No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

[flintlock]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

My Libertarian instincts tell me no bailout, but what EJ proposes makes sense . Unfortunately, the bailout we will get will probably not be anything close to that so I'm still not convinced that a bad bailout is better than no bailout. I have no doubt that any bailout funds that flow through wallstreet will be decimated.

To you anarchists out there, its one thing to say "bring on the depression", another to actually experience it. Lots of little details people forget about when reality sets in. For one thing, the 1930's were relatively speaking, a lot more peaceable and law abiding time than what we live in now. I don't see folks humbly "taking their medicine" laying down quite as easily as they did back then. And the people then had a better work ethic, were willing to get their hands dirty, etc. I see a much uglier response in our times. Plays right into the socialists hands. You may feel well prepared to ride out a depression, but your neighbors( or the govt) may decide you have more than you need and decide to encourage you to share it.

[rj1]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

EJ said: "As JK Galbraith noted: "The great dialectic in our time is not, as anciently and by some still supposed, between capital and labor; it is between economic enterprise and the state.""

This is where the wheels fall off. It is impossible for markets to deliver collective benefits without the presence of governments. There is a reason that markets which generate the most wealth always exist in territories with strong states, if not downright imperial states.

Whatever the degree of EJ's policy pragmatism, which I actually think trumps statements like this most of the time or I am sure I wouldn't bother visiting this site, this dualistic view of the world is simply not very helpful at this point. It is part of the problem. The question is simply what are governments and markets supposed to do. The story worldwide over the last 40 years is not one of the triumph of markets or states. Rather, it is one of extensive institutional experimentation with different roles for and combinations of state, market, and civic. Viewing the world in these dualistic terms is not just dogmatic, it makes it impossible to see, much less assess, a much larger realm of institutional possibility.

The beauty of the proposal that opened this thread is that it doesn't operate with this dualism in mind. To the extent it is insightful it is insightful along entirely different axes of inquiry. If it weren't it would just be banal.

In short, Galbraith's statement is just as anachronistic as Marx's. It is just fighting the last war (quite literally in Galbraith's case).

I have to agree with sabocat here.

[sadsack]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

EJ appears to be consistent in his libertarian philosophy, in that any "bail out" or other accommodation, needs to respect the various self interests that constitute the parties to such agreement.

Anarchy, on the other hand (in my perhaps inadequate comprehension), is characterized by the absence of any requirement that an agreement be in the mutual interest of all parties.

Thus, as has been opined in many threads here, the initial Paulson bailout plan is, as "symbols" has graphically pointed out, no more than a Godfather-type "offer that cannot be refused." As such, it is anarchistic in nature, using the bludgeon of fear to preclude proper due diligence with respect to the self-interest of the involved parties.

Perhaps my understanding of Libertarianism is erroneous, but I gather that the fundamental difference between it and anarchy is this underlying assumption that ecomonic transactions between parties should be both uncoerced and to the ultimate benefit of both parties. Anarchy, on the other hand, is "kill or be killed," "only the strong survive," etc.

As John Donne said,

No man is an island, entire of itself;
Every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were.

Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind;
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.

If we are to live in a human society, and pay at least a passing acknowledgement to the benefits therefrom derived, let not our hearts be so hard, to commit to spiting ourselves, for the sake of fulfilling our resentful desires or indulging our sense of schadenfreude . . .

[jtabeb]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

No, it is not a class struggle, nor a struggle between workers and capitalists. That ended decades ago. As JK Galbraith noted: "The great dialectic in our time is not, as anciently and by some still supposed, between capital and labor; it is between economic enterprise and the state."


No argument there. But who let them? Who voted for the politicians that ran our country while this disaster developed?
Yes, as I told my publisher and was reported in the LA Times and repeated afterwards by others, “We always do the right thing, but only after exhausting all other options."

We have only just begun to fuck up.

Wrong it is a class struggle, between EARNED and UN-EARNED INCOME, what country do you live in? Have you ever talked to someone that makes less than $50,000 a year, or $25,000?

It is a class struggle because the Earned income class has had real wages frozen while nominal gains due to inflation "trickles-up" to the rentier class of FIAT financed asset holders (traders).

Were it not for inflation the picture would be exceedingly clear to all. Just subtract 10% from workers wages every year in nominal terms whilst non-traded goods and services maintain a constant price level. This is neo-serfdom, a systems that VERY MUCH pits labor against capital. But in the real world the effect is much more hidden from public scrutiny and much more vicious as inflation is such a powerful wealth redistribution tool (that only flows upward, I might add).

"No argument there. But who let them? Who voted for the politicians that ran our country while this disaster developed"

I love this quote, you chastise idealogues, but then become one to dismiss "their" argument. And you expose your own hypocrisy by quoting as fact one of the biggest, if not the biggest, fallacies in all of american politics.

