Hard News: Crash and Contempt
283 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 12 Newer→ Last
-
(see the list of Obama's economists )
That's an interesting list. A whole heap of Bill Clinton's team; a pinch of University of Chicago (albiet liberal UC); and Bernstein and Galbraith (who are much more clearly to the left)...
-
"This is what they did, and they're being vague on what they'd do. Here's where I stand, and it's going to include one or two inconvenient truths you won't want to hear. But should."
Sounds like Helen Clark talking about National.
-
you mean apart from the bomb bomb bomb Iran stuff
I was more concerned that he forgot Iraq existed when he discussed the Iraq/Pakistan border.
I can be vaguely forgiving of forgetting the name of some African country that America doesn't have much to do with. But given that he attacked Obama for his statements about talking to Iran, it'd be nice if he knew where it was.
-
As Dean Barker puts it: "The first target for reform should be the outrageous salaries drawn by the top executives at financial firms. The crew that lost tens of billions at Citigroup, Merrill Lynch and the rest have received tens of millions, possibly even hundreds of millions, in compensation for their "work" over the last few years."
That's pretty astute for a man best known for his sailing.
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
-
Sounds like Helen Clark talking about National.
Steve: You really want to troll for a fight, I'll give you one just not now.
Re the crash, Guyon Espiner has a peculiar take on the recent exchange on the subject started by Cullen who, quite rightly, points out the connection between John Key, his old firm and the current crisis .
HenryB: As I've said elsewhere, if Cullen really wants to continue down that track (and he does) then he should get ready to be held personally responsible for the Fourth Labour Government's role in the near-collapse of the Bank of New Zealand. (And guess who had to carry the political can for that bail-out. Not the Associate Minister of Finance from 1987-89.)
-
That's an interesting list. A whole heap of Bill Clinton's team; a pinch of University of Chicago (albiet liberal UC); and Bernstein and Galbraith (who are much more clearly to the left)...
The one people seem to be talking about the most is Austan Goolsbee, who's tech-savvy and aligned with Steven "Freakonomics" Levitt.
For the umpteenth time, it really bugs me the way apparently intelligent people to the right of centre can ignore all this stuff and buy into the craziness of the modern Republican party. David Farrar, for one, is cheerily surfing along with the Palin nonsense and he should bloody well know better.
-
Re the crash, Guyon Espiner has a peculiar take on the recent exchange on the subject started by Cullen who, quite rightly, points out the connection between John Key, his old firm and the current crisis .
Funny, it looked like lame-o point-scoring on Cullen's part to me ...
-
Present company excepted? :)
-
Far freakin' out ...
The Fed comes up with an $85 billion bailout to save AIG from bankruptcy.
-
Oh, and that bounce seems over, Angus. And its the fading Palin star that seems to be one of the bigger drags for McCain. I'd put your assessment at closer to 50/50.
oh really.
During the 2 weeks the press is fascinated by "the Palin story", that you think is most likely to damage McCain - McCain's polling numbers rise.
3 days after an issue (the economy) starts dominating the news, something I've been saying all along would benefit Obama - Obama's polling numbers rise.
Of course you tell me it is the Palin story that is killing McCain, "proof" of which can be found in polling coincidental with a large Wall Street reversal. I'd put your assessment at 80% smoke & mirrors.
-
Steve: You really want to troll for a fight, I'll give you one just not now.
Didn't mean to be unkind, you know that was the last thing on my mind.
*earworn inserted*
;-)
It's true though but eh? -
For the umpteenth time, it really bugs me the way apparently intelligent people to the right of centre can ignore all this stuff and buy into the craziness of the modern Republican party. David Farrar, for one, is cheerily surfing along with the Palin nonsense and he should bloody well know better.
That's not the way Farrar and his coterie work. DPF, more than any other in the NZ blogosphere, must carry the can for this whole divisive left/right problem. "My party, right or wrong" makes as much sense as "my mother, drunk or sober"* but they keep pushing the party line anyway. Why? Because they don't have to think. Thinking is hard. Finding solutions is hard. Character assassination is easy, in comparison, and by copying the crap memes from abroad they can post quickly and frequently, and therefore pour more (copies of) content onto the net so that their crap will bubble higher in searches. IMHO, people like Farrar and Rove (who he idolises BTW) just want to win. There is no ideological basis to their stance - they just enjoy playing the game.
But I share your bugged-ness, even if I understand the cause
*(which is not to say my mum's a lush, cos she's not, for those of you with a literal state of mind - it was metaphorical, mmkay?)
-
Funny, it looked like lame-o point-scoring on Cullen's part to me ...
Certainly, and America isn't the only place where (sorry for getting all Aaron Sorkin here) but we've got real problems, and need serious people. If Michael Cullen wants to talk about the kind of character and judgement we should expect from our leaders, he's got to do better than a job Key left eight years ago.
We are five days into a general election campaign -- and if the media isn't actually going to take this seriously, I don't see why anyone else should.
-
It's true though but eh?
No, Steve, if I really wanted to be catty I'd have to say the dearth of actual policy and endlessly repeated talking points is making Clark sound more like a John McCain-Sarah Palin mash-up. Though to be fair, at Day 5 of the campaign I'm hardly knocked on my can by any of it.
