"But the lack of sustainability for the current economic system derives from the fact that it requires growth. While there are people who have proposed that the growth could be restricted and shifted"

i hadn't considered a non-growth solution. I read everything Krugman writes and the other day he said, I'm paraphrasing, that the economy is still in deep trouble because he doesn't see any job growth in the future. I recall him often predicating what he says on the fact that the population is growing at such-and-such rate therefore requiring the creation of a respective number of jobs. That kind of thinking is ingrained in me. So I am saying that I feel that population growth requires economic growth.

I feel that changing from a invention-production economy to a service-based economy was a mistake because it was undertaken to make money for the elite, not to benefit the populace. As much as I agree with Krugman I disagree with Friedman who continuously espouses all the glorious benefits of a global economy. He, it seems to me is wrong on everything, going back to invading Iraq. A virtual economy is beyond what I am capable of imagining.

"To the reason for wanting an economy not based on growth is ecological sustainability -- much more basic than fairness. The issue I was raising about employment is correctly an issue of fairness. Given that there may not be a need for so much productive output, how do you decides who works, and on what, and when? And how do you support the non-working population, which is currently supported by economic growth (retirement investment, for example)."

Again these thoughts are beyond my comprehension. Not many people care about ecological sustainability. Maybe in the future but not in my lifetime. You're talking about rethinking how the great majority of people think about living life.

Hell, I'm deeply cynical and wouldn't trust one politician or lawyer under any circumstances. Oh, also any banker.

Let me propose to you an idea that is much more simple to address the problem, but also something we could hardly implement.

Let's call a spade a spade and do unto others as we would like them to do unto us.

"society must create a system of workers and non-workers that is sustaining and perceived as fair. I don't know how to do that, but I would submit that it needs to be figured out and figured out fast."

You're right, the way things are is not sustainable.

You're right, in that the bailout was wrong, selfish, grandiose and only benefited GS because Paulson sure as hell knew that bailing out AIG was putting $16 billion in to GS's coffers.

But these GS megalomaniacs have created a system that benefits only themselves and their colleagues in the elite establishment. They announced enormous profits today through gambling in a game which they created and where they paid off congress to run amok. The massive problem they have right now is something that they can't control because their devised system, as you point out, can't possibly keep paying out outrageous rewards for their controlled risk taking.

I think some reasons that their selfish methodology for screwing over us is unsustainable because;

1) A select few are benefiting while the rest of us are being gouged

2) It is a Ponzi scheme where nothing is being produced, just money being taken out for their indulgence through subterfuge and payoffs

3) It is not a invention-production type economy, as you say, but a service based economy where nothing is made. Labor is cheap. Out-sourcing in prevalent or bringing in cheap labor from foreign countries to improve profit margins and discriminating against Americans reduces the capacity of the consumer. Pretty soon we won't be capable of making anything and won't have any money to consume anything.

4) Off shore tax protection for GS and their ilk so that only the middle class pay taxes and they don't.

5) They seek immediate gratification for their desires and damn the consequences.

This uncontrolled greed has been going on for a long time and people like wgsalter keep working at perpetuating a giant hoax on Americans. An honorable profession, my ass!

I don't see any solution. $3.7 billion in profits! Nothing of value added to the economy! Where did the money come from and where did it go? Why in the hell is this system necessary? Ludicrous and repulsive!

"Walk to where?"

AIG keeps saying that the retention bonuses are needed to retain the "best and brightest."

Where are these guys and girls going to go after screwing up the whole fucking world. If the government didn't bail them out they'd be like the rest of us. Utterly screwed!

Perhaps wgsalter knows where these clowns are needed?

Good night!

"But the profession is necessary and provides the benefits I describe,"

I know that logically I can't go from a particular to universal. But this anecdote I think relates to the discussion.

I had a Citibank MasterCard. Almost immediately after they received the bail-out money they raised my rate to 16.9% as I recall. Also newly imposed fees and the missed payment penalty resulted in an interest rate of around 29%. That's my recollection!

I immediately terminated the card and the rep and I got into an argument. I told her I couldn't believe that they were raising the rates right after getting the bail-out money. She then tried to convince me that I was misinterpreting the purpose of the bail out money. She had obviouly been rehearsed. I read later a justification for the rate rise in a magazine article.

I think Citibank said it was due to the "cost of capital."