Economical Stuff

I try to keep up. With so much news, so many opinions, it's hard to stay as well informed as I obviously am. Believing that an informed electorate is vital -- more so now than ever -- and arguing constantly that such an electorate is sorely lacking, I'm sharing an important article from what many consider America's finest news source. Among its insights and revelations:

According to numerous articles and economics segments from major media outlets, experts on banks and such have become increasingly concerned over a new extension or rates or a proposal or compromise that could signal fewer investments, and dollars, and so on.

The experts confirmed that the stimulus has played a role...

...The man, who also apparently mentioned the Nasdaq, the Dow, and the Japan one at some point or another, talked for a really long time about credit or reductions or possibly all these figures, which somehow relate to China...

...Paul Krugman, New York Times columnist and 2008 winner of the Nobel Prize for something in one of those economics categories, acknowledged in an editorial this week that the SEC must work closely with the stock market, Wall Street, and the New York Stock Exchange to maintain the bulls, bears, and opening bells. Krugman also said something could spur lending or trading or budgetary measures.

Greece was also involved.

You're welcome.

Adult Toys

Let's not talk solutions, he pleads, while saying we need adult conversation. Un-fricking-believable. This from the party of "Death Panels," "Killing Grandma," and pledges to return to the failed theory of trickle-down economics, brought to us four decades ago, by Ronald Reagan. This from the party that still contends, a lá Ronnie (as if it didn't fail miserably when he tried), that they'll balance the budget while adding nearly four trillion bucks more in tax-cut debt, while increasing defense spending. This, from the party that wants, in effect, to return us to the hand-cranked Model T and its broken arms.

This from the party that calls global climate change a deliberate hoax, an anti-capitalist plot. (Care for some lemonade, Los Angeles?)

John Boner is saying let's scare the people into voting for us (ed note: hating Muslims is the best way, of course, but with the right lies, the economy can work, too). Then, we'll ignore real solutions just like we always have. Note also his reference to "consequences." In other words, in the poisoned pool into which they've dragged us, any policy statement that even remotely gets close to reality is doomed to failure.

He should know. Because when Barack Obama made serious proposals to address medical costs in ways that Republicans would have surely proposed themselves had they been in power, they railed to the heavens and, charitably, mischaracterized them shamelessly. What does that leave them? "Well, huh huh, y'know that was just to trash that black guy terrorist illegitimate president. Really, we need to do that stuff, so never mind what we said. Huh huh. You weren't dumb enough to believe what we said then, were you, when we were just kidding? This time it's for reals. Really. Trust us to do the right thing."

Adult conversation. After making disinformation and demagoguery the coin of the realm. After actively avoiding (the linked article is by a conservative) talking about what they'd really do, and what it'd mean for the country.

Adult conversation. Right. That might be the most dishonest thing the guy has ever said, and that's saying a hell of a lot.

Calling It

Remember when there were "liberal" media? Like the WaPo? Funny how things change.

Today there's a long article decrying the fact the Obama has been pointing out he inherited the economic mess in which we find ourselves. So much for post-partisanship, they imply. Where does he get off doing that, they ask. 

What a crock of sh*t!!!

At the very end of the article, way past the point where most people read, it's mentioned, sort of parenthetically, that the Rs have taken to calling it the Obama recession, the Obama market, the Obama economy. Yeah, like after eight years, the person who takes over owns it in a month. If that's fair, then what's unfair about pushing back? Particularly when the pushback is toward the undeniable truth.

There are no politicians who are above criticism, Obama included; but really, this is pretty pathetic. Trying to blame him for the mess -- which is the only way Republicans can survive -- and then taking offense when he points out the obvious. And they're no longer even subtle about their hypocrisy. Like breathing, there's nothing to hide: we lie, we say stupid stuff, we do the very things we complain about. So what? Who's gonna notice?

Once again, simply another in a string of outrages, we see what politics has become in this country. It's hard to be hopeful.

.

