Quick snap with the pocket camera + monopod…
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Mustard, Pelosi wouldn’t pass this without Republican votes. What does it say about her leadership that she isn’t willing to do it by herself and take the political hits? She is putting party above country.
But you get upset when Republicans do the same?
They were willing to be part of a bipartisan fix only.
I think the problem is that so many congresscritters were told, in no uncertain terms, that they’d better not vote for this thing if they expect to get re-elected.
Although ignorant and uninformed, “the people” have spoken.
Democracy: Two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for lunch.
Republic: Two sheep appoint one wolf to decide what’s for lunch.
Oh, and exactly how many Jews are there in Congress that the whole shebang has to close down for Rosh Hashanah ? Can’t the rest of them carry on like we do here at work?
We know not what the morrow will bring, but I think this is the best possible situation (vote-wise) for the Democrats. The Republicans needed to help their friends on Wall Street, but they didn’t want to carry the ball.
The Democrats did what I suggested in the previous bailout thread. That makes them smart. Or does it?
If Capitalism-As-We-Know-It began with the New Deal in 1933, and if this is the end of CAWKI, then it is interesting to note that both Capitalism and Communism have a useful life of about 75 years. If the economy collapses (more) because of no bailout, then the fact will be plain to see that the Republicans defeated the (necessary) measure.
If the economy adjusts, and all the worthy remain or become wealthy again, then the Democrats will have dodged a huge bullet, something on the order of what Lincoln and Abolition and Southern Democrats did to their illustrious opponents, the age of a Communism + the age of a CAWKI, ago.
I said “buy partisan.”
okay, you freaking morons….
if the Republicans had voted FOR the bailout, you would be complaining that the party was all about favoritism toward big business. As it stands, you’re complaining about THEM causing a Depression. It’s clear you don’t know which way is up – you just like pointing fingers and blame-shifting.
idiots.
I say let it fall. Let the bloated banks and corporations die off without any sense of help . May every walmart-esque fall by the wayside. stocks, ventures, etc will be now taken down to the little guys. And they will fight fir that big business giving proper rates. Start carving your headstones now baby boomers, it’s a new world out there and you’re not invited
#30 – Are you suggesting that no Democrat has ever voted against something just because some Republican pissed them off? That kind of behavior from both sides is probably a good third of Congress’ activity. Most of Congress is driven by reelection, ego and greed.
I would agree that most need to be shot.
1. If a republican didn’t vote for this because of Pelosi’s speech then they really need to grow up.
2. It didn’t pass because of lack of leadership in both parties including Bush.
3. The bail out probably won’t help in the long term. It’s just more borrowing.
Would the bail out have helped? Maybe, in the short term. More importantly, it would have implemented the regulating that the Republicans did away with a decade ago. THAT is the fix we need.
My understanding is that the White House and Paulson strongly opposed wage caps. That single item probably brought more Democrats into the fold while scaring off the Republicans.
Pelosi’s speech was spot on. The current leadership coming out of the White House is atrocious. If any Republican was turned off by her speech, then they must be assuming the responsibility for Bush’s mishandling. Explain that one to the electorate.
Pelosi’s remarks show that either she really did not want the measure to pass or that she is an incompetent politician. If she really thought the measure was important, then why say something that might have even the remotest chance of causing the vote to fail? Why piss off the people you need to get the measure passed?
It is Pelosi that needs to explain to the electorate why she claimed the measure to be important but acted like a juvenile and in doing so prevented the measure from passing.
#42, Thomas,
You vote for the legislation, not the Speaker, or Committee Chairman, or Majority House Leader. The picking of those positions is long past.
If they voted against the Bill because of Pelosi, then they are typical shallow Republicans. If they voted against the Bill because of heart felt concerns, then all the power to them.
BTW, the Bill was agreed to by top Democrat AND Republicans meeting with the Treasury Secretary and President’s advisers. This was not just one person’s doing.
#38 Thomas (referring to #34)
Your points:
A: If you want to give a later date than 1933 for the start of Capitalism-As-We-Know-It, that’s fine, although it does make Communism look longer-lasting. You can’t use any date earlier than the 1929 meltdown. After that they made changes so that what happened in 1929 could “never never never” happen again.
B. Good point, I hadn’t thought of that. But … you may have had a static system from 1776, if you insist, but you didn’t have a static country. The original 13 colonies, the War of 1812, genocide of the natives, Texas, the Louisiana Purchase… the country was expanding by leaps and bounds. Then 1861 to 1865 the Civil War. It wasn’t a meltdown of Capitalism, but it was a meltdown of the country. Everything in living memory (WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan-Iraq) is pale by comparison.
Between 1865 and 1929 you don’t exceed 75 years at all. I admit that I was blue-skying the facts to fit the number 75. But on reconsideration, it still doesn’t seem so bad a measure. So, thanks, Thomas, for providing two exceptions that prove the rule.
#43
I agree that anyone that voted against the bill *soley* because of Pelosi, should reconsider their profession. That’s orthogonal to the issue with Pelosi. If Pelosi thought the bill was important, then why do anything that would jeopardize her chances of succeeding? Why open her trap? What possible good could she have hoped to have achieved other than venting? Either she did not really care about the bill or she showed herself to be utterly incompetent as a politician. Sometimes politicians have to deal with people they dislike or are themselves petty. It happens. People that run for office have huge egos. A skilled politician has to account for that if they are going to be successful.
#44
Either your definition of capitalism and mine differ quite a bit or I’m unclear as to what you mean by “capitalism as we know it”. From my perspective, the US was the first country founded on capitalistic ideas and has yet to have its government disposed or replaced. Compare this with the former Soviet Union which lasted from 1918 through 1989. Since the South lost the Civil War, the outcome of that war was the same government that exist prior to the war.
#10 SparkyOne
That was a f’ing awesome post!
I’ve been to Russia (1996) and can now understand a lot more of what I saw there.
You are wonderful.
#46, Thomas.
Yes, I see now that we view things differently. I thought that the USA was founded on such ideals as the separation of Church and State, personal liberty etc. For a nation founded on “capitalistic ideas” I recommend Cyril Kornbluth’s brilliant 1948 novel “The Space Merchants”.
There is a fundamental difference between the US and the USSR.
The history of the US is one of a displacement of indiginous people by invaders looking to grown an economy. This history of the US starts in the 1500s.
The Republics of the USSR had been assembled from existing, well-entrenched, societies. Yes, their populations expanded with improvements in technology, but they didn’t sweep across a land in the same dramatic way as in the US. Growth was less dramatic.
#48
Indeed the country was *also* founding on the ideas of personal liberty, limited government and the power of the States. The concepts of capitalism and personal liberty are not mutually exclusive.