And now the mortgage mess is making nonsense of claims that we have effective contract enforcement — in fact, the question is whether our economy is governed by any kind of rule of law.This news item has been making the rounds. Basically servicers of mortgages are foreclosing on homes when they don't actually follow the process of foreclosure. This is illegal. Property rights are a foundation of our capitalist economy.
More interesting reading from Barry Ritholtz's The Big Picture (a very good and objective source of analysis on all things financial):
here, (this is the most important one)
here,
here,
here,
here, and
here.
This brings up a bigger point I'd like to make. There is no longer a two party system in our government. It used to be Republican and Democrat and those two things stood for two different views on how government should be run and how it should regulate its citizens. For about a decade now I just don't see how you can cast the American political system into this framework. We have a single party system now largely run by corporations. There differentiator between the two political parties now is which corporations are they beholdened to?
As far as I can see both political parties display the same two issues. First they have no fiscal responsibility. They display it in different ways but ultimately it comes down to the same problem. Whether it is defined benefits plans we can't pay for or wars that provide no benefit to our safety, both parties spend like drunken sailors. Actually that's an insult to drunken sailors. The bailout of the financial community was started by W. Bush and continued and expanded by by Obama. The war started by W. Bush is still going on with Obama
Two, they are not "protecting" the populace. Whether it is infringements on privacy or the complete gutting of protective regulations or the complete apathy to instituted regulations, the government no longer serves to protect your interests. Most regulations offered by both political parties are written by corporations whether it be music, telecom, banking, insurance, etc. And most regulations are written through legislative actions which are coerced by corporate lobbying.
How can Obama be rationally viewed as better than Bush? He's continued to support these two ridiculous wars. He's supported Patriot Act type legislation that removes civil liberties. He's continued his bailout of the financial industry with little appetite for prosecution. I could go on for paragraphs with this kind of thing.
It is an irrational viewpoint to support a political party based on what they USED to stand for. Right now they are indistinguishable to me. And they are certainly not representing me anymore.
1 comment:
Ok, but here's the thing. For better or worse, you simply cannot turn the super tanker quickly. Yes, we're still in two ridiculous wars, and, yes, we still have security measures in place that help no one - but with the realities on the ground and the attitudes of the American public, what's the alternative? I'd like to think Obama would actually be trying something different (he did draw down Iraq), but he has to deal with the house on fire first.
One thing I do agree with is that there is absolutely no excuse for not taking over every large bank, firing everyone above a certain pay grade, and unwinding them as carefully as necessary. All these people who say you need these people who got us into this mess to get us out of it are ridiculous. And, worse, people in the financial industry hate government intervention, and are some of the biggest backers of getting government out of their business. Give me a break - half of Wall Street should be a justifiable ghost town.
Post a Comment