radical, eh?
Bill Stewart is great. We should try to keep him around. “The left rightly condemns the USSR as no less an imperial capitalist power (state capitalism) than the US”: 2:14PM. I guess I’m silly, but I just love that sort of thing.
Now if I read Kate correctly, and she’s planning to hole up for the coming civilizational collapse in a prairie compound with a bunch of guns and canned food and schnauzers – living off deer and sniping at tax-collectors – well, I just hope her internet access somehow remains intact.
Re: “… your philosophy of the untrammeled unregulated free market …”
Problem is, there are millions of regulations on the books in all countries, states, provinces, and other places. So …
“The reality is we haven’t had capitalism in almost a century now.” is closer to the truth.
Re: “ET I have to correct one minor item in your comment on the under or non acheiving Obama. One position he held was with Acorn and in the 90’s he initiated and led the legal team in the court action he brought after CitiCorp. Seems they were not closely adhereing to the Carter/Clinton banking requirement to make loans to ‘deserving’ inner city dwellers. Check out citibank stock price today, as a result.”
So if the meltdown was caused by forced bad mortgages and Ohbummer was the lead lawyer in this case, then he himself has a fair amount of responsibility for it?
Quite a bunch of doozies from Bill Stewart today …
“Guess what comes after capitalism? Barbarism OR Communism (the social appropriation of socially produced surplus). The choice is ours to make.”
Nothing should come “after capitalism”. Once we have true full-fledged capitalism, the standard of living will be so high no one will dream of replacing it with anything else. Communism, with its death toll of 100 million innocents in the previous century, is already regarded as barbaric except by a few power-hungry demagogues.
“Tim in VT, my understanding is that the invisible hand refers precisely to a something that is beyond ‘the sum of all of the decisions made by the parties involved’, something that ultimately ensures that unregulated self-interest will ‘naturally’ lead to the benefit of all individuals. It’s a marvelous harmonizing principle that converts greed into a public good. Kind of like the concept of God’s grace and forgiveness.
btw I reject your premise that there is a self-evident naturally occurring law of supply and demand that is either self-regulating or needs to be centrally regulated. So if you’re asking me what regulates today’s markets, I would say that it’s ‘the sum of all of the decisions made by the parties involved’, a long as we agree that there are no invisible market faeries converting greed into the public good that leads to the perfect society.”
There are no “market faeries”, there is only “the sum of all of the decisions made by the parties involved”, as you put it. But this helps reduce the impact of “greed”. If we define greed as desiring more than one is entitled to, then since other people are looking out for their own interests, few are likely to accede to your desires, as they will be losing out. This is basic self-interest. Oh, and greed doesn’t turn into a “public good”. There is no such thing as a “public good”.
“I don’t believe it to be an exercise in divination to suggest that the capitalist mode of production is also not natural nor eternal and will likely be supplanted”
It is the only natural mode of production, because it is based on reality, truth, freedom and justice. Marx and other socialists merely replaced mystic faith in God with mystic faith in society and/or government.
“For me, the mode of production is tied to material survival and a kind of prioritizing the economy in the underpinning of societies more than anything.”
No one “prioritizes” the economy under capitalism. People make their own individual decisions about what to produce and what to consume. Only the socialists want to take over and “prioritize” because they think they know better than everybody else and they want to tell everyone what to do. They are parasites who produce nothing and usually pay themselves exorbitantly.
“[Marx] also had a dialectical understanding of the relation between the mode of production and society”
“Dialectics” is a marginal concept at best, that Hegel tried to turn into a central one. He was full of B.S.
“Right wing Libertarians and free speechers tell me this routinely when I ask them about the self-regulating part of the ‘self-regulating market’. When asked how they can be sure that a self-regulating market won’t simply result in a Hobbesian race to the bottom, they calmly reply that the Invisible Hand is behind the economy, or that the invisible force of Reason will ultimately dispel all forms of unreason in an unregulated marketplace of free speech.”
First of all, only people who don’t believe in free speech refer to others as “free speechers”, as we’ve seen from the Mark Steyn case and others.
An economy is based on voluntary trade between individuals for mutual benefit. All progress comes from individuals figuring out how to produce goods and services better and/or cheaper. Business profits follow from improving the standard of living of the masses, and indicate they are using resources efficiently. Wages rise in accordance with an increase in capital investment per worker. Only socialist societies involve a “race to the bottom”.
“you are concurring with me that the Invisible Hand is not simply a metaphor for the sum total of market decisions. but an imperceptible, almost supernatural exterior Benevolent force (which was why I referenced the Christian God and concept of grace and forgiveness) that guides the market.”
It is a metaphor, not a real “thing”, although it is an epistemological concept, like “causality” for instance.
On the other hand, Hegelian/Marxian mysticism revolved around the former’s “Spirit” which turned into the latter’s concept of “History” as a supernatural, exterior force (whether benevolent or not is open to debate).
Charles @ 1:39pm … I don’t think that Alan Greenspan is a dimwit, and it is quite possible that he flooded the money supply on purpose. Greenspan was one of the dozen proofreaders for Atlas Shrugged, and would be very familiar with the character of Francisco D’Anconia.
Only the hard right believe that Obama caused this recession.
Kate didn’t you run a series of articles spoofing the notion that we were heading for a recession? Ooops…. err it’s all Obama’s fault.
Well, this has been a great exchange of ideas. Since the world is heading into the recession with every government throwing money into every industry, noticing them union backed [90%] is getting most of it. I don’t see small business owners getting much, so of the invisible hand everybody talks about is not for everybody. So taking that ‘the governments’ of the world today is going one step closer to communist socialism at warp speed.
