Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- A Culture That Condones The Killing Of Children And Teaches Children To Kill
- Slaughter in Connecticut: 20 Children, 6 Adults Dead in Kindergarten Massacre
- How the Mighty (Mississippi) Has Fallen: Historic Drought Plagues US
- Wealthiest Kissed, Weakest Kicked: Obama's Ugly 'New Deal' Offers to Cut Social Security
- 'I'd Rather Fight Like Hell': Naomi Klein's Fierce New Resolve to Fight for Climate Justice
- A Culture That Condones The Killing Of Children And Teaches Children To Kill
- 'I'd Rather Fight Like Hell': Naomi Klein's Fierce New Resolve to Fight for Climate Justice
- Wealthiest Kissed, Weakest Kicked: Obama's Ugly 'New Deal' Offers to Cut Social Security
- Remember All the Children, Mr. President
- Save the Children: Tears and Tragedy in Connecticut
Popular content
Today's Top News
Published on Saturday, April 4, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
The Ones Who Got It Right
Why is it that well regarded people working the fields of corporate power and performance who repeatedly predicted the Wall Street bubble and its bursting receive so little media and attention?
Instead, the public is still being exposed to the comments and writings of people like Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, James Glassman (of Dow 36,000 notoriety) while others like Timothy Geithner, Larry Summers, and Gary Gensler are newly-appointed at high levels in the Obama Administration. These men were variously architects, rationalizers and implementers of the massive de-regulation and non-regulation that unleashed the epic forces of greed, speculation and ruination of millions of livelihoods and trillions of dollars other peoples’ money worldwide.
Here are some of the people who got it right—early and often:
1. William Greider—author and columnist with The Nation magazine—wrote books (including Secrets of the Temple, 1988) and articles warning about the Federal Reserve and the anti-democratic consequences of rampant corporate globalization.
2. Robert Kuttner whose books (e.g. Everything for Sale, 1999) and articles predicted what will happen to workers and pensions when the regulatory state is tossed aside by the corporatists operating inside and outside of government.
3. Jim Hightower whose books (If the Gods Has Meant Us to Vote, They Would Have Given Us Candidates, 2000) and the monthly mass circulation Hightower Lowdown newsletter pointed out again and again the abuses of the “greedhounds” and vastly overpaid corporate bosses that have run consumers of health care, credit, cars and banks into the ground.
4. Nomi Prins (Other People's Money, 2004) a former managing director of Goldman Sachs, quit in disgust and began disclosing how these giant Wall St. firms deal and how, with their ideological backers, they wove their webs of deception and fraud against investors, students borrowing money for college, taxpayers ripped off by corporate contractors, sick people gouged and insurance companies denying legitimate claims. (See her book Jacked: How “Conservatives” Are Picking Your Pocket, 2008)
5. John R. MacArthur, author (The Selling of “Free Trade”, 2001) columnist and publisher of Harpers, authored a sharp, prophetic criticism of NAFTA’s effect on U.S. and Mexican workers. Finally, on March 24, 2009 the New York Times featured a report titled “NAFTA’s Promise, UNfulfilled.”
6. Robert A.G. Monks—the leading shareholder rights advocate in our country warned for years in books (latest Corpocracy, 2008) , articles, testimony and standup challenges at corporate annual meetings that keeping investors—the owners of these companies—powerless and dominated by corporate executives would lead to big trouble. Everyday, you can now see the ways that avaricious abuses of executive compensation by Wall Street led to cooking the books, hiding the debts and wildly losing other peoples’ money.
7. Tom Stanton, whose 1991 book State of Risk, exposed the dangerously undercapitalized condition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and predicted coming disaster if this reckless leveraging continued. By comparison, a year ago Fannie and Freddie’s federal regulator, James B. Lockhart III called fears of a bailout “nonsense” and amazingly further lowered the required capital levels months before their collapse and takeover a few months later. Mr. Lockhart is still in his job heading a new regulatory entity over these two goliaths.
8. Republican Kevin Phillips, (latest book Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Failed Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism, 2007) whose numerous writings on Wall Street power and money and the dictatorial rule of the plutocracy were wise, historically—rooted premonitions of future collapse.
