August 03, 2008
Is America in Decline? Becker
Articles about whether America is in decline is a cyclical industry that rises and falls over about a twenty-year cycle. The previous cycle started with Paul Kennedy's bestseller of 1986 "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers", and was vigorously discussed during the next decade. It was finally dismissed after starting in the early years of the Reagan presidency there was more than twenty-five years of vigorous growth in GDP-much faster than in Western Europe- declines in unemployment to very low levels, and the complete absence of any inflationary pressure.
This gloom and doom industry has begun to grow again during the past few years. Kennedy had attributed his projected decline of the United States to its role as the world's policeman, and the resulting spending on defense and military manpower and equipment, Yet, defense spending did not account for more than six percent of GDP, and some of the military spending went for military R&D and training that had carryover to civilian products and services, such as the development of the Internet, and the training of pilots. The new pessimists continue to blame America's role as policeman, and in particular its protracted involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. They also see possible doom in the debacle in the US housing market, the high price of oil, and the current economic slowdown in income growth, and declines in employment. Much emphasis too is placed on the growth of China and India, and also Brazil, and the shift of the world's attention toward these large rapidly developing nations. Some members of the doom school claim in addition that the United States is getting "old", like old Europe, and is suffering from ailments that afflict old nations.
Readers of our blog will realize that I generally do not subscribe to this gloom and doom school concerning America. I do agree that being the world's policeman does take resources that could be producing civilian output, and countries in Europe and elsewhere free ride off of America's efforts, but when done right this policeman's role also makes the world a safer place in the future. However, the resources spent on military manpower and equipment is not large enough to have a serious effect on the growth of US civilian output. The economy and housing market will before long recover from their current difficulties. The rapid expansion of China, India, and a few other large nations does mean that the share of world GDP produced by the United States has begun to decline, and is likely to continue to decline over the next decade and longer. After all, these two huge nations, along with Brazil, comprise over forty percent of the world's population, so their rapid growth must lead to a decline in America's share of world GDP. But the success of other nations should not be taken per se an indication that America is in decline.
Moreover, and on the whole, the growth of these other nations will help US growth prospects. The United States has been for several decades the world's leader in technological innovation, so that other nations have been able to free ride to some extent over US investments in new ideas and technologies. With the rapid growth of China and others, they too will begin to make considerable innovations, and the US will now be able to take advantage of their technological advances. In other words, in the future, America will become more of an importer as well as continuing to be an exporter of new ideas and innovations.
The expansion of exports from China and other poorer nations has not benefited all nations, especially those that compete with exports of similar products. However, it has greatly benefited the US and other developed countries because the rich countries can import amazingly cheap consumer goods, and these developing countries provide a market for the industrial goods and advanced services of richer nations. As the rapidly developing countries get richer, the mix of their products and services will change, and some of them will compete directly with those of richer nations. Yet the evidence is strong that trade is stronger in general between countries of similar levels rather than different levels of economic development, but is mutually beneficial to both sides. I see no reason why this should not continue as China's, India's, and Brazil's economic development become much closer to that of the US, Japan, and Western Europe.
Another argument made by the America is declining camp is that as countries continue to get richer, individuals lose their motivation and begin to sharply cut their hours of work and ambitions regarding further accumulation of wealth and income. In a celebrated article published in 1931 called, "Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren", the great economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that as incomes continued to grow, then adults in Europe and the United States would by the year 2030 be working about 15 hours per week, and they would spent most of their time in leisure pursuits. Keynes’ predictions about the long-term rates of growth of income were surprisingly quite accurate, despite the worldwide depression then in effect, but his predictions about how people would spend their growing wealth were way off the mark. He did not appreciate that higher hourly earnings could lead people to work more hours even though their incomes were higher, and that the continuing development of new products, such as computers and television, would increase people's desire for more spending power. These effects were magnified by the interest in relative economic position since that induces men and women to strive for higher incomes in order to move ahead of their peers (on all this, see the article by Luis Rayo and me "Why Keynes Underestimated Consumption and Overestimated Leisure for the Long Run", in the recent collection of essays, "Revisiting Keynes".
