[lbo-talk] NYC on the government teat (was credit crunch)

[Jose]

I'm with Doug, Alaska needs spanking.  On this topic, I have an idea
to help the economy.  Just because Caribou Barbie lost the election
for the Repugs doesn't mean that they can get away with their
shenanigens or that they won't be back for more.  Remember, they
barely threw out that ancient corrupt Senator Palpatine clone Ted
Stevens.  It was a miracle that the last few votes came through for
his challenger, Mike Begich.  But his legacy lives on.  For many years
now Alaska has been living the REd State Life high on the hog courtesy
of what they call 'Uncle Ted' and his magic pork train, getting back
as much as $1.60 from the federal government, from all of the rest of
us, for every dollar they pay.  What bullshit!  While that's been
going on, they've also been cashing in on their fat oil profits to
build a big nest egg to pay people to live there.  I say that's
unacceptable.  It runs completely counter to civilization that they
get to spend all of the rest of our money on bridges to nowhere and
save their own for a rainy day while we hurt and our industries get
destroyed and our states have to cancel construction projects.  It's
not right.  They shouldn't be allowed to keep that big bank account,
not while the rest of the country is hurting.  They shouldn't be
allowed to keep it anyway, but especially because we enabled them to
get it in the first place by giving them lots of our money so they
could save their own.  It's time to take it back.  Who else thinks
that their bank account be taken back by the Fed and used to help
everybody, not just Alaska, as part of the economic stimulus package?
Can we really afford to have people or entire states hoarding money
when we need it to get the economy going?  Let's shake down some of
the people who need it.  Frankly, it serves them right for being
greedy anyway.

my .02, lurking again (love lbo!)

-j

On 1/3/09, James Heartfield <Heartfield at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> You do not have to believe that the credit crunch was an actual conspiracy
> to see the bailout for what it is, a shakedown. Paulsen and the bankers told
> Americans that if they did not get some trillion or so dollars to extract
> the bad debt then credit would seize up and the economy would tank. But once
> they had the cash they did not use it to extract the bad debt but to support
> their own failing businesses. Banks have not made credit available to
> lenders (either businesses or households). They have used the money to
> defend their own businesses.
>
> Assuming for the moment that, even though we might want to see a socialist
> revolutionary answer to the the problem, that is not on the cards right now,
> what is the best solution?
>
> Is it to bank-roll these failing, NY-based banks. Surely it would be much
> better to let them go to the wall. Plainly America (and even more Britain)
> has too large a financial sector. What possible virtue is there in shoring
> up this bloated and parasitic apparatus?
>
> The shakedown is the bankers' argument that 'apres moi, le deluge'. But they
> have confused their survival with the economy's survival. Banks prospering
> is not the same thing as the economy prospering. They are saving the money,
> but they are not lending it. It would make more sense for the government to
> lend the money direct to households and businesses, than go on supporting
> these failed entities.
>
> For the finance employees, we should demand retraining, in a more useful
> trade, like engineering, or plumbing, maybe.
>
> Doug was very critical of the purportedly over-subsidised denizens of
> Alaska. So why subsidise New York?
>
> For many years now, thanks to the success of its financial services, New
> York has been a net contributor to the national accounts. (There is of
> course a specialised debate amongst Marxists, and others, about whether the
> financial sector is parasitical upon the productive economy, but let's put
> that to one side.) But now, the financial district, at least, has grown too
> large, and demands government cash to keep its executives in monster
> bonuses.
>
> Why reward failure? Let them fall. A leaner, more productive financial
> sector would serve our needs better than a bloated monster sucking on the
> government tit.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>