9. Dean Baker, (latest Plunder and Blunder, 2004) Washington-based economist, warned repeatedly earlier in this decade of the housing bubble and the calamitous consequences once it burst. He even sold his own home in 2004 and became a tenant, so convinced was he of the housing precipice.
10. Then there is Naomi Klein who has been documenting how economic disasters produced by corporations and their governmental cohorts end up not with reforms but with further increasing the power of the corporate state. (See Shock Doctrine the Rise of Disaster Capitalism, 2007)
Chances are that outside the independent media and an occasional public tv-radio interview, you have not seen or read them in the mass media. But they were right, so why haven’t you? Well, first of all, they took on commercial interests and called them out by name and specific misdeeds. Take it from one who knows, big advertisers do not hesitate to let their media outlets know about their displeasure. Publishers, editors and producers will deny being affected by such realities of the bottom line but money talks—not always but enough to screen out or marginalize the provocative early warners.
Second, these early warners are not like their counterparts such as the market fundamentalists and other active corporatists in the world of writers and commentators. The latter meet and plan often and ferociously attach themselves to political and corporate leaders. While the progressive forecasters do not connect either with each other or with their policy allies on Capitol Hill as much. The media likes to see growing power like that of the intertwined Heritage Foundation with the Reagan regime and their supporters in Congress.
Third, there is this sense that these progressives are exposing conditions that the reporters themselves should be revealing. So why not publish staff-driven magazine-style features instead of publicizing outsiders and covering an unfolding story as reportage. Journalistic prizes go to the former. But, they’re not the same either in reader impact or for change.
Finally, there are establishment figures who tried, in their own way, to blow the whistle—James Grant, Henry Kaufman and, twenty five years ago, Felix Rohatyn come to mind. Their astute alarms regarding excessive risk-taking were ignored. They are not getting much media play either.
Maybe it’s also a cultural thing. Big book deals, radio talk shows, promotions and quotable celebrity status go to the rogues, the grossly negligent, the suppressors of truth and the wrongdoers. They’re just so much more exciting!
This is a fast road to a state of decay.
Instead, the public is still being exposed to the comments and writings of people like Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, James Glassman (of Dow 36,000 notoriety) while others like Timothy Geithner, Larry Summers, and Gary Gensler are newly-appointed at high levels in the Obama Administration. These men were variously architects, rationalizers and implementers of the massive de-regulation and non-regulation that unleashed the epic forces of greed, speculation and ruination of millions of livelihoods and trillions of dollars other peoples’ money worldwide.
Here are some of the people who got it right—early and often:
1. William Greider—author and columnist with The Nation magazine—wrote books (including Secrets of the Temple, 1988) and articles warning about the Federal Reserve and the anti-democratic consequences of rampant corporate globalization.
2. Robert Kuttner whose books (e.g. Everything for Sale, 1999) and articles predicted what will happen to workers and pensions when the regulatory state is tossed aside by the corporatists operating inside and outside of government.
3. Jim Hightower whose books (If the Gods Has Meant Us to Vote, They Would Have Given Us Candidates, 2000) and the monthly mass circulation Hightower Lowdown newsletter pointed out again and again the abuses of the “greedhounds” and vastly overpaid corporate bosses that have run consumers of health care, credit, cars and banks into the ground.
4. Nomi Prins (Other People's Money, 2004) a former managing director of Goldman Sachs, quit in disgust and began disclosing how these giant Wall St. firms deal and how, with their ideological backers, they wove their webs of deception and fraud against investors, students borrowing money for college, taxpayers ripped off by corporate contractors, sick people gouged and insurance companies denying legitimate claims. (See her book Jacked: How “Conservatives” Are Picking Your Pocket, 2008)
5. John R. MacArthur, author (The Selling of “Free Trade”, 2001) columnist and publisher of Harpers, authored a sharp, prophetic criticism of NAFTA’s effect on U.S. and Mexican workers. Finally, on March 24, 2009 the New York Times featured a report titled “NAFTA’s Promise, UNfulfilled.”
6. Robert A.G. Monks—the leading shareholder rights advocate in our country warned for years in books (latest Corpocracy, 2008) , articles, testimony and standup challenges at corporate annual meetings that keeping investors—the owners of these companies—powerless and dominated by corporate executives would lead to big trouble. Everyday, you can now see the ways that avaricious abuses of executive compensation by Wall Street led to cooking the books, hiding the debts and wildly losing other peoples’ money.