I am an optimist about the future prospects of America; that is, I believe the individuality, entrepreneurship, and drive in this country will continue to propel the economy and society forward at a good pace. The biggest risk to America's continuing success lies not in the considerations already discussed, but in the expansion of government regulations and controls that can throttle the dynamic energies of its competitive private sector. Clearly, various forms of government spending and regulation, such as spending on police and the military, on schools and other infrastructure, are crucial to any prosperous society. However, the tendency during the past half-century has been to go further than is warranted as different interest groups look to the government for help. Governments now often decide what consumer goods can be produced (see our blog discussion last week), subsidize housing and other goods, and regulate who can be fired and hired (especially in many European countries but also increasingly in the US). Governments also are placing greater stress on equality as opposed to opportunity and efficiency, and pay for medical spending, provide retirement incomes, and often impose heavy taxes on persons who earn more than average.
So far, this expansion of the role of government has not been a crucial deterrent to entrepreneurship and private energies in the United States-a much greater expansion of government has had much more harmful effects in countries like Italy and France. Although I remain optimistic, I do fear that interest group pressures toward a much larger role of government in the United States may become much harder to resist in the future, and that this could eventually kill, or at least badly wound, the free market-entrepreneurial goose that has been laying the golden eggs.
Posted by becker at 08:23 PM | Comments (44) | TrackBack (2)
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lessig.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1718
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Is America in Decline? Becker:
Comments
"The expansion of exports from China and other poorer nations has not benefited all nations, especially those that compete with exports of similar products."
Ricardo was wrong?
Posted by Thomas B. at August 4, 2008 12:44 AM | direct link
Of course America is in decline, at least when judged from the perspective of one who works for a living. Health care and retirement benefits are threatened, shrinking, or non-existent. It is horrifyingly difficult to afford college for your kids. Job security has disappeared. Wages are eroding relative to inflation or even dropping in absolute terms. The top 1 per cent grab an ever larger share of the national 'pie'. And we have the remorseless, insensitive, cheerleaders orchestrating this debacle, defending it, lauding it. Thanks, guys. You are a good example of why this country is failing at meeting reality based challenges. You don't recognize reality. In fact, you haven't got a clue.
Posted by dissent at August 4, 2008 01:03 AM | direct link
The most pertinent threat facing our country is a higher corporate tax rate. Corporate tax rates decrease the amount of capex spending of firms. It also creates disincentives for firms to expand operations in this country.
Posted by John at August 4, 2008 07:49 AM | direct link
The most pertinent threat facing our country is a higher corporate tax rate. Corporate tax rates decrease the amount of capex spending of firms. It also creates disincentives for firms to expand operations in this country.
Posted by John at August 4, 2008 07:49 AM | direct link
Generally I do not believe the United States is in decline due to a constant DREAM of "I wanna go to America for further education and maybe a job so I can survive in this society and maybe support my parents back in China!" In fact, that's what my dream is. I can see why a group of Chinese so-called "comment people" say that the U.S. is killing Chinese housing market thus performing a "massacre" to the Chinese economy. Maybe, and with a relatively high possibility, our low profile on export goods' price did hurt people over the ocean.
My humble opinion, I'm a economy student in Beijing
Also, Beijing welcomes you!
Posted by Sebastian at August 4, 2008 12:47 PM | direct link
Generally I do not believe the United States is in decline due to a constant DREAM of "I wanna go to America for further education and maybe a job so I can survive in this society and maybe support my parents back in China!" In fact, that's what my dream is. I can see why a group of Chinese so-called "comment people" say that the U.S. is killing Chinese housing market thus performing a "massacre" to the Chinese economy. Maybe, and with a relatively high possibility, our low profile on export goods' price did hurt people over the ocean.
My humble opinion, I'm a economy student in Beijing
Also, Beijing welcomes you!
Posted by sebastian at August 4, 2008 12:48 PM | direct link
The expansion of exports from China and other poorer nations has not benefited all nations, especially those that compete with exports of similar products.
Are you sure? I would think that, as long as those poor nations have opened themselves up to the global economy, they will benefit from economic growth everywhere.
Sure, one shoe factory in Malaysia might be undercut by a shoe factory in Vietnam, for instance but, on the whole, I would think they would all benefit from growth in China, India, Vietnam, etc.
