Letters to the Editor
Majorajam
Published Letters: 308 Editor's Choice: 12
-
The endgame
[Read the article: How Wall Street broke the free market]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is just affirmation of where capital has been flowing for a while, and with extreme prejudice over the last five years. The soverign wealth funds are all from countries that financed eye-atering $800bn current account deficits- and their parabolic reserve growth evidences debt trap dynamics (the era of the consumer relying on debt for purchases is waning- the era of the consumer relying on debt to service debt is waxing). Only, there will be a point when the Ponzi game ends, varying only by the extent to which the players involved are willing to delude themselves or have incentives to delude others (politicians across the globe come to mind).
Many economists have noted that for external governments to continue to amass USD claims, eventually we as a nation will have to accept foreign ownership of massive percentages of our capital stock- I saw one scenario with the number 40%. That process, only now begun with the building of influential stakes in many notable US firms (the banks, but also AMD and a few other notables), is ultimately a political non-starter. We frankly won't let it happen. And that is assuming that the investments don't go south on these funds badly before such a backlash is inspired (and Citi, Merril & Bear have serious capital adequacy issues against huge backlogs of dodgy looking debt).
Either of two things will happen- foreign governments will get frustrated at being not only forced to hold dollars, but unable to invest those dollars in anything outside of paper that can't even be considered a store of value, and pull the plug, or the Fed will inflate the claims away (and clearly some combination as either catalyst will inspire the other- the Fed will print before it lets the financial industry implode). All that spells an end to lifestyles as we know them, and a dramatic realignment of global power and America's place in in both militarily (this just in, we can't afford the bill), economic, and intellectual- we are destined to lose some of this as so much is foreign. Change, it would seem, is inevitable irresective of the vagaries of the political process.
-
I didn't get to see the debate...
[Read the article: The Democrats defeat the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but found it most encouraging that there was no story about it on Drudge. This was the most succinct and reliable affirmation that the Democrats have stopped warring at their expense and the GOP and media's benefit, and its about time. The change in tone of campaign is welcome and good for the party and the country.
-
First they came for the beltway reporters...
[Read the article: CNN's John King responds]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's a helluva takedown for one interview. As long as we're affixing King with 100% of the liability for the short comings of our press, in the context of no less than a decade of history that is, why don't we see if we can assess his culpability for smallpox?
Don't mind me, I'm just having a bit of a left-wing blogosphere theodicy at the moment. It will pass as soon as we get some right wing nut jobs in here to distract me. Shiny objects.
Until it does though, I feel compelled to note the rather inconvenient fact that any hard hitting questions a journalist might formulate are necessarily forged in the context of implicit values and standards whose legitimacy 300 million people aren't likely to agree on, (think specifically of the questions you might like to see asked of John McCain, and then what it is you are really asking). The British press is a fascinating study in the degree of groupthink required to circumvent that, and the degree to which it can be circumvented. But pay no attention to the pachyderm in the living room, lest it impugn on our righteous indignation.
-
I get it...
[Read the article: Did Obama win the Nevada delegate count?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So the caucusers don't select the national delegates, just which of Bill Clinton's staffers do? Joan, fyi, they're saying, and you're reporting verbatim, that the Obama campaign is wrong on a technicality. If this works at all like say, the electoral college, than the state delegates should equate to the national delegates, no? At the very least, what the Clinton camp has come back with is not helping clarify matters.
Also fyi, there are some other things to report here, like the overwhelming evidence that identity politics have decided the outcome- in particular that there are far fewer blacks in the electorate as people who don't like the idea of a 'black president'. And then there's the Obama camps accusation of voter irregularities, and that lovely push poll that tells prospective voters that Barack Hussein Obama has accepted money from special interests, and didn't you know that about Barack Hussein Obama, or were you not told that by Barack Hussein Obama. Probably its just the state Republicans up for some giggles.
Let's tell more than just the story of glorious hard fought victory, shall we?
-
On Obama and Regan
[Read the article: Did Obama win the Nevada delegate count?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]By the way, Clinton has heaped praise on Regan before, claiming that she admired his skills. Their joint letter after his death could not have been more laudatory. I fail to see how that differentiates them from anything Obama has said. To set the record straight, Obama has done is to correctly note that the Republican Party with the rise of Movement Conservatism became the party that had ideas (he never said good ones- see here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/18/195212/284/181/439165). The Democrats had the New Deal and the War on Poverty- the Republican ideas were to undo all that. Defending programs and principles already in place is not something people usually think of as an idea.
It's worth noting the irony here. Remarkable. Bill Clinton spent two terms as President doing not much of anything outside of enacting Regan Revolution ideas- welfare reform, 'the end of Big Government as we know it', spending cuts- and Obama gets tagged for it in the primary. Never let it be said that the Clintons were not masters of distorting the debate.