Posts by HenryB
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
John, you may sneer at educational institutions like universities and those who work in them but, yes, they are `real' jobs doing useful things - not trying to make money out of money which is all that high-flying currency trading is.
As for the Red Flag your reference to it is a useful reminder of how relevant the lyrics are. The blood is not that of the rich but that of workers - and, in case you haven't noticed, one of the commodities that has come under pressure recently as part of this crisis is food. It won't be the rich paying the price but workers. The Red Flag is a song of hope for workers in troubled times. I'd suggest listening to Billy Bragg singing it.
As for "lining them up against the wall": well, actually it is my experience it is the "right" who are in favour of the death penalty for all sorts of things. Their more excessive demands for the use of this penalty have, thankfully, been relegated to the unthinkable. That said, a lot of people ARE troubled by the fact that the `fact cats' will get away without any consequences for their actions. One of the major demands being placed on those who are trying to put together `rescue' packages is to also find some way of, if not punishing those who have been so delinquent, at least finding some way to make sure that they don't profit from this kind of delinquency in the future. Obama expresses that sentiment.
As for "rich pricks" - you don't have to be rich to be a prick and it is definitely not the case that all the rich are pricks. The issue is what kind of "rich" you are. Those who have been making money out of money are those who have been in truly unreal jobs and whose profit is based on taking money from those who have actually done the work - business entrepreneurs, farmers, workers, etc - and creaming it. Which is where JK's totally neutral reaction to Andy Krieger's raid on the NZ currency in the late eighties is relevant. Whether or not he had a direct hand in this - and there are still questions to be answered - his lack of moral engagement with this kind of activity is absolutely relevant to our present situation. But once again JK reveals himself to be the most Hollow of Hollow Men. Don Brasch was a man of substance compared to him.
-
And (thanks for the reference, Lucy) it would seem the next domino, after the sub-prime mortgages, is the money-market mutual-fund sector which is already the subject of concern
-
Having just read the Obama transcript I would note the following:
Obama said
The recklessness of some of these executives has helped to cause this mess, even as they walked away with million-dollar -- multi- million-dollar golden parachutes while taxpayers are left holding the bag.
And the point I would make is that some walked away several years ago but are no less culpable. This mess did not start in the last 5 years. It's relevance to our current political scene shouldn't need spelling out.
-
The financial crisis is Obama's fault?
Well, actually Colin and Guyon Espiner would have you believe that Michael Cullen was blaming it on John Key. Maybe JK is Obama after all!
Seriously, though, people have been too dismissive of Cullen asking a very legitimate question: Should we entrust the country to somebody whose only job (`real' or not) has been to be one of the `fat cats' that are now being seen to have at the heart of our crisis.
As far as the `sub prime' crisis is concerned: this in not just a sub-prime crisis. The delinquent behaviour around credit goes way beyond just the housing market. Yes, this has been the most dramatic and obvious thing to fall over but the other dominoes will follow.
And Don Christie
Borrowing for infrastructure, nowt wrong wi' tha'.
Why borrow? Cullen just bought back Kiwirail - a crucial bit of infrastructure. Much as I love broadband and much as I would love to see it improved, I think the former might actually be just as good an investment because it will be used to move goods around.
To borrow to give tax cuts seems nuts to me but then I haven't been involved in the funny money business like JK.
-
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.
-
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 . According to Espiner, Cullen's comment is "a bit like saying that because a top life guard got swallowed up by a tsunami he was never much of a life guard anyway". Is Espiner serious in this comparison? Has it occurred to him to ask what caused the earthquake that caused the tsunami? The likes of John Key are responsible for the current tsunami. They, with their practices of making money out of money instead of honest labour, are directly implicated in creating the current crisis (tsunami). Just because Key has retired from the field doesn't mean he can wash his hands of the shared culpability that rests with all those who didn't blow the whistle on the funny money that they were instrumental in creating.
Espiner advises Key to "vigorously defend his record at Merrill Lynch; state how proud he was to have excelled there". Maybe Key is showing uncommon good sense by not taking this advice which would be like trying to walk on very thin ice.
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."
Taxpayers money in the US, Britain and Eurpose is being used to try (who knows whether it will succeed) and bail out the problems caused by these people. And as Barker notes, many of them will, of course, have salted away their millions. This (tax) money is coming out of the pockets of ordinary working people whilst the crisis itself is destroying their savings.