Posted by Richard at August 4, 2008 01:42 PM | direct link
I am a little surprised both Prof Becker and Posner omit any referrence to perhaps the most important asset to American economic growth: human capital. As David Brooks recently remarked in his weekly Op-Ed piece, America's once competitive advantage in education, and the rate of education's growth, peaked in the late 60's and our source of competitive human capital has waned as other countries (India, China, eastern Europe) continue to educate their human capital at better rates and with more efficiency. Naturally this is a long-term problem that seems an innate cultural shift from work to leisure earlier in life. Yes, more college diplomas are being awarded and higher education is more affordable than ever, but the problem arises much earlier on: during the formative years of a child's cognitive development and the cause is not so much public or private education system as much it is the parents and guardians who shape a person's life early on. This is a fundamental concern that could contribute to an American decline.
Posted by Thomas at August 4, 2008 04:35 PM | direct link
Japan gov provided policy to drag the country out of recession in 2002. What should be the US's response in 2008?
http://www.meti.go.jp/english/information/data/c6Strategiese.html
What is the similarity and difference of gov role between the two countries? (culture is one of course).
Thanks for your insight.
st
Posted by st at August 4, 2008 04:42 PM | direct link
Whether or not the economy as a whole grows, the concentration of income growth in a small segment of households is a serious issue. Using the averages doesn't really capture the adverse changes the US faces.
The long term prospects aren't good for country made up of the very wealthy on one hand; and those who teach their children, guard their property, and mow their lawns, on the other hand.
Posted by Pilgrim at August 4, 2008 07:30 PM | direct link
Civilizations don't rot from the top down and no matter the size or strength of an economy, if the building blocks (a critical mass of individuals) are poorly educated, selfish, feeding at the public treasury, lazy, self indulgent, unwilling to sacrifice, etc, etc, the country will decline. The understanding of history in the US is poor, only 35% vote, we are divided racially, politically and by gender. We are obsessed by superficialities and common tastes, While Becker's view is hopeful, it is not realistic in the least.
Posted by Jim at August 4, 2008 08:25 PM | direct link
Here again, all the argument is about money. Not freedom, not liberty, not independence. We are far past the satisfaction of our needs in terms of economics. The rest is mostly gravy.
Someone said society doesn't rot from the top down, but I say otherwise. Professors used to line up to help the CIA in the early phase of the Cold War. 100s of Professors at Columbia University alone. Then there was the bullshit of the Vietnam War. That was from the top. Now Columbia won't allow ROTC on campus. The hearts of America might still be on its side, but the minds are distinctly more agnostic. It is a serious question if a series of American leaders will ever deserve or earn the trust of most of America's intellectuals and academics again.
Posted by Josh SN at August 5, 2008 09:57 AM | direct link
Josh,
Whom do you think put those leaders there. Ignorant, uneducated (non-readers), lazy and materialistic voters, that's who. In a "democracy" you get exactly what you wish (vote) for. As far as I am concerned, the last president who was laudable was Harry Truman and he was an accident. Since then all of them have had a certain lack of character reflective of the society which elected them and now we are about to elect someone who thinks that he is Jesus Christ. "We are the ones we've been waiting for". PLEASE, spare me!!!
Posted by Jim at August 5, 2008 10:22 AM | direct link
We British are a great deal richer than we were a century ago. But a century ago "London, where power is in the air" (a line of verse that was deligtfully anachronistic when quoted by Reagan)was a reality. That reality ended in 1946 or before. The power in the air in Washington has just begun to evaporate as the BRICs become richer and more assertive. It will be surprising if much of it is left by mid century. That is the major reality facing US foreign policy.
The economic reality is coloured by the fact that wheras Britain was the predominant creditor nation of the 1908 world, in 2008 the USA is already the world's dominant debtor nation. That is reducuing and will reduce further the USA's room for manoevre; both in economic policy and in other international relations.
