One more thing. As you know, America has a mixed economy so some of our institutions are socialist already. The two most obvious being the post office and the military.
Could they both be privatized? Sure. Must they be privatized? I, for one, say no.Comment Posted By bsjones On 19.02.2009 @ 14:57
I am sure there are a few revolutionaries somewhere in America (on the left and the right), but I don't believe there are Marxists under every bed. These people are few and far between.
I went to truthout.org. I did not see revolution. I did not see dangerous radical, extremist ideas. I saw well intentioned people who disagree with me on many issues.
According to the website they want:
to save the whales
to get young people a piece of the stimulus bill
to prevent new tax cuts
to build schools with federal money
They are Americans participating in political discourse, that have a different viewpoint than we do. That's all.
Here is an example of their reporting on the Iraq war:
Is it slanted? Sure. Is it the Russian revolution of 1917? I think not.
My point is that getting some exposure to how other people think and feel might lead to some shared understandings. I'll get nervous when we start referring to people at Truthout.org as Marxist revolutionaries.Comment Posted By bsjones On 18.02.2009 @ 00:08
regarding post # 11.
I run with an incredibly diverse group of people and I have never actually met anyone who wants to "spark a revolution along Marxist lines."
I bet the number of American citizens that want to destroy "our Republic" to be less than a tenth of a percent. Sometimes these nut jobs come from the right. Think Timothy Mcveigh.
Read the novel "The Turner Diaries" and tell me those rightists love our nation.Comment Posted By bsjones On 16.02.2009 @ 22:54
I agree with this idea (if I understand you) that a larger government is an inevitable consequence of the complexities of modern life.
As conservatives we must start addressing what is really happening in our complex world. Take the complexities and consequences of the modern mortgage industry. "Government IS the problem!" is not a political solution to something as complex and destructive as the global banking collapse.
It is time to move beyond an ideology that has "resulted in a paralysis of thought that has gripped many on the right and caused them to look inwards to a rigid, unyielding, ideological framework that brooks no deviation from orthodoxy." In other words, a bumper sticker ain't gonna do it this time.
Just to be clear, I am not advocating everyone go and join the Green Party. Instead, look at reality, acknowledge the problems you see, and generate NEW conservative solutions to these problems.
It is time to stop looking at the shadows on the wall, leave the cave, and let our eyes adjust to the sunlight.Comment Posted By bsjones On 16.02.2009 @ 00:02
The ability, to so often, be able to say, "Your guy did it too!!" should alert us to two things:
1) Our political system, as it currently operates, is systemically broken.
2)The gigantic hole we find ourselves in as a nation is not the fault of "just" the other guy's party.
Both parties are working overtime, they're just not working for the American people. Rynlds is right we get the government we deserve.Comment Posted By bsjones On 14.02.2009 @ 18:03
In comment 61, I asked if you thought more robust government oversight and regulation were necessary in light of the current global banking collapse.
Allen Greenspan,a self-avowed disciple of Ayn Rand, thinks so!!
This Is So Huge!! Not only because it is a 180 degree turn and a mea cupla for Greenspan, but because I think it is an illustration of refusing to look at the world through our ideological glasses when they no longer help us see. As Rick said, "And until we can show we are making a serious effort to examine where we went wrong and embrace the world as it is and not as we wish it to be in some alternate reality" we conservatives will continue to be in the political wilderness.
Greenspan is pointing the way to a new dynamic conservatism that is based on current facts and circumstances. How? Simply by accepting what is.Comment Posted By bsjones On 18.02.2009 @ 00:56
The agency that monitors these transactions already exists!! However, even after that agency is repeatedly warned about corruption, lies, and malfeasance from insiders, the agency insist on doing nothing. Then, when all the horses have left the barn, a Congressional Subcommittee holds a show trial with silly charts and other childish props.
Why? Why does our government work this way?
I believe it because both parties are on the payroll.
It works like this:
Congresswoman Y (D) has a husband who needs a job. He gets a six figure job from the industry that that she regulates.
Senator X (R) wants a new house. The company that wants a natural resource contract in X's state have a fully furnished house that they don't happen to need right now. Of course, Senator X is grateful and wishes to show his appreciation.
Congressman Z's (D) subcommittee controls investment banking regulation. Congressman Z likes male prostitutes. (He's really straight, of course. Not like Barney fag.)
and on, and on, and on...
In the words of Don Corleone: "Good. Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But, until that day, accept this justice as a gift on my daughter's wedding day."
Summary: Our government has been sold to banksters and other special interests for a freezer full of Omaha steaks.
Go ahead. Explain to me about "free speech" and the vital role these special interests play in preserving our Republic.
last jab: If it's free speech, why does it cost so damn much?Comment Posted By bsjones On 16.02.2009 @ 23:24
I believe that many of the politicians and bureaucrats who run Washington view ordinary American citizens with contempt. The power brokers I am speaking of do not think we citizens deserve anything other than child-like explanations (and outright lies) when they justify their policy decisions to us. The electorate is treated like two year old children that will be told we are moving next week because of daddy's job.
This, in my view, is a central fact of American political life. There are so many examples of this contempt for ordinary Americans that I will leave it to others to post examples.
This is a test. Both parties are guilty of this contempt for America's people. Anyone who can only find examples from the "other guy's" party, will expose him or herself as an ideologue who is unwilling to accept the reality of how our government works.Comment Posted By bsjones On 16.02.2009 @ 12:53
I'm back at the keyboard....
I was thinking about what you wrote in post #54.
Specifically: The problem was the investment bankers assumed that those mortgages were verified by the lending institutions for the necessary income and enough equity in the property. We now know it was a bad assumption, but I think if I was an investment banker it might be one I’d make too.
Wouldn't the Wall Street investment firms be negligent if they did not verify the loans they were repackaging (as gold) to investors?
If the Wall Street investment firms just assumed "Hey! It's all good! The originators know what they're doing." How should the stock holders in those investment firms react? Should shareholders have expected more?
Maybe it's just me, bit it stinks of negligence.
In the link I posted, the person in charge of ensuring that the loans met underwriting standards was consistently overruled by her superiors. That sounds like fraud and complicity.
Finally, as your post points out, the way the whole thing was set up with originators selling loans to banks, banks bundling loans to sell to investment houses, and investment houses selling pieces of these loans to thousands of investors living all around the world just seems disastrous.
Do you think a more robust government oversight is necessary?Comment Posted By bsjones On 15.02.2009 @ 23:27
As I see it, the problem with these Boards of Directors is that too many of the members of the board are banksters working for other corrupt institutions. Board members have huge conflicts of interest and they would rather protect each other than their shareholders.
It's a huge cover up. Right now share holders and employees should be paying for the years of negligent, unethical and (often) illegal behavior of the CEO's and their Boards. Instead the taxpayer transfer of wealth to the failed banksters started by the previous Congress and Presidential administration is continuing with the current Congress and Presidential, administration.
The failed policies of the past are being carried over into the future by the current gang.
There was no accountability in the past, there is no accountability now, and I doubt there will be any accountability in the future.
Vote All the Bums Out!!Comment Posted By bsjones On 15.02.2009 @ 22:45