'Twas the day after Christmas, and all through Bill's House
All three Barkers were stirring, on my wife I did bounce
(Hey... it rhymes, dammit!)
The goodies were piled, on the floor as each year
We delay putting 'way all the booze and the beer
(*THUMB UP*)
And so on and so forth, I'm no poet, I sigh
Pre Happy New Year to all, from my liver... and I!
All three Barkers were stirring, on my wife I did bounce
(Hey... it rhymes, dammit!)
The goodies were piled, on the floor as each year
We delay putting 'way all the booze and the beer
(*THUMB UP*)
And so on and so forth, I'm no poet, I sigh
Pre Happy New Year to all, from my liver... and I!
3 comments:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/12/26/russian_roulette_with_americas_future__112528.html
There are moments when our political system, whose essential job is to mediate conflicts in broadly acceptable and desirable ways, is simply not up to the task. It fails. This may be one of those moments. What we learned in 2011 is that the frustrating and confusing budget debate may never reach a workable conclusion. It may continue indefinitely until it's abruptly ended by a severe economic or financial crisis that wrenches control from elected leaders.
* THIS IS ROBERT SAMUELSON WRITING IN NEWSWEEK, FOLKS... (*SHRUG*)
We are shifting from "give away politics" to "take away politics."
Since World War II, presidents and Congresses have been in the enviable position of distributing more benefits to more people without requiring ever-steeper taxes. Now, this governing formula no longer works, and politicians face the opposite: taking away - reducing benefits or raising taxes significantly - to prevent government deficits from destabilizing the economy.
It is not clear that either Democrats or Republicans can navigate the change.
* I BELIEVE ONLY VIGILANTE ACTION CAN SHOCK THE SYSTEM TO THE DEGREE REQUIRED TO STIMULATE RATIONAL AND RESPONSIBLE ACTION BY OUR POLITICIANS. EXAMPLE: BOEHNER AND PELOSI "TAKEN OFF THE BOARD." REID AND MCCONNELL "TAKEN OFF THE BOARD."
* THE ONLY FEAR I WOULD HAVE REGARDING THE ABOVE SCENARIO IS THAT OBAMA WOULD TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY (NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE) TO DECLARE MARTIAL LAW. (BUT OF COURSE SUCH AN ATTEMPTED ACTION WOULD CREATE ITS OWN BLOWBACK.)
(*SHRUG*)
Our political system has failed before. Conflicts that could not be resolved through debate, compromise and legislation were settled in more primitive and violent ways. The Civil War was the greatest and most tragic failure; leaders couldn't end slavery peacefully.
* FOLKS... LET'S START AT THE BEGINNING... THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION WAS... er... A VIOLENT REVOLUTION!
The budget impasse raises comparable questions. Can we resolve it before some ill-defined crisis imposes its own terms?
* DOUBTFUL.
For years, there has been a "something for nothing" aspect to our politics. More people became dependent on government. From 1960 to 2010, the share of federal spending going for "payments to individuals" (Social Security, food stamps, Medicare and the like) climbed from 26% to 66%. Meanwhile, the tax burden barely budged. In 1960, federal taxes were 17.8% of national income (gross domestic product). In 2007, they were 18.5% of GDP.
* FIGURATIVELY SPEAKING... THINK OF WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S A MAJOR GAS LEAK IN YOUR HOME - WHILE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY ARE SLEEPING - AND THERE'S NO ALARM TO WAKE YOU UP. (MY FRIENDS... AMERICA HAS BEEN ASLEEP. THAT'S WHY WE'RE DYING.) AND YET...
Liberals still want more spending, conservatives more tax cuts.
With a few exceptions, Democrats and Republicans haven't embraced detailed take away policies to reconcile Americans' appetite for government benefits with their distaste for taxes. President Obama has provided no leadership. Aside from Rep. Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, few Republicans have.
* AND RYAN'S PLAN IS ONLY "SERIOUS" IN A COMPARATIVE SENSE. (THINK CALLING ME SKINNY COMPARED TO SOME OF THE CONTESTANTS ON AMERICA'S BIGGEST LOSER!)
No one wants to take away; it's more fun to give.
All 2011's budget feuds - over the debt ceiling, the super-committee, the payroll tax cut - skirted the central issues.
* THE LOGIC OF THE AUTHOR'S OBSERVATIONS POINT TO ONLY ONE POTENTIAL SOLUTION. (*SHRUG*)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204026804577100710435635928.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond
Unemployment, the economic statistic that packs the most political punch, has risen to 8.6% now from 7.8% the month Mr. Obama took office. It topped 10% briefly in 2009.
* ACTUALLY, FOLKS, THE CURRENT NUMBER IS UNDERSTATED. TAKE AWAY THE METHODOLOGICAL SMOKE AND MIRRORS AND REAL UNEMPLOYMENT IS WELL OVER 11%.
The misery index - the combination of the unemployment and inflation rates - has risen to about 12 now from 7.83 when he took office.
* AGAIN... IF MEASURED UNDER THE SAME CRITERIA AS THE CARTER YEARS... WE'RE TALKING 20 OR MORE.
(*SHRUG*)
Median family income fell in the first two years of the Obama term, after rising the previous four years.
As of September, 12.6% of U.S. mortgage borrowers had missed at least one payment on their mortgage or were in foreclosure, down from a peak of about 15% but still well above the normal range of 5% to 7% in the last two decades, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association.
In large measure because of a decline in home values, household net worth dropped 1.7% over the last year; under every president since 1948, it rose in the year preceding the election.
* AND SO IT GOES... AND SO IT GOES... (*SIGH*)
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/project_syndicate/2011/12/bank_bailouts_why_are_we_helping_banks_and_demanding_austerity_for_everyone_else_.html
Santa Claus came early this year for four former executives of Washington Mutual, which failed in 2008.
The executives reached a settlement with the FDIC, which sued them for taking huge financial risks while “knowing that the real estate market was in a ‘bubble.’”
The FDIC had sought to recover $900 million, but the executives have just settled for $64 million, almost all of which will be paid by their insurers; their out-of-pockets costs are estimated at just $400,000.
* IN BILL'S WORLD... AGAINST THE WALL THEY GO - BLINDFOLDS AND CIGARETTES PROVIDED OUT OF THEIR OWN ASSETS. (BULLETS COURTESY OF THE TAXPAYER!)
To be sure, the executives lost their jobs and now must drop claims for additional compensation. But, according to the FDIC, the four still earned more than $95 million from January 2005 through September 2008. This is what happens when financial executives are compensated for “return on equity” unadjusted for risk. The executives get the upside when things go well; when the downside risks materialize, they lose nothing (or close to it).
* THIS IS *NOT* CAPITALISM, MY FRIENDS!
[W]hat about government support for the big banks? Is this contracting in the light of our current fiscal pressures?
(*SMIRK*)
Unfortunately, it is not.
Much government support remains, implicitly through allowing banks to be “too big to fail” and explicitly through various kinds of backing provided by the Federal Reserve.
* THE THREE "B's" ACCORDING TO BILL: 1) BERNAKE; 2) BRAIN; 3) BULLET! (JUST A THOUGHT, FOLKS... JUST A THOUGHT...)
[C]apitalism without the prospect of failure is not any kind of market economy. We are running a large-scale, nontransparent, and dangerous government subsidy scheme for the benefit primarily of a very few extremely wealthy people. Concentrated financial power is a gift that keeps on giving - but not to you [or me].
Post a Comment