Econo-crisis

[Walsingham]

We've got a

on here, so I thought it was worth pitching some ideas in. See what we get.

 

~

 

It occurrred to me this morning that the central problem we have is that we're only exploring two options: we either pump money into the system, or we let it crash. My take on why neither option has been taken is that both are bollocks. We can't pump in capital without fixing the structural problems. And we can't crash because the cost is too high.

 

It further occurred to me that what is in fact needed is a method for allowing defunct portions of the economy to crash without the impact of those crashes being communicated onwards. Controlled demolitions, if you like.

 

Now, I'm not remotely financially astute enough to suggest how such controlled demolitions might work. but I thought it was an interesting idea.

 

What think you, boffins?

[Gorgon]

I remember a recent discussion where we decided that invading Russia, specifically the gas and oil rich regions of the Kaukasus could be a solution. As long as the war didn't last too long, the period of intense mobilisation would help the job maket immesurably. With Gasprom's resources at our disposal the economic recovery would be on the fast track.

 

We should leave in any event if we hadn't reached our objectives by winter. History, bad karma and all that.

[Malcador]

I remember a recent discussion where we decided that invading Russia, specifically the gas and oil rich regions of the Kaukasus could be a solution. As long as the war didn't last too long, the period of intense mobilisation would help the job maket immesurably. With Gasprom's resources at our disposal the economic recovery would be on the fast track.

 

We should leave in any event if we hadn't reached our objectives by winter. History, bad karma and all that.

 

Wonder if they read Red Storm Rising..

[Walsingham]

So... structured demolition of failing companies and a land war in Asia. Any other ideas?

[Gfted1]

Go against a Sicilian when death is on the line?

[Gorth]

It further occurred to me that what is in fact needed is a method for allowing defunct portions of the economy to crash without the impact of those crashes being communicated onwards. Controlled demolitions, if you like.

That is like peeing in your pants. A short term warm and fuzzy feeling before the cold sets in again, as you will still have the structural problems (endemic corruption and inefficiency).

 

Split Europe in two and kick out those who can't meet the requirements and hit those politicians who are dead set on empire building for their own reasons, whether it be megalomania, being paid by the companies who wants expansion or just plain stupid.

[Tigranes]

Wouldn't that cause massive problems long-term where you get the Undercity and Overcity of Europe, and the latter is forced to gradually shut down all immigration (except for the dirty work they need done), holding poorer and needier countries to ransom for their resources, etc?

[Gorth]

Wouldn't that cause massive problems long-term where you get the Undercity and Overcity of Europe, and the latter is forced to gradually shut down all immigration (except for the dirty work they need done), holding poorer and needier countries to ransom for their resources, etc?

Letting half of it crash and burn vs. letting all of crash and burn?

 

I'm not exactly a member of the Mussolini fan club, but he did take an aggressive stance against organized crime and corruption. Unfortunately the current breed of politicians take an aggressive stance against independent audits and accountability. Greece and Italy (and Spain and Portugal for that matter) has little short to medium potential as anything but money pits where you can shovel all your money into and 5 years from now, nobody can tell your where the billions went and whose pockets it ended up in (e.g. the first 100 billion Euros that disappeared in Greece). So, sending more money solved absolutely zero issues, it just prolongs the problem.

[213374U]

Letting half of it crash and burn vs. letting all of crash and burn?

Letting half of it crash and burn is letting all of it crash and burn. If you start kicking countries out of the Euro, their #1 reaction will be a drastic currency devaluation. This will in turn hit both Germany and France pretty bad because >50% of their exports go to Eurozone countries, that will be in a process of BOT readjustment for years. So, recession for everyone again, instead of recession for just some.

 

ECB-sponsored economic rescue is probably the most sensible -as in cheapest- choice. I agree about the corruption thing, though, but that's a problem in and of itself. Want to extend the debate into the issue of terminally corrupt but democratically elected government vs rolled-up-sleeves, undemocratic, opaque bureaucrat cliques, or do we leave that for another thread?

[Gorth]

Want to extend the debate into the issue of terminally corrupt but democratically elected government vs rolled-up-sleeves, undemocratic, opaque bureaucrat cliques, or do we leave that for another thread?

