|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
[Reshuffles post order for Citizen K(e)rensky's insult/compliment]
Comrade Anklebiter wrote: I don't know enough about Krugman, but Detroit's decline has nothing to do with the creative destruction of markets and the decline of auto? Yes, all Comrade Goblin ever talks about is race.
Where does 25 miles outside of Detroit put you?
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote: meatrace wrote: Zeugma wrote: Second: I will argue that consent can only be given, not taken. A master could coerce or command, but couldn't provide a slave's consent (because to consent is to voluntarily yield or comply). No person can "consent" for another. Except they can. A parent can consent for their child, someone with power of attorney can consent for anyone else, and so on. Not in the case of sex:
A parent cannot give consent for their child to have sex with someone else (or with the parent for that matter).
I don't think power of attorney allows that either.
The definition of "inalienable rights" means those rights that can't be surrendered, even by volountary choice.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
More simply shouting racism and international socialist revolution
The strangling of Detroit
Comrade Anklebiter wrote: More simply shouting racism and international socialist revolution
The strangling of Detroit
I don't know what you're on about.
That's a very cogent summation of all of the factors at play.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote: More simply shouting racism and international socialist revolution
The strangling of Detroit
Quote: Coincidentally, and along the way, Orr's old law firm pocketed as much as $1.4 million in fees from the city and state Why am I not surprised?
Krensky wrote: Comrade Anklebiter wrote: More simply shouting racism and international socialist revolution
The strangling of Detroit
I don't know what you're on about.
That's a very cogent summation of all of the factors at play. Vive le Galt!
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Comrade Anklebiter wrote: More simply shouting racism and international socialist revolution
The strangling of Detroit
This is where Obama shows he's really not that different from the party across the isle that wants to invalidate his Presidency.
A half trillion or more for Wall Street? No problem, they're "too big to fail". Relief for the public sector that's suffered onerous cutbacks ans is on the verge of collapse? Sorry, you're on your own. The American labor population is expendable.
LazarX wrote: This is where Obama shows he's really not that different from the party across the isle that wants to invalidate his Presidency.
A half trillion or more for Wall Street? No problem, they're "too big to fail". Relief for the public sector that's suffered onerous cutbacks ans is on the verge of collapse? Sorry, you're on your own. The American labor population is expendable.
More cynicism, fatalism and borderline conspiracy theory laden journalism
LazarX wrote: Comrade Anklebiter wrote: More simply shouting racism and international socialist revolution
The strangling of Detroit
This is where Obama shows he's really not that different from the party across the isle that wants to invalidate his Presidency.
A half trillion or more for Wall Street? No problem, they're "too big to fail". Relief for the public sector that's suffered onerous cutbacks ans is on the verge of collapse? Sorry, you're on your own. The American labor population is expendable. To be fair here: The Wall Street bailout wasn't entirely Obama's call. TARP was passed before he took office and even before the election. He did support it. It was a crisis and something needed to be done to stop the freefall. There were certainly better approaches, but I doubt any of them could have made it through Congress at the time.
And really, what do think the chances were or are of getting any serious relief for the public sector through Congress? He was barely able to get the inadequate stimulus package passed.
He's tried to do some good things for the economy and everyone has been fought tooth and nail by Republicans. He's also pushed a lot of austerity-driven, deficit reduction stuff and that's been fought tooth and nail as insufficient, while simultaneously grabbed as the new starting point for negotiations.
That said, I agree Obama is far too tied to Wall Street and to the Chicago school of economics. Even so, he's still far different from the party across the aisle.
We could really use a socialist or even a good old-fashioned Keynesian populist, but I don't see one getting elected any time soon.
|
6 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Wallstreet: Oh noes! We invested too much money in something and our investment didn't work out!
Congress: awww you poor things. Here's a suitcase full of money. Oh, and while we're at it, here's some loans at .02 percent interest.
Wallstreet: Hey, thanks for the money! I'm going to take that suitcase full of money and lend the loans to you at .06 percent interest. Then i'm going to raid the company pension fund for a 45 million dollar bonus, cause I'm smrt enough to loan your money back to you at rates higher than you lent it to me and smrt people deserve moar moneeeey.
Detroit worker: Hey, I gave you money every week for 30 years, I'd like MY money back now...