7. Tom Stanton, whose 1991 book State of Risk, exposed the dangerously undercapitalized condition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and predicted coming disaster if this reckless leveraging continued. By comparison, a year ago Fannie and Freddie’s federal regulator, James B. Lockhart III called fears of a bailout “nonsense” and amazingly further lowered the required capital levels months before their collapse and takeover a few months later. Mr. Lockhart is still in his job heading a new regulatory entity over these two goliaths.
8. Republican Kevin Phillips, (latest book Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Failed Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism, 2007) whose numerous writings on Wall Street power and money and the dictatorial rule of the plutocracy were wise, historically—rooted premonitions of future collapse.
9. Dean Baker, (latest Plunder and Blunder, 2004) Washington-based economist, warned repeatedly earlier in this decade of the housing bubble and the calamitous consequences once it burst. He even sold his own home in 2004 and became a tenant, so convinced was he of the housing precipice.
10. Then there is Naomi Klein who has been documenting how economic disasters produced by corporations and their governmental cohorts end up not with reforms but with further increasing the power of the corporate state. (See Shock Doctrine the Rise of Disaster Capitalism, 2007)
Chances are that outside the independent media and an occasional public tv-radio interview, you have not seen or read them in the mass media. But they were right, so why haven’t you? Well, first of all, they took on commercial interests and called them out by name and specific misdeeds. Take it from one who knows, big advertisers do not hesitate to let their media outlets know about their displeasure. Publishers, editors and producers will deny being affected by such realities of the bottom line but money talks—not always but enough to screen out or marginalize the provocative early warners.
Second, these early warners are not like their counterparts such as the market fundamentalists and other active corporatists in the world of writers and commentators. The latter meet and plan often and ferociously attach themselves to political and corporate leaders. While the progressive forecasters do not connect either with each other or with their policy allies on Capitol Hill as much. The media likes to see growing power like that of the intertwined Heritage Foundation with the Reagan regime and their supporters in Congress.
Third, there is this sense that these progressives are exposing conditions that the reporters themselves should be revealing. So why not publish staff-driven magazine-style features instead of publicizing outsiders and covering an unfolding story as reportage. Journalistic prizes go to the former. But, they’re not the same either in reader impact or for change.
Finally, there are establishment figures who tried, in their own way, to blow the whistle—James Grant, Henry Kaufman and, twenty five years ago, Felix Rohatyn come to mind. Their astute alarms regarding excessive risk-taking were ignored. They are not getting much media play either.
Maybe it’s also a cultural thing. Big book deals, radio talk shows, promotions and quotable celebrity status go to the rogues, the grossly negligent, the suppressors of truth and the wrongdoers. They’re just so much more exciting!
This is a fast road to a state of decay.
- Posted in
Comments are closed
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


110 Comments so far
Show AllRight on the money Ralph. But with all the Obama disciples hanging out here, it will fall on deaf ears. Obama is their one true deity, and can do no wrong. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil...their rallying cry!
Yes it will be interesting to watch the disciples scream and yell about trolls and Republicans and such not realizing that some of us here are objective observers and make comments in that vein.
There is no such thing as objectivity. Anyone who casts a vote is choosing one ideology over another. For the Obama supporters denial is more important than transformation. And when the superstructure comes crashing down, watch the hysteria take hold of the 'so called' objective observers.
elohim, "there is no such thing as objectivity" Is that observation arrived at objectively? Or subjectively? Perhaps a function of your own unique perspectives experiences & feelings?
The latter of course. Becasue you are right, there is no such thing as objectivity. Or absolutes, an epidemic on CD.
Everything is relative, (an absolute!)
All is subjective, And those who claim "their" pov is the only right one, that others are "stupid" don't 'get' that, (ironic, huh?).
Only one absolute is Viable-The GOP sucks absolutely, all else reflects the viewer of the viewed, the analyazer in the analyzed, or, famously "we see things not as they are, but as we are".
US Blues
None of us has a patent on the truth.