Not that I don't want to discuss it, but I just can't drum up the interest in politics to really motivate myself. My interest is mostly from a historians perspective, as dull as it may sound. Short version is, I think democracy is an easier product to market to the masses (who are you going to blame, the idiots that voted the current incumbent in?), but not necessarily the best or most efficient form of government

[Calax]

Viva La Revolucion!

[Guard Dog]

Short version is, I think democracy is an easier product to market to the masses (who are you going to blame, the idiots that voted the current incumbent in?), but not necessarily the best or most efficient form of government

No it is the worst....except for every other kind.

[Orogun01]

Short version is, I think democracy is an easier product to market to the masses (who are you going to blame, the idiots that voted the current incumbent in?), but not necessarily the best or most efficient form of government

No it is the worst....except for every other kind.

Except that it's the most inefficient one, maybe our modern view is eschewed by all the tyrannical regimes (some of which we put into power) and vestiges of Cold War thinking. But if you need some proof you only need look at the government inefficiency to deal with economic crises, being completely dependent on the free market to get back on course by itself. Which also renders them incapable of staving off the corporate takeover of government.

[Walsingham]

I've been reading your comments with interest.

 

I'd suggest the theory that democracy is simply a mechanism. The energy which powers that mechanism is the underlying political culture.

 

Or to put it another way, democracy is the lense through which the light of political culture shines.

 

A key problem (in my opinion) is that many forms of democracy cripple government with constraints and invariably get corrupted by agile and ruthless sub-groups.

 

A further point must be that I can't think of very many countries without serious corruption problems. And the ones where it's not so bad still have problems.

[Orogun01]

I've been reading your comments with interest.

 

I'd suggest the theory that democracy is simply a mechanism. The energy which powers that mechanism is the underlying political culture.

 

Or to put it another way, democracy is the lense through which the light of political culture shines.

 

A key problem (in my opinion) is that many forms of democracy cripple government with constraints and invariably get corrupted by agile and ruthless sub-groups.

 

A further point must be that I can't think of very many countries without serious corruption problems. And the ones where it's not so bad still have problems.

I see it another way, democracy is corrupted from the get go because if there is something that's ever true is that every man will act in their self interest. Fact is that democracy in America is more corrupt because we thrive from self interest, and with the consolidation of power into the upper 5% it has become easier for them to affect the political discourse. Now everyone with enough money can buy lobbyist to protect their interests in Washington and while i'm not assuming malice on their intentions their issues will take priority to those of the common man. Which when you count the time that the incumbent has in office and the time he can actually dedicate to legislation; which is very short, we get very few laws that benefit the public in effect.

[Calax]

*Cough*

 

Mild topic hijacking, but Anyone following this "Occupy Wall Street" thing? It'd stayed below my radar for WEEKS and is now becoming MUCH more powerful (people are likening it to the Tea Party).

 

And it does seem like Nanci Pelosi is trying to hijack it's message, and say that they aren't dissatisfied with the current economic climate in the polls, and instead say that they're "Dissatisfied with Congress".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

 

So... thoughts? Expansion on the bare bones I've given? SPEAK!

[WDeranged]

It's interesting stuff, there are a few red streaks but at least people on the whole are looking in the right direction.

[213374U]

Meh. At least commies had their manifesto. All these guys have is a dumbed down, decaf version!. Not terribly innovative, and sorely lacking punch.

 

Here in Spain, we had that same thing just a few months ago. They made a lot of noise, camped for a few weeks, campaigned for blank/null voting, grew tired, and went home. Some time later, it's business as usual.

 

Don't expect a real revolution while 40 million tonnes of food end up in the trash bin each year, in the US alone.

[Guard Dog]

*Cough*

 

Mild topic hijacking, but Anyone following this "Occupy Wall Street" thing? It'd stayed below my radar for WEEKS and is now becoming MUCH more powerful (people are likening it to the Tea Party).

 

And it does seem like Nanci Pelosi is trying to hijack it's message, and say that they aren't dissatisfied with the current economic climate in the polls, and instead say that they're "Dissatisfied with Congress".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

 

So... thoughts? Expansion on the bare bones I've given? SPEAK!