-
I'm no financial genius, so please help me out....
Banks "invent" spare money which they loan out to make a profit... but too much sloshing around is inflationary and bad for the economy?
Now, the Banks have got just a bit too creative for their own good.... I can see how the FED bailing out can help prevent the collapse of the entire system....
But if they have to bail too much.... if they have to inject larger and larger sums.... where are these sums coming from? Are they not just going to start printing more themselves to do the bailing out with?
If they keep trying to bail out every failure, arent they just going to perpetuate the problem?
-
The scale of the problem is such that it demands an intellectual heft that I think is simply beyond McCain, whatever other qualities he might claim.
Obama has much more of the intellectual grunt and, importantly, the quality of advice
Obama is making more and more speeches like this one:
This is not your ordinary stump speech, it is pretty substantial. I think the post RNC/Palin bounce is already being eroded and for good reason.
-
Fletcher: yes, yes, and yes. Unfortunately, bailing out rich bastards by metaphorically printing money (moral hazard, anyone?) is US policy. And it has created the ever-larger series of asset bubbles of this decade. It started under Clinton/Greenspan, but it's been getting worse, and amplified by deregulating and putting hands-off stooges in important regulatory positions.
-
We are five days into a general election campaign -- and if the media isn't actually going to take this seriously, I don't see why anyone else should.
True. I wondered whether our election could pass without anybody taking any interest at all. I mean, with our polling day being three days before the US, confusion may reign for those of a bewildered nature. I can imagine some looking at their ballot paper and wondering where Obama is while they worry about what happened to their life insurance and whether the bloke down the road is a terrorist.
It's all too much (for one thread) I tell you. -
It IS lame-o point scoring but that's because Cullen didn't push it far enough. And my point is precisely that the funny money creation started during exactly the time Key was working in the financial markets - at Bankers Trust (sic!) and then at Merril Lynch. Just because he retired from it 8 years ago doesn't mean that he wasn't a party to the party that started then.
And it is relevant to the current campaign. Do you think that Key would be in the position he is now if he didn't make his millions then? Who would take any notice of him?
And I am not quite sure what you are driving at, Craig, about Cullen's role as Associate Finance Minister during the 4th Labour Government (the "Act government"). As subsequent events have shown he was one of those who (from the inside) opposed the direction in which Douglas et al were leading the country. And he has clearly done a lot to undo what was done during that time. I haven't heard a squeak from Key about the role of he and his ilk played in creating the conditions for the current crisis. Nor would I expect it - and that was my point about Guyon Espiner's advice to Key to trumpet out loud how wonderful he was a money changer. I wouldn't be going there politically - and it is why Cullen is going there.
-
Whether you "blame" McCain, or regard him as tainted (or for that matter, his opponent as "fresh") is just the same old infantile politics that the Republicans have been trying to make campaigns about. That's not the issue. The issue is who's better equipped to take on a problem in which the world has an interest, and that's very clearly Obama.
Of course, that all requires Americans to stop voting for the person they think they'd like to have a beer with.
...and indulge in some theorising about economics. Perhaps the Cato Institute could provide a booklet, Obama's people could provide a booklet and before you know it - they'll be 700 million booklets not being read all across America.
7 weeks out from an election is an unreasonable timeframe in which to expect an epiphany that Russell Brownian (or perhaps Craig Ranapian) economics are correct.
-
It IS lame-o point scoring but that's because Cullen didn't push it far enough.
Too right. Key is runinng on the self-made man myth, let's have a little conversation about what a currency trader does and how he makes his money, and whether you'd want to put him in charge of a country.
-
The scale of debt is so enormous there isn't the physical production to back it up in the USA.
People think the government has real wealth, the government can help solve problems.They can't.They can debase money, they can rearrange the losses, but they can't make them go away and they can't produce anything.
I reckon Bush and co have been cooking the books for years and that the true inflation rate is probably closer to 9 % than the figure that they report which is 5.6%.I would love to see the new fed balance sheet after AIG.So much for tough love, eh!
-
And I am not quite sure what you are driving at, Craig, about Cullen's role as Associate Finance Minister during the 4th Labour Government...
I didn't think you would, henry, but here goes -- even if you don't buy your narrative of Cullen as heroic marquis, it's a rather silly stretch to hold him personally responsible for the near-collapse of the BNZ.
One might think Doctor Cullen would treat a somewhat serious event, that is going to have ramifications here, as something more than an occasion for what Russell rightly calls "lame-o point-scoring" that Key was right not to dignify with more of a response than he did. And with all due disrespect to Espiner Jr., I don't think it was worth covering either.
-
Too right. Key is runinng on the self-made man myth, let's have a little conversation about what a currency trader does and how he makes his money, and whether you'd want to put him in charge of a country.
As long as we get a similar discussion about whether we really want to give someone this unserious a fourth term. After all, Cullen is trying to paint himself as the sober hand on the tiller. Not seeing much evidence of it so far.
-
Saw elsewhere "A vote for National is a Vote for ACT!!" Or have I got that back to front? or "A vote for Key is a vote for Douglas"
Post your response…
This topic is closed.