US Blues
This is absolutely, objectively the Truth! Nothing relative or subjective about it!!
az, precisely what I am saying. We project onto the world our inner landscape. In my inner landscape I find appalling war, occupation, and environmental degradation. That is my bias. And I am unapologetic about it. Moreover, The death of other people the result of war (but especially innocents like children blown apart is especially appalling to me) along with environmental degradation because of stupidity to honor corporate interests, is definitively an ABSOLUTE state in my view. Species extinction cannot be otherwise, IT IS AN ABSOLUTE, you cannot bring back a species lost because of human greed. Again, I am unapologetic in speaking against bad environmental policies and anthropocentric norms. But maybe you are privy to something I am not, and if so, I guess an absolute understanding of things metaphysical on your part? In Obama's inner world, married as it is to the status quo, his actions are subjectively rationalized by his commitment to those issues I oppose, and speak against. I don't see him as advancing norms of peace, shutting down the coal, nuclear and bio fuel industries, all inimical to the earth: I don't see him downsizing the military industrial complex, or appointing people who favor these issues. Nader's article is pointing out that Obama choose people against economic accountability and ignored people with radically opposing views and who are GETTING IT RIGHT: what don't your understand about this? So yes, my subjective concerns are radically opposed to his subjective concerns apparently arrived at through the illusion of objectivity. We can have this metaphysical argument ad nausea but what would be the point? If you favor occupation, environmental degradation, escalation of war in Afghanistan, government snooping without warrant (FISA), the G-20 elites dividing up the wonders of the world to exploitation in the name of reason, then by all means continue your support of the dim wit, Obama. That is your right as a free being.
elohim, that was a beautiful post. I humbly submit our values are near same. I considered saying that hurting other people is where I draw the line, it is 100% ABSOLUTELY wrong. And, I thought McCain would start a Nuclear War, a five front-war, and hurt & kill COUNTLESS more people than Obama, "what don't you understand about this?"
Where we diverge elohim is not basic values, but how we percieve best to respond to the nightmare we call The World.
elohim, Let's jump ahead-who do you project you might vote for in '12? I project the same 2 electable choices, bad or much worse. Dem or Repub. Do you think there will be a viable alternative? If Mr. Nader or another 3rd party candidate was gong to run, given the distance they would have to travel, the time to start organizing would be now. Yes it's a rotted duoply. Of course I see that-
I ask though, what might we do elohim, who might we vote for, ELECT, and thus actually CHANGE things?
Thanks for your intelligent, communicative, non-combative post.
US Blues
Rest assured that whoever I vote for will not have blood on their hands, and will take a definitive stand AGAINST corporations rather than pocketing their dirty money in the name of the LEAST WORST.
I rest assured you will vote for someone who won't get elected.
And I Rest Assured you won't be voting for Ralph Nader-He is drenched in blood! About half a million in Fidelity Magellan, an MIC investment, w/ RAYTHEON, that is cluster bombs elohim, one of their top ten holdings! Top-10! Yeah!
I know, at this point I get insulted, because there is NO justifying that from St. Ralph The Pure, The Clean, and Heroes should never be questioned. (That is why I acknowledge quickly that Obama will do much good, and much wrong-because I am HONEST about the guy (hint), and I know there are NO heroes.
But Hey, nothing feels as good as Righteous Anger, Huh?
US Blues
Get a grip Joe. I guess my views hit a raw nerve. Your presuppositions about me are as flawed as your discipleship is for Obama. The only thing truthful in your misguided and ignorant presuppositions is that my vote will be one of protest against the corporate machine, and on behalf of - as you put it - "...for someone who won't get elected." And I am perfectly all right with that. If you want the watered down version of George Bush that is your right, no one disputes this.
And guess what? My protest vote keeps intact my values, honor, and soul life, something you have long since lost in one cultural sell out after another. Tell me, is there anything left inside besides submission to your masters? Has the cultural and political hegemony taken everything, or is there still a flicker of life lurking in the bottomless pit, crying for transformation and renew of your own soul life?
Sioux Rose
EOLHIM: Thank you for the compliment.
There are some in our forum who ARE by nature pragmatists, probably earth signs. And there are some who are naturally visionary and cannot, nor should they, compromise to find a practical "solution" between two highly compromised seemingly viable options. They will reach for what is not on the menu, or venture into the "out of the box" region which is the ONLY region where real change ensues.