In the percieved economic realities that influence politics, the fall in the value of the dollar means that the feeling that the USA was unequivocally the richest nation on earth is finally ebbing away. The confidence that one's children can always expect to be better off than oneself has already ebbed in America, in a way it has not in western Europe. I read those signs as being positive. The political will to tackle the burden of vested interests that the United States has accumulated in its years of empire (Ike was very right about the military-industrial complex, but he did not foresee the half of what has accumulated in a thousand fields - from cotton subsidies via water rights and under investment in infrastucture maintenance to rescues for Fannie and Freddie shareholders, etc., etc.) is already building up. Just as Britain did not really begin to revive until some of its vested interests were tackled under Thatcher, (in the Western Roman Empire the vested interests were never tackled) so the USA will not feel renewal until it begins to cut away these burdens. Clearly, that is not likely to be the focus of this Presidential election. Nevertheless, I sense sufficient felt dissatisfactions accumulating to make it a winning political formula well before mid-century.
In 2108, assuming no cataclysm, the USA is still likely to be one of the great powers, but no longer even first among equals. Most of its citizens will be among the relatively prosperous of a much richer world; but the tide of actual and potential economic immigrants will have receded. The character and capacity of its elected leaders will vary from the excellent to the mediocre; as it has done since the foundation of the Republic.
Posted by David Heigham at August 5, 2008 12:38 PM | direct link
Is America in Decline?
That depends on your definition of decline and on what happens in November.
If the Republicans stay in power, the USA will continue to become less like western Europe and more like, say, Indonesia: weakening currency and unstable financial system; increasing gap between rich and poor and increasing gaps in the social safety net; increasing political polarization and religious extremism; increasingly authoritarian government and decreasing respect for human rights and the rule of law; increasing role of military in civilian life and decreasing role government programs such as basic science research; etc.
If the Democrats take over then the USA will shift back to being more like western Europe and less like Indonesia.
From what I can tell, though, most people in the USA want to be more like Indonesia and less like western Europe. As the ancient Chinese curse says: "May you get everything you want."
Posted by Wes at August 5, 2008 01:24 PM | direct link
Have you only just realised this ??
The dollar is sinking, your economy is massively over-dependent on foreign oil, which you have been pouring down the toilet like it is going out of fashion, you have failed to respond to the challenge from Japanese automation, and you are wondering if you have started a decline ??
Folks, that started a long, long time ago when your manufacturing became massively too expensive and China started to take up the slack. You've been borrowing far too much for far, far too long and the pigeons have come home to roost...
You have worshipped the almighty corporation, which has no human values, and whose rapacious greed has killed your long term prospects on the altar of short-term profits.
Readers of this blog need to forget about deciding 'whether' the country is in decline, and start doing some reading to understand 'why' it is on a fast-track to a mammoth irreversible decline.
Try reading :-
Joel Bakan - The Corporation [essential reading]
Naomi Klein - The Shock Doctrine
George Monbiot - Captive State - [It ain't just America that is in the mess, much of the English speaking West is heading that way too]
As it says in that great work of philosopy 'Ferris Bueller's Day Off' - 'You've been led up the primrose path...'
Top Tip for Survival ? Learn Mandarin...
Posted by Wake up and smell the coffee !! at August 5, 2008 02:10 PM | direct link
"I do agree that being the world's policeman does take resources that could be producing civilian output, and countries in Europe and elsewhere free ride off of America's efforts.."
Hilarious ! If it wasn't so serious !
A/ In Iraq, there were no WMDs, yet you seem to have managed to kill 600, 000 + civilians for an illegal war !
B/ Sadly, much as we Brits and 'Europeans' might like to 'free-ride', we seem to get pressured into joining your escapades as part of a 'coalition of the willing' [sic] to help do your dirty work.
C/ Nobody asked you to be the 'World's Policeman'.
Fewer than 3,000 Americans died on 9/11, whereas hundreds of thousands people perish at the hands of the US military-industrial complex every year.
And we Europeans are just as bad ! Our weapons from companies such as BAE and EADS are just as deadly, and we are, if anything, even less fussy about who we export to !! You guys may think your role is as the 'world's policeman', but in actual fact you are helping to sow the discord which are the seeds of your long term destruction.
Posted by Anonymous at August 5, 2008 02:30 PM | direct link
Jim,
How odd. I'll grant that most voters aren't up to my standards, but I find Truman to be about the worst President. The Senator from Pendergast, for just one example, signed the order to integrate the military... but nothing actually happened, the military, for the most part, completely disregarded his order. What was his response? Next to nothing, it was a PR move. Eisenhower actually made it happen (see Blanche Weisen Cooke's "Declassified Eisenhower").