Entertaining discussion, and from all quarters. (The ET/Dhimmi colloquy reminds me of the old Bill Hicks joke–his friends were torn over George H. Bush…some wanted to boil him in oil, others wanted to kick his head down the street, or sentiments to that effect). Best of all, the spelling has been generally flawless. No one has written “linched” “rift-raft” or (my favourite) “lamb basted” in any post I’ve read. It’s been a treat to hover and watch the interplay. Time to ditch the Globe. Blog submissions are far superior. (A quick aside. There was the whole “invalid logic” business regarding Bill Stewart’s attempted syllogism. Was that logical fallacy not also known, informally, as the “No True Briton” move? Seems to trigger memories of first year Phil. Not that there’s anything good about that.)
Yes, Jose-
Kate spent months mocking the idea of a recession – now it’s undeniable – oops, it’s Obama’s fault.
Same thing with: for awhile it was hilarious that Obama was mimicking Bush’s policies & infuriating lefties – But whoops! Now Obama’s a dangerous socialist!
Obama’s a bumbling incompetent – except when he’s a dangerous Lenin/Mao figure.
Consistency in thought? A coherent philosophy going forward? Nope. SDA hasn’t got it.
Throwing any sh– to see if it sticks to the wall? Yep.
Modern conservatism: the dumb ugly kids muttering against the smart, good-looking kids in the schoolyard. Boo-hoo-hoo!
No, Jose – I ran a series of articles spoofing a media that was trumpeting recession talk at a time when the economy was humming along nicely. But in case you haven’t noticed, now that a recession is actually here, they’ve had to bump up the volume to hysteria levels, just to keep people’s attention and their remaining few subscribers.
Nice to see the new President doing his part.
Aw, feel better now bleating one?
Why are leftards always on about people ‘looks’?
Because hollyweirds minions are all about that and the all encompassing hurt “feelings”?
Might be why their devout followers so impressed with a few bulging muscles and hip hop slop as entertainment.
Translation of Kate:
“Back when people were rightly predicting an oncoming recession I mocked them every step of the way (can’t be a recession when Boosh is in power!)”
“Now that there predictions have been proven correct beyond any doubt, with Warren Buffet saying ‘the economy’s going off a cliff’, I mock them ’cause they’re getting too hysterical – I mean come on, a worldwide global meltdown can’t be so bad!”
And when Obama acknowledges the severity of the situation, like so many others, I say he’s ramping up the hysteria about a recession I denied was coming too…
Because he’s not Boosh in his manly codpiece!”
“No, Jose – I ran a series of articles spoofing a media that was trumpeting recession talk at a time when the economy was humming along nicely.”
Humming nicely on a pile of debt, various Ponzi schemes and voodoo economics.
Kate, anybody with half a brain could have seen this recession (which will get a lot worse, by the way, as you seem to agree with now). That the timing of such predictions is wrong doesn’t negate they were right all along.
As to your comment re. owning land and ammo: spoken like a true doomer. I never thought that of you Kate! Glad to see I’m not alone.
So bleet, are you filthy, stinking, obscenely rich now from all the short positions you bought back in 2006?
In 2007, did you just know in your heart that Citibank was heading for penny stock territory?
Did you sell your Lehman Brothers stock at the peak, right before it went to zero?
And just one more question, since you’re the smartest guy on this thread. Why is it that Lefty commenters always default to crude sexual innuendo when the facts aren’t going their way?
Just wondering.
Hell, yes I miss “W”. Let’s compare cabinets to start. One knew there was a grown-up at the helm not a metrosexual attempting a man’s job.
To answer your questions, Phantom – no, I didn’t do any of those things.
But then I didn’t spend my time posting countless snarky posts like Kate did, demeaning anyone who saw the big recession coming.
So: where’s the mea culpa? Where’s the admission from Kate that she was dead wrong, as usual?
As for the ‘sexual innuendo’, hey, it was your heartthrob who came out with his codpiece on display during the ‘Mission Accomplished’ speech, remember that?
“Mission Accomplished”. Snarky “Recesion Watch” posts. ‘The invasion will pay for itself’. ‘Saddam has WMDs’.
You folks sure are consistent, I’ll give you that.
Consistently wrong!
“hey, it was your heartthrob who came out with his codpiece on display during the ‘Mission Accomplished’ speech, remember that?”
bleet sure has an uncommon obsession with Bush’s, err, ‘manhood’. A little insecure, are we bleet?
“”…the wipeout of dividend income by companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index this year already has surpassed what was eliminated in all of 2008.””
The smart money is pulling out of companies committed to annuity payouts and pension funds…the word is that both these private pension vehicles will evaporate as they start to consume their seed capital to survive…and there is talk the social security entitlement is threatened as well. This is a sign post of imminent collapse.
At any rate, I think Kate is not clowning when she intimates there could be an economic crisis of the magnitude which could produce wide spread looting (live stock, fuel, unbanked cash) when resulting vital commodity shortages start to sink in….also seeing the religious fervor the morbid little leftards in the commentary have in “wealth” redistribution, I can see them as the first in line to loot others.
Statist collectivism is orderly administrated theft…collectivists in “crisis management” are little more than predatory bandit lords leading looting hordes in the final pillage and rape of a once productive nation.
Over the last few weeks I have heard on several American talk shows small businessmen call in saying they will be forced to lay people off due to tax increases and the faltering economy. Who are they going to lay off and how will they decide who to lay off? They all said that they noted which cars in the company parking lot had Obama bumper stickers. LOL.