I think it's important to acknowledge that we human beings do have different perspectives and priorities, and that in a just society, these can fuse together in the way all colors balanced emanate white light. Of course ours is anything BUT a unified, healthy or harmonious society (how can it be when it bludgeons other lands and steals their resources?) and that's why sometimes very decent, deep thinking persons aim their intellectual artillery at one another. Given the stress so many of us feel knowing that our nation is THOROUGHLY misguided and unsure what if anything we can do to stem this dark tide, this forum serves as a relatively safe place to vent. If ideas function as a form of fencing, many of us get to hone our "game" by sharing here. May "the force" be with us!
"There are some in our forum who ARE by nature pragmatists, probably earth signs. "
I wish the pragmatists would just admit themselves to be nothing more than mere concession meisters.
"And there are some who are naturally visionary and cannot, nor should they, compromise to find a practical "solution" between two highly compromised seemingly viable options. They will reach for what is not on the menu, or venture into the "out of the box" region which is the ONLY region where real change ensues."
Well put and you just reminded me of thing. If you push for what's not on the menu and get others to do the same, the demand will be so high for it that the restaurant will be forced to either lose its revenue or make that item available.
"Given the stress so many of us feel knowing that our nation is THOROUGHLY misguided and unsure what if anything we can do to stem this dark tide"
Stress, that's it. Thank you Sioux. Politics looks so confusing that when it comes to figuring out how to recover from defeat, stress builds up trying to figure out where to start first. Watching Pelosi get overwhelmingly reelected over Sheehan made me feel utterly depressed that both sides are makig it difficult for a 3rd menu item to make it to the list of candidates to choose from. The election system though is just plain rigged to make 3rd parties irrelevant even if they are on the ballot.
Sioux, just curious and wondering if you are native? I use to live on the Rex in NM. It was a place where I learned many wonderful things but especially to be true to myself, to walk in beauty and honor our Earth Mother. Mostly, the elders taught me to live outside the white box. It has led to some astonishing vistas of Spirit. True power is to live from one's heart. Apparently a lesson Obama never learned with his sell out style to bow before the corporate machine...
Thank you, elohim. A protest vote is really a courage vote. On last week's article Ralph Nader posted, I talked about the way Ralph Nader's lifelong courage inspired me and changed my life for the better even in these rough and depressing economic times. I like the way you stood up to that Obamabot and struck a raw nerve on him.
By the way, pleased to meet you. I look forward to more posts and discussions from you. This site is great both in terms of the articles and the extra helpful comments, well most of them anyway. This is one of the few progressive/liberal sites on the net which actually post most articles written by Ralph Nader. Not even alternet.org comes close.
Nice to meet you too Jennifer, keep the fire burning. Apparently it is extinguished in Joe and company...
You will never understand apparently that criticisms of Nader are perfectly acceptable, but what you do is far, far from the definition of that term.
Sioux Rose
ELOHIM: I "suffer" from the same subjective criterion. Very well-stated, and thank you for doing so.
Thanks for your encouragement, I've also admired what you contribute to this forum.
v.purto
"Everything is relative, (an absolute!)"
I presume, azjoe, you meant Everything is relative, (and absolute!) Then with that fullness of A = !A where is heuristic value of your proposition? The rest of discussion becomes "white noise", white dragon on white background etc, unless you and elohim do not mean dinamic, evolutionary logic, once upon the time called dialectical. Think about this.
I suppose that is true for anyone who casts a vote. It appears that objectivity has been replaced by mental masturbation.
Nader should add to his list Michael Whitney, Michael Hudson and F. Willian Endahl to his list of those who said the current state of economic affairs was corrupt and were leading to a great bust. As for anyone taking a position being 'subjective' I would counter those taking an alternative position to those of the status quo were not doing so out of personal gain or subjectivity. Those countering the status quo of Greenspan etc....were doing so by analyzing economic data with credible analytic tools. Hardly subjective.
Nader should add to his list my personal favourite, Dr. Doom himself - Nouriel Roubini. I am familiar with your 3 chosen wise men, in particular Mike Whitney, he writes excellent pieces.