Wallstreet: congress, tell that lazy schlub looking for a handout that he's a worthless bum leeching off his betters
Congress: yeeees master...
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
BigNorseWolf wrote: Wallstreet: Oh noes! We invested too much money in something and our investment didn't work out!
Congress: awww you poor things. Here's a suitcase full of money. Oh, and while we're at it, here's some loans at .02 percent interest.
Wallstreet: Hey, thanks for the money! I'm going to take that suitcase full of money and lend the loans to you at .06 percent interest. Then i'm going to raid the company pension fund for a 45 million dollar bonus, cause I'm smrt enough to loan your money back to you at rates higher than you lent it to me and smrt people deserve moar moneeeey.
Detroit worker: Hey, I gave you money every week for 30 years, I'd like MY money back now...
Wallstreet: congress, tell that lazy schlub looking for a handout that he's a worthless bum leeching off his betters
Congress: yeeees master...
Not too far off at least for some Congresscritters. The rest, or at least enough of them, are brought along with:
Wall Street: Nice little economy you've got here. Shame if something happened to it.
See... That's where the joke goes wrong.
You start with Wall Street, not lawyers.
Turin the Mad wrote: It will be interesting to find out RL Detroit's version of OCP. ;) Wal-Mart *sits back with feet on the table sipping hot coco*
Oh, and on top of that, I'm going to sue you for bailing me out because people thought the bail out might mean my stock was overpriced...
KingmanHighborn wrote: Turin the Mad wrote: It will be interesting to find out RL Detroit's version of OCP. ;) Wal-Mart *sits back with feet on the table sipping hot cocoa* "It's only money."
Well, Detroit pensioners are going to get 16 cents on the dollar.
Very sad, but at least the banks were willing to take only 75 cents on the dollar, they have/had the clout to get even more and screw the pensioners even worse.
Hopefully other city workers will take note and begin make their own preparations so that they can weather such a storm should it hit them.
LazarX wrote: NPC Dave wrote: And of course, the final conclusion from Krugman, which I already quoted, as he sweeps it under the rug...until the next big city hits the wall.
"There are influential people out there who would like you to believe that Detroit’s demise is fundamentally a tale of fiscal irresponsibility and/or greedy public employees. It isn’t. For the most part, it’s just one of those things that happens now and then in an ever-changing economy."
Krugman's way of saying...nothing to see here folks, not to worry just move along.
Your built in bias is showing
No Lazar, I don't have Paul Krugman's problem.
LazarX wrote:
to the point where you are actually ignoring text that's in front of your face.
No Lazar, I am not doing what you are doing.
LazarX wrote:
Krugman isn't saying that Detroit's collapse is something to be taken for granted, swept under the rug and not looked at in a serious way. He says as I quote.
So by all means let’s have a serious discussion about how cities can best manage the transition when their traditional sources of competitive advantage go away. And let’s also have a serious discussion about our obligations, as a nation, to those of our fellow citizens who have the bad luck of finding themselves living and working in the wrong place at the wrong time — because, as I said, decline happens, and some regional economies will end up shrinking, perhaps drastically, no matter what we do.
The important thing is not to let the discussion get hijacked, Greek-style. There are influential people out there who would like you to believe that Detroit’s demise is fundamentally a tale of fiscal irresponsibility and/or greedy public employees. It isn’t. For the most part, it’s just one of those things that happens now and then in an ever-changing economy.
I already pointed out how this section of Paul Krugman's text is where he does in fact, sweep the real problem under the rug and pretend the root causes aren't fundamental flaws in his(and others) economic view of the world. I see no reason to review them again, you can just look at my previous post again.
What you have shown is that Paul Krugman likes to talk out of both sides of his mouth at the same time. Not surprising at all, I wouldn't accuse him of being a scrupulously honest person.
LazarX wrote:
Lumping this "Marxist misrule" or "Bad Unions" or "Mini-Greece" IS sweeping important facts under the rug. Krugman points out that Detroit IS a reminder that we DO have hard questions to ask about handling the transition of our cities in a changing economy, and that the world has tried some very bad ideas in Greece and Spain,...
I will agree that we can't call it a mini-Greece any longer, it is worse than that. The Greeks will get significantly more than 16 cents on the dollar.
|