Swede Mystery Of Life

Not alone, I'm sure, I've been pondering the larger meaning of the world-wide economic melt-down, and wondering if good could possibly come from it. Might it fundamentally change our paradigm for living our lives, and if so, could it make it better?

For decades the US economy has been built on consumption, and on the coveting of things. Above all else, we've been told, we need to acquire stuff. I suppose it's also true of much of the western world, but the US has taken it to incomprehensible heights. What better example is there than the Bush-recommended public response to 9/11: Go shopping! Simple logic and a moment's thought say it's an unsustainable model: using up resources, producing more garbage, polluting the environment, burning down the planet, building more places to put everything. On a finite planet, it can't go on forever. And the thing of it is, even as we acquire more stuff, people only seem to get emptier and more unhappy, more isolated and frustrated.

I just got back from a weekend with a bunch of family members. We talked, we laughed, we ate some fabulous (as usual) home-cooked food, had some wine. Didn't cost much, didn't use up much or throw away much. And it felt really good.

Rush Limbaugh and his party scream about tax hikes and scare about socialism. Let's not become like Europe, they say.

Well, let's see. In Sweden, where their tax rates are in the 50% range, everyone has health care, school is covered from kindergarten through grad school, and old folks are guaranteed nursing homes if they need them. The rich aren't as rich as here, and the poor aren't as poor. They don't have as many Beemers, their houses are mostly smaller. And they work fewer hours, have more vacation time. Polls say they're happier. Spending time with friends, family, hiking, being healthy. It seems there's more to their lives than acquisition, they participate more actively and widely in their democracy than we do (which means they chose their priorities and level of government services and taxes), and they're more contented for it. Goddamn socialists.

Talk that up and you'll get greeted like Dutch Elm disease on this side of the pond.

I don't know. I like cars. I'd like to have a HDTV. At the end of my internship, I spent the whole $3500 I'd saved from my $8000 salary and bought a BMW 1600. Loved it, I or my wife driving it every day until we fixed it up and donated it to the Little League auction twenty years later. I know I'd like an M3; hell, why not an M5? (Ain't no way I'll ever spend that kind of money on a car, even if I had it. Which I don't and no longer ever will.) Taking my wife's ten year old Mazda Miata on a spin in the country gives me great pleasure. My partner's Porsche, when he let me give it a ride, even more. But here's the thing: it's nothing like the pleasure of hanging around with my extended family on a weekend. If I had friends any more, that would be better, too.

Could it be that we've been led down a garden path, convinced that it's stuff that makes us happy? Advertised, seduced, role-modelled, for-profitted into delusion? For whose benefit, exactly? But without that unquenchable desire for more things, our economy would fail.

Oh wait. It just did.

This would seem to be the time to take stock (no, not that kind: it's worthless now.) Life is short. Defining happiness by the things you own doesn't seem to be working all that well. Could it be that, rather than hating rich people and punishing wealth for their own sake, those who argue against the enormous income imbalance that has occurred in this country in the last few years are actually onto something? That we've lost sight of the real potential for joy in life, in the name of making more and more money to get more and more stuff? That we're wasting our one and only chance? On the other hand, could our country sustain itself if we changed? Is there a collective reset button? I doubt we'll find out until the second time around, after it all burns down and we try again, if there's anyone left.

You can be damn sure the party of Rush Limbaugh (he who will have more money than god no matter what the tax rates are) will never let it happen. He'll keep his limp listeners convinced that anyone who calls for a second look is out to destroy us all. It's socialism!! It's horrible. The very word, it's.... it's.... well, it's just perfect to inflame the dittoheads. Meanwhile, his way, we've been doing a pretty good job of economic destruction already, especially for the last thirty years (1992 - 2000 excepted.)

Besides, Sweden has beautiful women and ski instructors and national happiness. Can't have that. It's unAmerican.

And Volvos. I hate Volvos.

_________________________________
[For the record, I wrote the above before this appeared. And this.]

.