I've watched it a little on Youtube & News coverage. It seems like it's made up of a handful of Campus Communists and a few hundred useful idiots. Most of the folks there when asked are unable to fomulate a coherent sentence about why they are there. The few that can are obviously left wing nut jobs/commies.

 

The irony is that ten years from now the ones that actually do graduate will be working for the companies they are protesting against and probably doing well in them.

[Humodour]

Most of the folks there when asked are unable to fomulate a coherent sentence about why they are there.

 

Sounds like the Tea Party.

[Calax]

*Cough*

 

Mild topic hijacking, but Anyone following this "Occupy Wall Street" thing? It'd stayed below my radar for WEEKS and is now becoming MUCH more powerful (people are likening it to the Tea Party).

 

And it does seem like Nanci Pelosi is trying to hijack it's message, and say that they aren't dissatisfied with the current economic climate in the polls, and instead say that they're "Dissatisfied with Congress".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

 

So... thoughts? Expansion on the bare bones I've given? SPEAK!

I've watched it a little on Youtube & News coverage. It seems like it's made up of a handful of Campus Communists and a few hundred useful idiots. Most of the folks there when asked are unable to fomulate a coherent sentence about why they are there. The few that can are obviously left wing nut jobs/commies.

 

The irony is that ten years from now the ones that actually do graduate will be working for the companies they are protesting against and probably doing well in them.

Well, it seems like the big thing that all of them are fighting for is the removal of businesses and their money from politics. One thing that's interesting is how Fox News is playing this, the Tea Party (which has about the same level of coherence and rightwing nutjobs and so on) is the "demonstration of people's rights to enter politics" while this group manages to somehow be "violent nutjobs" who are "disorganized" and "nazi's" (Ann Coulter mainly)

[Walsingham]

I don't think that we should be at all surprised by attacks on Wall Street. If the dog craps on the carpet, you reach for the rolled up newspaper! However, I don't see this spasm translating into an effective change in the political landscape of voting America.

 

So long as the people vote for the guy with the best PR, they are going to be voting for the guy who sells himself best to big business. And that means no shift in the relationship between Congress and business.

 

I don't see that as a failing of the system, so much as a failing of the people.

[Humodour]

I don't think that we should be at all surprised by attacks on Wall Street. If the dog craps on the carpet, you reach for the rolled up newspaper! However, I don't see this spasm translating into an effective change in the political landscape of voting America.

 

So long as the people vote for the guy with the best PR, they are going to be voting for the guy who sells himself best to big business. And that means no shift in the relationship between Congress and business.

 

I don't see that as a failing of the system, so much as a failing of the people.

 

I agree, but I'm not sure how we can fix it.

[Morgoth]

I'm not sure what these protesters are trying to convey, or why they're so pissed.

 

Poverty? What is poverty really? Surely not some kids who can afford a $2000 NYC apartment rent and camp a week outside of some Telecom shop to get the latest iPhone first.

 

Nah.

 

The culture of corruption, decline and stupidity that is so prevalent in our todays (western) culture?

 

More powah to them. Just remember when you're being interviewed not to say confusing and stupid stuff. Haha.

[Walsingham]

I don't think that we should be at all surprised by attacks on Wall Street. If the dog craps on the carpet, you reach for the rolled up newspaper! However, I don't see this spasm translating into an effective change in the political landscape of voting America.

 

So long as the people vote for the guy with the best PR, they are going to be voting for the guy who sells himself best to big business. And that means no shift in the relationship between Congress and business.

 

I don't see that as a failing of the system, so much as a failing of the people.

 

I agree, but I'm not sure how we can fix it.

 

A start would be to improve the slightly abstract skill of critical reasoning in the voting populace. I say that because I think it's just possible one could foster that skill without getting directly political. It's a life skill so the benefits would be felt all over the damn place. However, I do sometimes wonder (in the twilight hours) whether it's just too easy for politicians to keep people dumb. I'm not saying they plan it. I'm just saying it's far far too easy to say it's far too difficult to do anything about.