Greenspan has said repeatedly that derivatives spread risk and therefore are a good thing. Part of his reasoning is that one hand washes the other, that a low probability event in one nations economic system would be counterbalanced by the other healthy world economies. If you care to look at the charts of the Merva in Argentina, you must agree with that assessment. For further consideration there is the LTCM debacle, which should have been a lot worse. What reason is there to suspect that counterbalanced risks don't outweigh the outcome of a Black Swan event, even in the world's leading economy?

So far the Emerging Market indexes are doing just fine, economic decoupling has placed firewalls between the rest of the world and the contagion on Wall Street. No reason to suspect the worst is yet to come. BSC stock is up 200% from the prospective deal price.

If you think sentiment is negative, guess again.

In the political backrooms you know there is a hell of a lot of consternation going on among the Neocons. Not only did Bush turn out to be a Communist appeaser, (the EU might boycott the Olympics, what's that say about American Right Wing politics?) including watching Putin outlast Bush and Cheney, (who might as well get their tickets for Paraguay, their legacy for the American political scene is a litany of what not to do) but his economic leadership is Socialist as well. OH SURE, he can make a speech about restraint, and secretly chide Democrats? (hardly) about not overreacting to the financial crisis, while the Fed chief and the Presidents Working Group are pulling out policy angles not used since the Great Depression. It might be that the last official act of the Bush dirty tricksters over at FBI was to nail Spitzer, while the entire economy slid down the toilet, in AN ELECTION YEAR.

This set of cartoons could only have been written by their press secretary, because it misses everything that matters. Or more rightly it denies everything that matters to them and why not put Forbes face, and Kudlows face, and Laffers face, to make the point. This is just timid.

Trouble is Hillary is getting her skirts dirty. Then let's not forget Ms. Commodity trader with none of those annoying margin calls. I read a bit today about Fannie and Freddie and how Bill C is up to his neck in that debacle. Well they're all guilty, but for gods sake, George Bush was supposed to be a Conservative Republican, what got into him?

and when bankrupt builders torch their own work to collect the insurance money and get out of a losing deal, what is that? Is it terrorism if you call the cops afterwards and claim you are an eco-terrorist group.

recently there were some devastating wildfires in southern california, while the local government ordered mass evacuations on a scale before unheard of. people who wanted to save their homes ignored the warnings, and most of them did save their homes. those who were behind on their payments and holding underwater mortgages were allowed to get out.

in the wake of the 2003 fires some arsonists were found and prosecuted, but nobody was ever charged in any of the 2007 fires.

now whats your definition of (state sponsered) terrorism again?

There is plenty of oil, the countries which suppose their oil is running out simply don't want to exchange a valuable commodity for worthless paper dollars. Secondly what political reasons can you give for the United States to place restrictions on itself, while America's competitors consumer energy in profligate fashion? Would you prefer that the U.S. and Europe consume all of Russia's energy, or that Russia apply their energy to creating a second world power, while America becomes a second rate country?

America should consume as much of the worlds remaining energy as possible, because despite our wastefulness that energy will go to developing new energy technology, not missiles and tanks, and that will lead the world into the next millennium.

Energy conservation is energy surrender. When the oil well is dry who will be holding all the aces? I hope it is this country, (absent any of the current leadership)...

Most of the conservation programs simply trade off one form of energy for another. The Bush Ethanol program is the biggest boondoggle in the history of energy technology. Rising grain prices are now the catalyst of famine, and the political destruction of Mexico, which fits nicely into the Bush plan for a single North American government.

There is really no way Americans can overconsume the worlds food supply, but they could easily consume more than their share of energy. And that's a good thing. American culture warrants the use, including superior medical, business, and transportation technology.

Even with America's profligate energy consumption, you can breathe the air in most cities, unlike the air in Bejing. Air quality in the U.S. is improving, and will continue to do so.

Those who suggest we can live off the electricity from a few solar panels are aging hippies and green freaks. There is no way the average American will keep their quality of life with less electricity.

The real question is how are we going to keep it coming, with more expensive oil. America may not be the dominant military, or economic power, but American culture remains the envy of the world, and is ascending, with an electronic entertainment and communication network which binds the most advanced culture in the world to everyone else in the world. Its absolutely imperative we maintain this advantage. The next energy technology will be created with the older fossil fuel economy. Use it or lose it.