Thanks for the list, Ralph.
q
Ralph Nader, on the question with which you begin your article, you have some interesting suggestions for answers. I might add to these the likelihood that some of these who "got it right" about our looming financial disaster were not so active before the presidential election as now about airing these critiques. I don't know about all the progressives in your list I do know about Greider and Hightower (as well as one you didn't mention, William K. Black who appeared last night on Bill Moyers Journal) that they were Obama supporters before the election and, for various reasons of support for him on other issues, were perhaps reluctant to rock the boat by bringing up inconvenient truths that might endanger his election. Just a footnote suggestion for your good analysis.
Jerry D Rose, Good Morning
Dean Baker offered qualified support for Geithner last Fall, quite qualifed, but support. He also criticized him, true. Adroitly, he did both.
-In The Guardian-
US Blues.
Hi azjoe, Dean Baker, "adroitly,he did both." Yep, that would be Dean Baker.
I have worked over 30 years in a small, local governmental organization habitually run by incompetent people who hire other incompetent people (middle managers) to abet them in their incompetence. It's the usual story: if you point out obvious incompetence, you get into a load of trouble. In the regime of George Wanker Bush, incompetence was the norm; so for all the slobbering, knuckle dragging morons who constituted that regime, everything was great. Barry-O and much of his supporting cast are obviously more intelligent yet, re the economy and Afghanistan, the result is the same. The answer apparently lies in the crotch, not in the mind.
Could you please explain something - Are you a close friend of Obama? Just wondering why you call him Barry-O? Isn't his name Barak?
You may not be aware of this, but it's common in democratic countries for people to ridicule politicians or show them disrespect. Referring to Barack (not Barak) Obama as "Barry O" is a way of expressing disdain for him.
Similarly, George Bush's middle name isn't "Wanker"--my guess is that the writer was intending to show disrespect, but I suppose it's possible he actually knows Bush well and this is an affectionate nickname.
v.purto
My take is that Barry-O is a construct of Barry Goldwater and Jelly-O (Ronald Reagan) Dig deap, licketyglick, and you find out a lot of interesting fucks, err, facts. Current mess is a final act of half-a-millennium tragedy, presenting itself as a farse. Find out author of last phrase. Best digs.
they're already coming around in steady bunches. remember that they're not all of the same ideological cloth. the Dems still have a crapload of conservative, corporatist members in their ranks, and they're not budging regardless, much like the trogs on the right.
the people who really wanted substantive change, however, are coming around and will continue to come around as this administration procedes down smilar paths of Bush, Clinton and Reagan.
i think Obama's a godsend in this regard, just as Clinton was for the left of the Dem party years ago. We'll have more of us by 2012, mark my words.
Once the EFCA gets ground underfoot, you'll see even more defections. Just be ready to let bygones be bygones and go forward. Not everyone's eyes can open simultaneously.
This country has never been perfect, and never will be as long as people are running things. However,it is what it is, and we may as well enjoy having a new bunch of incompetants to deal with. For many of us, it still works, and we just have to keep trying to fix the problems of those that are in umnfortunate circumstances. Constant complaining about the new administration will not help. Give them a little time and see how they get along with the disaster they inherited. Remember, the last set of self serving idiots had eight years to control everything, not three months.
re DaveBronstein April 4th, 2009 1:16 pm
"...the real nature of the last gang was totally obvious just from the way they stole the presidency."
yes.
and the nature of the gang across town was totally obvious from the way they rolled over and let the thieves get clean away.
"yes.
and the nature of the gang across town was totally obvious from the way they rolled over and let the thieves get clean away."
And while they were rolling over and letting the thieves get clean away, they were screaming their heads off at Nader and everyone who voted for him. Bigger hypocrites than Rove.
You're right. What we need is a robot president, programed to quote Thomas Jefferson. We could even build him an ebony robot for companionship. But it would behoove us to build a few robots who complain constantly, just to keep things honest.
Ralph, you left an important name off your list - your own. Perhaps due to modesty, of which some have accused you to be lacking. Never me.
I also would have liked to see Paul Krugman's name, because although perhaps considered mainstream, being a NYT columnist, he has been a Cassandra on this issue for years. Thanks to Paul, I bailed in 2006, selling a white elephant of a fixer in an up scale neighborhood, and buying a small mortgage free home on the edge of town. He had me watching the market like a hawk. I wanted and got a safe haven for the impending depression. I am very sorry for all those caught in this economic tidal wave.