Where It Is

Just a thought: in this economy, as millions are losing their jobs and millions more are taking pay cuts or working reduced hours, those who continue to retain large incomes are, by comparison, even more flush (not to mention fortunate) than a year ago. Money is scarce, prices are down. Bargains are out there, for them as has.

So. One could argue (and, by golly, I am) that getting rid of the bushian tax cuts for the wealthy makes even more sense now, urgently. De facto, the rich are even richer than they were. How much feeding at the trough of ill fortune do they need?

As he promised, Barack Obama is playing it down the middle, trying to get broad consensus even at the expense of some supporters. He still plans significant tax cuts to most people, an idea my warmth for which is luke, depending on the final details. (In that, it would appear, I'm not alone.) But he's also, evidently, planning to hold off on re-establishing pre-disaster tax rates for those making over 250K. To me, the only argument in his favor is gaining a few Republican votes. I don't discount that; and Obama's commitment to reaching out is something that drew me to him (even as most detractors failed to see it, or willfully ignored it.) Still, the deficit handed to him by Bush is already 1.2 trillion -- a number that would scare the shit out of me, except that it's beyond comprehension. And that's BEFORE any Obama plan.

There are indications that Obama will be looking at Social Security and Medicare as areas for savings. It's ballsy. And, as I've said many times, necessary. Probably doomed, too. Yet, given future projections, it's the responsible thing to do, and will likely alarm the left more than the right (until, perhaps, it comes down to indexing benefits for the wealthy! Also the right thing.)

But there's an obvious need for balance. The unneeded and overly generous tax cuts of Bush are a large part of why we're where we are. There's only so far one ought to go to gain favor with those whose ideas torpedoed the boat in the first place, and then threw an anchor to those in the water. People who continue to make a quarter million bucks a year are doing very well indeed: better than ever. (Might that have been the whole point?) Take away a little of it (and, really, it IS comparatively little), and they'll STILL be way better off than they were. And most assuredly better than everyone else. (Okay, yeah, like the rest of us lots of them must have lost money in the market. But having a big income makes it a hell of a lot easier to take. I was never at the 250K mark, but I was working during the last three recessions and the pay check eased a lot of worry.)

Hey, Rush? Sean? Bill? Mitch? Newt? Patriots of the first order?

Money. Mouth.

.

Does A Bear?

Well of course the stock market is driving me crazy, swinging wildly nearly every day, with no particular rhyme or reason. But what's maybe even more insane than the market itself, is seeing headlines like these, a mere sampling from Monday, or very recently:

Dow loses 679.95 as economy, Bernanke revive fear

Stocks fall sharply on consumer spending worries

Dow Plunges 680 Points as Recession Is Declared

Stocks slump as U.S. recession is officially called and signs point to a prolonged slowdown.

Dow falls amid fear over car makers

The Dow falls 679, fear has set in now.

Here's my point: DUH!!!!

What's different today, from yesterday??? Are enough people waking up each day from a year-long slumber to notice something? JFC, people!!! This has been going on for a LONG time!!!

Fully retired for the first time this year, dependent entirely on savings, it's been a little tough. And scary. Not to mention infuriating. I've always been pretty thrifty: my car is nearing 200K miles. Same house for twenty six years, paid off long since. Own one suit which I haven't worn in fifteen years. Travel too little. Never made anything near what most general surgeons make (owing to my career-long loyalty to a large clinic with a larger overhead), despite doing twice as much surgery as the national average. Nor have my investments been greedy or crazy (stayed out of the dot-com boom. And bust. A buy and hold sort of guy). So it's disheartening to have seen half of it disappear.

But it's literally crazogenic to be buffeted by these daily gyrations and to realize that my future is dependent on the whims of idiots, who seem to have no sense of proportion, nor to know what's going on on a daily -- let alone yearly -- basis. If I weren't so old and stupid, I'd go back to work. If the economy didn't suck so bad, maybe I could even find a job.