Truman, while mouthing off about "self-determination" was the President who started America's involvement in Vietnam... to prop up French colonialism (there was no "independent" South Vietnam at that time).
What about the Korean War, the war President Eisenhower promised, and did, end in the first 9 months of his first term? Did he go through Congress, or did he call it a "Police Action" and follow orders from the United Nations?
Personally, I really like the United Nations. I used to work there, but there's no way that allows a President to dodge Congress to start a war! Not to mention that, and this is debatable, Syngman Rhee was the aggressor!
Was the CIA started, in part, as a tool of the Democratic establishment _in_addition_ to its intelligence role? Why would a puppet of party politics in Missouri ever think of that?
Posted by Josh SN at August 5, 2008 04:05 PM | direct link
Josh,
Within the context of the discussion, I was referring to the character of the presidents not to the decisions they made since all the policies of all of the presidents can be argued either way and to be sure, hindsight is pretty good. At least Truman knew that he was mortal and refused the plaudits of the sycophants and corporations. He was an ordinary person who rose to the occasion. I would much prefer that to the royalty of the Kennedys, the paranoia of Nixon, the lying self important Clintons or the certainty of Bush.
Posted by Jim at August 5, 2008 06:10 PM | direct link
People interested in this blog topic may find this recently published article to be of interest.
http://www.utne.com/2008-07-01/Politics/The-Creativity-Conceit.aspx
The Creativity Conceit
by Eamonn Fingleton
Posted by nathan at August 5, 2008 07:39 PM | direct link
Jim,
We disagree.
Posted by Josh SN at August 6, 2008 03:58 PM | direct link
Website được thiết kế chuyên nghiệp, khẳng định thương hiệu website do VINA DESIGN thiết kế . Đội ngũ tư vấn chuyên nghiệp, có kinh nghiệm đầu tư và phát triển các dự án thiết kế website, dự án giải pháp thương mại điện tử
Posted by Anonymous at August 7, 2008 02:36 AM | direct link
Thiết kế web, thiet ke web, Thiết kế website, thiet ke website, design
Posted by Thiết kế website Việt Nam - Diễn đàn thiết kế web không chuyên at August 7, 2008 02:38 AM | direct link
Quảng bá website - Thiết kế website - Thiết kế website đẹp!
Posted by Quảng bá website - Thiết kế website - Thiết kế website đẹp! at August 7, 2008 02:47 AM | direct link
Nhà cung cấp giải pháp thiết kế mỹ thuật và thiết kế web, hosting, domain chuyên nghiệp.
Thiet ke, Thiet ke web, Thiet ke website, Web design, Domain, Hosting, Server, ten mien, may chu, cung cap ten mien, cung cap hosting, cung cap server
Posted by Thiết kế web site chuyên nghiệp. Cho thuê hosting. Đăng ký domain at August 7, 2008 02:48 AM | direct link
It is my first time come here.I am a student,my English is not very well,so I cannot understand your article and views clearly.But I want to see you if you could come to china.I canot express my thoughts in English.I will work hard.
Could you give me some advice about my university life?
Best wishes
Posted by wang tianyang at August 7, 2008 03:39 AM | direct link
It is my first time come here.I am a student,my English is not very well,so I cannot understand your article and views clearly.But I want to see you if you could come to china.I canot express my thoughts in English.I will work hard.
Could you give me some advice about my university life?
Best wishes
Posted by wang tianyang at August 7, 2008 03:39 AM | direct link
It is my first time come here.I am a student,my English is not very well,so I cannot understand your article and views clearly.But I want to see you if you could come to china.I canot express my thoughts in English.I will work hard.
Could you give me some advice about my university life?
Best wishes
Posted by wang tianyang at August 7, 2008 03:40 AM | direct link
I am so sorry to send the message several times
Posted by wang tianyang at August 7, 2008 03:44 AM | direct link
I agree with most of the comment but believe you underestimate the threat from a continually expanding federal government. It is simply this: Government has become an industry like any other and competes with private enterprise for capital and customers. There are many examples of this (Medicare D being an interesting one that combines benefits and coercion.) The problem, of course, is that it is not a fair fight. The government makes the rules and enforces them at the point of a gun, metaphorical or otherwise. This may well be the natural evolution of a society, if you think about it. Question: Does the co-evolutionary landscape of private enterprise and the desire not to be governed but to be free change the outcome? Will we (first the states, then the citizenry) at the last moment--or at any moment in between--wrest the gun away from our own Frankenstein monster and gain a reprieve? There are signs. But I wonder how it is possible for a government the size of the U. S. to coexist with a world-leading economy manned by free people.