Let's see, people voted for elected officials that LIED to them and later went on to make extreemly poor decisions because:
(no-one disputes this, I hope?)

a. They were stupid (not skeptical enough)
b. The media became less independent and more consolidated and in the process restricted debate by crowding out non-mainstream viewpoints.
Thereby, slowy dumbing down debate until, as it stands currently, the depth of discussion produces no actual public education, just a circus.

(That the rinse in political power of the preferred media outlets directly parallels the rise in political power of the FIRE players is not surprising. The exact same mechanism, extreem wealth accumulation that led to domination of the political process and the crowding-out of political access for the general public, manfisted itself in all of the power structures of our society.)

c. Willfully ignored the factual truth when it was presented to them by the mass media even though it was in a clear and understandable format that was dutifully and rigerously examined.
d. were intentionally mis-led by government officals, academics, and "experts" in all kinds of reports and statistics that purported to show the status of everything with and without the effects of inflation.

If you answered all except for "C" you have the correct answer.

Give the people shitty information to base their decisions off of and guess what? They make really, really bad ******* decisions. NO SHIT, REALLY?
( I think it's called GIGO )

EJ, you can be a real elitist swine some times.

At least Hudson for all his flaws makes a fair assessment of the situation, you do not, I'm afraid.

[sabocat]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

Although, I should have paid more attention to the word dialectic. If EJ takes that to be what it means, rather than simply as a synonym for "polar opposite" I take back the previous post... Galbraith was a pragmatist first and foremost, not a free market ideologue.

[BrianL]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

I ran this commentary by ~8 other non-itulipers. Most were people who had been following the situation to some degree. Mostly male, ages ranging from 21-50, averaging closer to 30.

6 of them stated positions similar to grapejelly. Of them, 4 considered themselves Libertarians, 1 was a Democrat and the other a Republican.

Given the small and biased sample set, the results aren't significant. At the same time, I concerned that if 'let it burn to the ground' position takes hold among the masses, this could get very ugly quickly.

I noted in another thread that more and more people seem to be expressing a desire for a Great Depression repeat to 'get it out of the system' and wipe the slates clean. A temporary socialist stand to user in a new free market system where people feel they'd start without the deck stacked against them.

Personally, I don't think these people understand the pain they are asking for.

[bart]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

Personally, I don't think these people understand the pain they are asking for.

Indeed, and just like there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, there is nothing quite so permanent as temporary socialism, temporary fascism, etc.

[krakknisse]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

Indeed, and just like there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, there is nothing quite so permanent as temporary socialism, temporary fascism, etc.

Sigh. I wish people understood that a little better.

Guys: "Government is a dangerous servant and a fearful master". Your own Thomas Jefferson said that.

We need government. We just need it restrained. As long as we have fiat money, this bubble cycle will repeat ad nauseam. I'd say that "a small bailout" is like being "a little pregnant". Bankers are wiping us clean with the governments help. If you want your kids, grand-kids, and grand-grand kids to be free, don't stand for it. Fractional reserve banking concentrates power in the elites hands.

FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING IS A SCAM.
TAKE THE HIT. NOW. NO BAILOUT. BUY GOLD.

Call it whatever philosophy you want.

[santafe2]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

i am cynical enough to believe that, although the king plan, or the roubini plan, or any one of a number of other plans make more sense, we are going to get a variant of the paulson plan, with a few bells and whistles to buy the necessary 12 changed votes.

I'm sure you're correct. The House vote appears to have fallen apart because the Democrats were requiring Republican support in the area of 75 votes. When the House Republican leaders failed to bring that number to the table the Democrats decided to wash their hands of it. Both sides know this bailout is an ill conceived loser and neither side is willing to name the baby with their party. I suspect the bill will be little changed but the posturing will largely subside as there are very few with a horizon past November 4th.

[santafe2]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

Wrong it is a class struggle, between EARNED and UN-EARNED INCOME, what country do you live in?...

EJ, you can be a real elitist swine some times.

Not to single out the above quote but the recrimination on this thread is breathtaking. The moral certitude like concrete - Labeling each other to disconnect the validity of argument from reality - Diatribe as dialectic proxy.

The points on all sides are well taken, the reproach only serves to fog the argument. I don't see a lot of kumbaya in our immediate future so we might be better served by our ideas than our clever words.

[sabocat]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

One thing I will add for all of you who fear the angry masses... Do not worry. They are prostrate. It may be the 1930s in economic terms, but it isn't in political terms. There is no threat of any ideological or popular socialism. There is hardly even a threat of unionization. No, it will be what C. Wright Mills called "The Power Elite" that will be arbitrating this particular debacle... (yet everyone still irrationally sees the specter of socialism threatening to enserf us all).

The people who are having government take over the financial sector are technocrats. That is a different problem, but merely one more on the list of problems that are invisible to those who see the world in simple Hayekian or Cold War terms.