The perpetrators should be jailed. Unfortunately we elected them. Yes, I blame those who deregulated the banking industry and that includes Clinton! Friend of the Left? Hell no! I read that Larry Summers talked him into undoing Glass-Steagall. I doubt it was a hard sell. Some in the banking industry crossed the legal line, but they always would have. Most just did what the law allowed, thanks to our public servants in Congress.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
You are right about Paul Krugman, right about the consequences of dumping Glass-Steagle and right about Jefferson.
I also thank you for your list and the books of these people. I find that books are, for here in america, the best source of real information. Unfortunately that information was around for a long time but being written it is basically still available. That implies that when the electricity goes out, you can still read about it.
Hey, changemymind, why do you think they were in such a hurry to dispose of the evidence? Same as in Fallujah. Of course there it was white phosphorus. Which falls under the heading of war crime.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Dave Bronstein, Obama may surprise you. He's a realist, and if he doesn't want to be assassinated, he has to play the game. But he has told us repeatedly that change must come from below (that's us) and a leader will go where the people push. Certainly when the workers of Republic Windows and Doors conducted a sit-in to prevent the selling of assets until they got their final paychecks and benefits, Obama came out in support of them. So I think we have a President who would not shoot us if we took to the streets, unlike our last one. I also think he hopes we will pick up the pitchforks. I could be wrong, but that's what I think. I'm just wondering how bad it has to get before people do it. For sure, it's going to get worse, in spite of the corporate media saying we're turning the corner.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Excellent points!
What are you talking about ? We sacrified ourselves enough already and you want to tell us to do more of it and let Barry keep allowing the devils sell us out ? The guy's acting like a coward just like most pols in Washington ! Please don't give silly conspiracy theory excuses to defend his selling out. Barry isn't surprising me though I wished deep down in my heart that he would. I would be utterly thrilled if he could prove me wrong but so far, I'm seeing none of it. I'm already sacrificing more than enough in life already and to tell me to sacrifice even more makes me angry to the point of screaming KISS MY ASS ! Sorry to be sounding very bitter about all this but Nader was correct all along but was written off and treated badly.
BeForKids,
Excellent analysis. Obama will do his best to lead but we the people can't sit by idly. Back during the Great Depression, people didn't wait for FDR to solve everything. In fact, FDR needed their support to counter huge opposition in Congress and the media. In fact, FDR faced 5 assassination attempts, 1 was very well known in 1934. As to your question about how bad it has to get, well that depends on what it actually takes for the people to wake up from fear and ignorance of taking to the streets. The monied elites are indeed very powerful and they have plenty of military backup and all to control the Congress and the White House. We the people will have to be relentless in fighting back. It doesn't matter who's in the White House. What matters is how successful we the people can unite in controlling our leaders that we elect at the polling booths.
v.purto
Five kudos to DaveBronstein, Leon could not say better; albeit he did. Alas, our square one is not 8 years back, it is rather 80, ten times longer.
I am really dissapointed that Ralph Nader did not include in his list David C. Korten, who has got it right since 1996, when he published his first book "When Corporations Rule the World", later he published "The Post-Corporate World", "The Great Turning" and his just released book, "An Agenda for a New Economey". The sad thing is that David Korten has never to my knowledge been invited on the mainstream media.
Obama is the defining moment of Africans melting into the American-Euro Empire, a.k.a. America. The last group (Indians/India) now reap the rewards of some of our best jobs, either by shipping them in here, or sending the jobs directly to them in India. Mexicans get the drug biz and jobs in our armies (then citizenship) for fighting Washington and Wall Street's illegal wars. And China, they get to play the enemy and sell our own slaves here their crap.
Nice deals for the rich, the political and those at the "top" of the media chain.
And the machine rolls on.
(Kudos to those in France and Germany who today have started getting tough.)
Alex Carey:
... the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.
Australian social scientist, quoted by Noam Chomsky in World Orders Old and New
as i read this piece and the statement about the oligarchy's control of the media, i am thinking about y'day's piece about PBS' censorship of the documentary on u.s. healthcare.
liberty or death
Even a broken clock is correct once a day....
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
A broken clock is right twice a day, although I am unsure what that has to do with it.
But the point was never about being right or wrong, it was about being part of the IN crowd.