Posted by John Galt at August 7, 2008 08:19 AM | direct link
Josh,
Respectfully, we need more gentlemen thinkers like you to prevent further decline.
Jim
Posted by Anonymous at August 7, 2008 08:59 AM | direct link
It is a refreshing change to read a cheerleader for the U.S. instead of the dire warnings of total collapse I read on a near daily basis. Having said that, just because a fairy tale makes me feel good doesn't mean I believe it. Which brings me to the above article. Certainly you can make arguments that America has a great number of things in it's favor. Most countries, if you look hard enough, do. However to simply suggest that the issues faced by the U.S. economy will simply vanish or not affect greatly the overall health and well being of the average citizen is blind optimism of the highest order. As pointed out in posts above, there are deeply rooted problems in this country that the authors seem to ignore, gloss over or simply wave a theoretical magic wand and hope they disappear. Citing past historical strengths of a country and assuming they will continue is a notion held by only the most innocent among us, which apparently include the author of this opinion piece. There is a tremendous amount of difficulties the U.S. now faces that it has not faced in the past - I point to the collapse of the value of the dollar and it's loss of pride of place as the Oil-transaction currency of choice. The fact that foreign countries in the past had to horde the dollar in large amounts to procure oil secured the integrity of the value of the currency. As countries now shift away from the dollar to the Euro for large scale oil purchases there is no longer a hedge against the dollars collapse. We are seeing the beginnings of that process now. What it portends for the future of the American economy is not good and cannot possibly be spun as good or beneficial. It is the wingnut that holds together the U.S. economy.
Other issues exist as well. The "human capital" the author so optimistically crows about is questionable, at best. I live in the city of Chicago and let me tell you (not suggest to you but absolutely TELL YOU in no uncertain terms) that the inner cities hold voluminous population densities of young citizens that are basically unemployable in any real sense of the word. The vaunted American education system which the author seems to think will rise to the challenge of our competitors in India and China is in shambles, is completely underfunded and in many cases, schools are little more than detention centers where children are corralled but not taught a thing. Walk the streets of Chicago or New York (where my family is from) and see the real future of America: it isn't pretty. The underclass is growing at a far more rapid rate than those who would "strive to get ahead" as Keynes suggested of his theoretical future Americans. America is simply failing to invest in it's "human capital." The author must live in a Ivory Tower not to notice that a large portion of America's youth (inner city and rural poor, mostly) are in no way shape or form capable or even interested in competing with China and India. America's collapse will come from apathy within.
And the situation is exacerbated by the large disparity between the rich and the poor, which is not even mentioned in the article above. Such discrepancies have historically preceded social unrest and economic collapse, both of which are manifesting themselves in American society as we speak.
There are a few dozen more arguments as to why the decline of the U.S. is inevitable, but I have work to attend to. I cannot spend my morning correcting the delusions of an author so apparently out of touch with the real challenges faced by the American worker and the U.S. economy. I'm a simple worker, I can't do his job and mine at the same time.
Best of luck. We're all going to need it.
Posted by Jess Vermont at August 7, 2008 09:09 AM | direct link
Dear Professor,
I admire your thinking except on De-reulation.
Banks have changed, the lines between right and wrong have blurred.
To find the truth is like digging an ant out of quicksand with the regulators and banks. The last rumor I read is that bank earning statements are unreliable mainly due to the under reporting of loses.
