Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

[jtabeb]

That says it all, don't it.:mad::mad::mad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/29/op...29krugman.html

"Now what? We have already, in effect, recreated New Deal-type guarantees: as the financial system plunged into crisis, the government stepped in to rescue troubled financial companies, so as to avoid a complete collapse. And you should bear in mind that the biggest bailouts took place under a conservative Republican administration, which claimed to believe deeply in free markets. There’s every reason to believe that this will be the rule from now on: when push comes to shove, no matter who is in power, the financial sector will be bailed out. In effect, debts of shadow banks, like deposits at conventional banks, now have a government guarantee.

The only question now is whether the financial industry will pay a price for this privilege, whether Wall Street will be obliged to behave responsibly in return for government backing. And who could be against that?"

[bcassill]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

When the Fed and the SEC are in bed with the Wall Street Oligarchs, they have the power of the printing press to keep things afloat. What's wrong with that????:p:eek:

[Ghent12]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

In what regard was President Bush considered a "conservative Republican administration," exactly? The term "neoconservative" has been in the lexicon for long enough to be used appropriately even by someone as ignorant as Paul "Deficits-don't-matter-now-because-it's-Obama" Krugman.

[nathanhulick]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

That says it all, don't it.:mad::mad::mad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/29/op...29krugman.html

"Now what? We have already, in effect, recreated New Deal-type guarantees: as the financial system plunged into crisis, the government stepped in to rescue troubled financial companies, so as to avoid a complete collapse. And you should bear in mind that the biggest bailouts took place under a conservative Republican administration, which claimed to believe deeply in free markets. There’s every reason to believe that this will be the rule from now on: when push comes to shove, no matter who is in power, the financial sector will be bailed out. In effect, debts of shadow banks, like deposits at conventional banks, now have a government guarantee.

The only question now is whether the financial industry will pay a price for this privilege, whether Wall Street will be obliged to behave responsibly in return for government backing. And who could be against that?"

This shouldnt really be news to anyone who reads this forum.

[Raz]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

In what regard was President Bush considered a "conservative Republican administration," exactly? The term "neoconservative" has been in the lexicon for long enough to be used appropriately even by someone as ignorant as Paul "Deficits-don't-matter-now-because-it's-Obama" Krugman.

Thank you.

NeoCons are NOT Conservatives. Conservatives don't spend money like Lyndon Johnson, they don't accept Presidential Wars, and they don't support new "entitlements" of any kind - especially adding them to the load of a bankrupt nation.

George W. Dumbass couldn't spell "Conservative".

[Aetius Romulous]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

To enact policy that effectively addresses the issues would require that one of the parties be supported by a powerful majority of the people. This is impossible in America because of the ideological constraints that any American government has to deal with.

This is not so much an issue of governance as much as it is one of flags and apple pies.

[jtabeb]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

To enact policy that effectively addresses the issues would require that one of the parties be supported by a powerful majority of the people. This is impossible in America because of the ideological constraints that any American government has to deal with.

This is not so much an issue of governance as much as it is one of flags and apple pies.

Should say...

"This is impossible in America because of the ideological divisions that every American government tries to foster so that none of the parties can be supported by a powerful majority of the people to affect any real change.

There, fixed it for ya.

[Aetius Romulous]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

Should say...

"This is impossible in America because of the ideological divisions that every American government tries to foster so that none of the parties can be supported by a powerful majority of the people to affect any real change.

There, fixed it for ya.

Yup, that'll work. Thanks.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

In what regard was President Bush considered a "conservative Republican administration," exactly? The term "neoconservative" has been in the lexicon for long enough to be used appropriately even by someone as ignorant as Paul "Deficits-don't-matter-now-because-it's-Obama" Krugman.

It's a political statement, certainly it's meant as a negative connotation. Phony conservative Republicans use it too. Have you heard Palin talk about McCain lately?

Conservative is a catch all in this case - an 'uber-Republican'. it has nothing to do with actual principles, despite that Krugman mentioned free markets. Free markets in their world is this madness of globalization.

[c1ue]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

Translation of Krugman:

"I, for one, welcome our new FIRE overlords"





Separated at birth?

[Andreuccio]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

Separated at birth?

Krugman and Bernanke were both born in 1953. They both earned their PhD's in Economics at MIT, Krugman in 1977 and Bernanke in 1979. Both were on the faculty at Princeton, where Krugman continues. Bernanke stepped down as chair of the Economics Department at Princeton to take a job as a Civil Service employee.

[c1ue]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

Krugman and Bernanke were both born in 1953. They both earned their PhD's in Economics at MIT, Krugman in 1977 and Bernanke in 1979. Both were on the faculty at Princeton, where Krugman continues. Bernanke stepped down as chair of the Economics Department at Princeton to take a job as a Civil Service employee.

You win the prize! I don't think many people knew that.

[charliebrown]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

We used to have 700B dollars?? (maybe I should say 700B more credit) before the bailouts started in the fall of 08. I wrote all of my trusted servants and told them to take the proposed bail out money, support the hospitals, schools, police, fire, farmers, truckers etc, anything that was absolutely essential to people and let the whole damn thing blow up. give the liquity to those mentioned, and see who is left standing after the dust settles. Of course I was ignored.

Our trusted servants still don't get it. They spend like nothing happened. I'm not talking about the feds either, my state, my school district, my county my village. nothing has changed. everything is going back to normal.

Now the whole thing is going to blow anyhow, but after years of slow suffering, and we may no longer have the borrowing power to fund the essential goods and services needed.

I grew up poor, and expect nothing. I fear for my wife and children, they are free spirits and only ask for a simple care-free life. I have not told them that things are going to get really rough in the near future.

[Andreuccio]

Re: Krugman: no matter who is in power,financial sector will be bailed out

You win the prize! I don't think many people knew that.

Awesome! What's the prize?

I saw Krugman speak at UCLA, right around the time Bernanke was being appointed. I remembered him saying something about him and Bernanke being in the same place at the same time. (I remembered it incorrectly as undergraduate studies. Bernanke went to Harvard. Krugman apparently couldn't get in to Harvard so had to settle for Yale.) Wikipedia filled in the details.