Letters to the Editor
walter_map
Published Letters: 1420 Editor's Choice: 20
-
@ Anonymous
[Read the article: No August vacation for the stock market]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Also, why would a bank give this guy a loan? Shouldn't they be held a little accountable?
The bank should suffer the consequences of their bad business decisions. Financial models do tell us that financial rewards do come with risks, after all. This is that 'risk' part.
My guess is any "bail out" that will occur will be for the poor little bank that suffers a loss, not the poor schmuck that is in over his head.
How else would the banks be able to afford those whopping bonuses for their top dealers?
Bailing out banks is a bad idea because it rewards bad business decisions and disconnects financial rewards from financial risks. It undermines The Almighty Free Market, takes care of Everything so no government regulation is therefore needed, which is what free market fundies would have you believe. Until they need a half trillion to tide them over.
It creates distorted incentives. It tells finance guys they have no responsibility for their actions, so they can go right ahead and pursue greed fearlessly - because the Conservative Mommy State will subsidize them with major welfare for the wealthy when they screw up. Which is exactly why they do it.
Some of us preferred the good old days, when narcissistic greedhead uber-failures flung themselves out of skyscraper windows. Now that's a market correction.
-
It's not as if we didn't see this coming.
[Read the article: Panic on Wall Street]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Notice the date.
MARKET WATCH; Mortgage Markets Are Out Of Control
August 17, 2003, Sunday
By GRETCHEN MORGENSON (NYT); Money and Business/Financial Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section 3, Page 1, Column 1, 668 words
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10F16FE3F540C748DDDA10894DB404482
Greed is good. Except, of course, when it's not.
I think these guys ought to be regulated. Just a thought.
-
@ dhadbawnik
[Read the article: Panic on Wall Street]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I'm more interested in is how this ties in to our whole sick culture. Health care administrators whose job it is to make sure you DON'T get the treatment you need. Credit card companies whose primary goal is to make sure you DON'T pay off your balance each month.
What is the common denomenator here?
We're the Can't Do nation.
And it's not just bridges. Has there ever been a period in our history when so many American plans and projects have, literally or figuratively, collapsed? In both grand and humble endeavors, the United States can no longer be relied upon to succeed or even muddle through. We can't remake the Middle East. We can't protect one of our own cities from a natural disaster or, it seems, rebuild after one. We can't even give our wounded veterans decent medical care.
We're supposed to be an optimistic, problem-solving nation, the country that tamed a vast wilderness, won World War II and the Cold War, put men on the moon, built the Panama Canal and the Hoover Dam.
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-commentarybig0812.artaug12,0,6831046.story
Apparently we also have to borrow hundreds of billions every year because we can't live within our means and can't pay up our debts even in good times. So it's a foregone conclusion we won't be able to pay up our debts, and the state of things will be even worse, when things turn south.
Everywhere you look, you see social systems that aren't working, cost way too much, or are falling apart: health care, schools, transportion infrastructure, consumer safety. And if you look closely at every one of these, you'll see greedy corporate representatives helping insecure legislators make the decisions on these issues. Not to make them better, but to make them more profitable.
We can't prevent a major city from getting blown off the map, and can't rebuild it when it does.
Honestly, I think we should tax these guys, and maybe pass some regulations.
It gets worse, of course."Incompetence" usually means bumbling, but the Bush White House's hostility to the federal bureaucracy has been quite purposeful. The administration has undermined the normal workings of agencies from the CIA to the Environmental Protection Agency, in part because they generate facts and opinions that conflict with political goals.
The White House has also seeded the government with appointees chosen for loyalty and ideological affinity, not competence. All of this has taken a toll on agencies' ability to process information, devise sound policies and communicate with the public.
-
Scorpio69er
[Read the article: Panic on Wall Street]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Excellent as always. Thanks.
We have seen this coming. I'm seeing private financial newletters advising their patrons to "take steps" on the matter of "short-term financial and personal security", meaning to start stocking up on currency and supplies.
I'm not feeling very good about having been right.
-
Rove knew
[Read the article: The poisonous rhetorical legacy of Karl Rove]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Full well that his politics of hate would result in the murderous killings of thousands and the despair of millions and would damage the country and the world for decades, and maybe irreversibly. There was no way he could not have known.
He didn't care. But it is more than that. It has been part of his political calculation and a tool for his political ambitions, no less than he used 'God' as a bludgeon for his political ambitions, and was very happy to do so.
If by 'fascist' you mean a criminal psychopath and a mass murderer, then you must rate Rove as the rankest fascist, worthy of nothing but as an example of the kind of person you want locked up next to Hannibal Lecter, not pushing the levers of government.