[Supercilious]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

EJ the King plan is nothing else than rewarding stupidity, greed an irresponsible behavior with taxpayer's money.

Hank&Ben's bailout plan is nothing else than a per capita Wall Street tax ... every American form senior citizen in a nursing home to the premature baby in an incubator has to pay $2700 to Wall Street of else ...




Why don't we make it legal and on the square? Why not to have the Clowngress make a new law called "The Financial Cast System of United States of Somalia" which will say that every year every member of the inferior cast has to pay x amount of dollars to support the High Cast of Wall Street Priests?

It wasn't the taxpayer the one who lobbied for the neutering of the Glass-Steagal Act. Without that neutering we would not be here. It was the financial "geniuses" on Wall Street who fought hard to get rid of it.

If I max all my credit cards and my personal credit line (on which I have no balance now) and begin whining that I'm poor and I'm in trouble are you willing to "recapitalize" me with a $240000 bailout, so I can cotinue doing the same thing next day? If the answer is yes and you are such a charitable and good person, just let me know...

The whole idea of Mortgage Based Security is not new. The first MBS' came out in late 18th century in Germany and their use never resulted in a housing bubble. Strange isn't it ?

There were no stochastic credit risk evaluations .. no numerical solutions.. no binomial tree .. no Monte Carlo ... well .. no risk gambling with math.

Those MBS were called Pfandbriefe and the main difference between the "stupid german" instruments and the "modern risk-free" MBS, is that the old german banks making loans and packing them into Pfandbriefe, kept those loans on their books.... Yes, there was the occasional bank failure, but there was no such thing as setting the whole financial system on FIRE. It's that simple...

There was a time when the banker was one of the pillars of the community, like the priest, doctor, policeman and the school teacher.

I'm not an anti-banking anarchist, I'm just an advocate of responsible and non-fraudulent banking.

In my books Ben&Hank, bailout is nothing else than a theft perpetrated on a national scale, and it encourages further fraud and irresponsible behavior on the Wall Street. King does nothing else than to carefully and artfully cover Ben&Hank's bailout plan with lipstick.

Well if you choose to support King's plan ... what can I say? It's your website and you business... and it's a free country ...

One more thing EJ ... my assessment of your short comment ...

[Rajiv]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

Kucinich on the Rachel Maddow show

[cakins]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

"Utopian Anti-Interventionism"

The first bailout failure was simply a mandate from America's hard-working majority...who were tireless in calling their representatives...

Bailout: Main Street’s message to Wall Street & Washington…

September 30, 2008 · Filed Under The Fed, Bernanke & Paulson
We don’t believe you.
Not a single word you say.
Why?
Do the words “read my lips - no new taxes” ring a bell?
We didn’t believe you when you said - “the credit crisis is well contained.”
We didn’t believe you when you said - “the worst is now behind us.”
We didn’t believe you when you told us the bill would be - “$150 billion.”
We didn’t believe you then and we don’t believe you now.
And how dare you!?!
How dare you trot out a bumbling, stumbling, stuttering, slickster like
the former CEO of Goldman Sachs who personally profited to the tune
of a $700 Million Dollar personal fortune by sending our jobs to China
so some fat cat Wall Street CEO could double the value of his stock options,
grab some lobbyist created tax credits, and drop .09 cents to his bottom line.
Not to mention that he, his former firm, and his ilk, were the ones who created
and profited from dumping all this toxic Wall Street paper on Main Street in
the first place!
Any coincidence that Paulson tried to “bum rush” us into a bailout, right
after Goldman Sachs started to collapse?
Bear Stearns - no problem.
Fannie & Freddie - no problem.
Lehman Brothers - no problem.
Merrill Lynch - no problem.
WAMU - no problem.
Goldman? - problem.
We all know there are no coincidences on Wall Street.
And now you want to keep your $40 million dollar apartment in Manhattan,
your $10 million dollar vacation home in the Hampton’s, and the windfall
profits you sucked out of America, just before you collapse it?
You want us to bail you out of bankruptcy, right before you send us
(and America) into it?
You want bankruptcy reform for you - after you locked us into serfdom
with the bankruptcy reform act of 2005 - right at the peak of the credit,
and housing bubble?
You want a bailout - AFTER you locked us, our children, and America
into debtors prison?
Relief, reform, and a bailout for you… and the bill & debtors prison for us?
You must really think we’re a bunch of chumps.
Well guess what Wall Street & Washington, while “this sucka may go down”
this time YOU’RE going down with us.
Sincerely,
Main Street
http://tinyurl.com/3jyn74

[deepvelvet]

Re: No Time for Utopian Anti-Interventionism

You are an anarchist, not a Libertarian.

But your comment about how the US awaited self-correction in the 1930s was strange. There was massive intervention in the economy by the US government in those years, was there not?