I have come to believe that these financial institutions dealing in mortgage loans require to be regulated effectively because basically they are dishonest in their dealings. Consumer regulations must be passed to give the consumer the right to question, object or to contest any problems that cause the borrower concern with the institution that has his loans, deposits etc. The analogy here is that the consumer acts like a smoke detector in a house. Where there is smoke the detector sounds the alarm. Where there is a financial transaction that is wrong or dishonest, it is the consumer that finds out first. Accordingly when the consumer has redress in the regulatory system with his bank, it can be tracked, much like the FDA tracks Voluntary Consumer Complaints looking for smoke. The Regulatory system in this country is too independent and self serving. The Congressional oversight is a joke. People know when they are being lied to or “spinned”. This meltdown will get worse. It will happen again and again. Our regulatory entities of government have under performed with the present financial crisis. These government entities do not appear to have the balance and checks to ascertain the credibility or integrity of the financial system. What is scary, is the Congress. These people went on vacation.
We have almost 4 million foreclosure homeowners that are facing extremely serious situations affecting their very lives. There are another 2million projected for year end 2009. Congress displays an attitude that these foreclosure victims are nothing more than an aggravation.
The Congress is fat with money, power and all the perks. Rome is on fire. I think I hear a violin.
Michael LittleBig
POB 16588, RockyRiver OH 44116-3065
Posted by Michael LittleBig at August 7, 2008 01:05 PM | direct link
Posted by バイブ at August 7, 2008 09:26 PM | direct link
hayude thanks
Posted by geciktirici at August 8, 2008 08:31 AM | direct link
penis büyütücü
Posted by penis büyütücü at August 8, 2008 08:32 AM | direct link
zayıflama
Posted by zayıflama at August 8, 2008 08:35 AM | direct link
Thanks a lot
Posted by sohbet odaları at August 8, 2008 02:05 PM | direct link
Michael, Exactly. EVERY time regulations are eased or relaxed Wall Street comes in an steals us blind. The last couple decades have been the undoing of the protections put in after 1929.
Nader has a GOOD handle on this. As you imply, Nader specifically favors having derivatives audited in the same GAAP manner as other instruments. $500 trillion of these are "traded" per year and few buyers know what they are "worth", that's why the term "illiquid is used so much. Translation: a pawnbroker wouldn't give two cents on the dollar for them.
The new joke should be "the check is in the mail, government is your enemy and deregulation and leaving it to "the market" is the cure for all ills" What has been stolen and lost in the last 8 years is beyond imagination and can never be recovered.
Posted by Jack at August 9, 2008 12:28 AM | direct link
"Is Ameri'k'a in decline?" Depends. To quote Dylan from the Sixties, "Those who aren't busy being born are busy dieing". Now, that, was a time when the Nation was truly dieing. Yet, somehow we managed to survive. Or how about the Civil War? Now, there was a time, when the existence of the Nation was up for grabs. Yet, somehow we managed to survive. Or how about the Great Depression? Now there was an economic failure and collapse. Yet, somehow we managed to survive.
Through out our history, limited as it may be, The Nation has been in decline in one way or another. What has been our salvation is a peculiar American genius for recognizing what the real problems are and working to correct them in a rational, and clear headed fashion. Regardless of ideology and other forms of "Group Think". Perhaps the powerful tool of survival and regeneration is the ability to come up with practical pragmatic solutions to the problems at hand.
As T.Paine so aptly put it, "These are the times that try men's souls, the summertime soldier and fair weather patriot ...", or as A.Lincoln put it, "We must learn to think anew and act anew ...", or as B.Dylan put it, "Those who aren't busy being born are busy dieing ...".
If we lose that, we are in decline.
Posted by neilehat at August 10, 2008 09:18 AM | direct link
I'm not sure if America is in decline or not. I hope it is not, but blind hope defeats itself. We need the pessimists to keep us aware.
Where I get pessimistic is when I read 1) that the citizens of over two dozen countries live longer, healthier, lives that Americans; 2) that we have more of our population in prison than any other country (including China, where we have more in both percentages and actual numbers); 3) gun violence (Switzerland is basically an armed camp, with soldiers allowed to bring their weapons and ammunition home with them yet has less gun violence than we do, so there's something else wrong besides the number of weapons), and 4) the disparity between the rich and the poor increases and the middle class is disappearing (an alarming trend).
Posted by David Merchant at August 11, 2008 01:06 PM | direct link
Thanks.
Posted by Muhabbet at August 12, 2008 01:24 PM | direct link
Thanks.
Posted by Sohbet at August 12, 2008 01:26 PM | direct link
Thanks.
Posted by Cet at August 12, 2008 01:27 PM | direct link
