Political Frustrations and the "Bail-Out."
I know that this is a blog that claims to be devoted to faith issues, so I apologize for this thoroughly political and economic posting. This is the only place (other than Facebook) where I can rant and rave and at least imagine that somebody else might take a gander. Thanks for reading.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So I just saw an Oregon newspaper's front page, and it had a student protester holding up a sign on New York's Wall Street (where the NYSE does its business). Here's what her sign said:
ReplyDelete"I have a 4.0 GPA, $90,000 in debt, and no job, WHERE IS MY BAILOUT?"
I have a hard time not barfing on-sight of this inane kind of reasoning. At first I even thought (hoped) that it was perhaps a mockery of Wall Street's (and consumers') ridiculous lobbying to get "bailed out" from the consequences of their own greed and foolishness. But much of the public mood, as reflected by the sign quoted above, indicates that we all want somebody to wave a magic wand and make all of our financial worries disappear, NOT just so we can feel better about our bottom line, but so that we can also continue to consume and feed fodder to our various lifestyle obsessions.
3/4 of our economy is deeply rooted to consumer spending. Americans have, on average, a negative 1% savings rate. This means that we as individuals spend more money than we make. Our government has been doing this for decades, but that is a different, even if related story. We have to have nice stuff: nice houses and apartments, new cars, new clothes, nice vacations, big-screen TVs, the newest cell phones, the latest iPods and all their related gadgetry, and on and on.
Most of this depends on credit: spending more than we have. Because people (and investment banks) are greedy and foolish, many bad bets have been made, called and subsequently failed. Translation: payments have defaulted and our nation's credit is drying up. This means limits on how much of the latest and greatest we can have, from housing to transportation to eating out and starting new businesses.
But limits are a GOOD thing. Personal, corporate and government accountability are GOOD things. We (as a nation and as individuals) have GOT to learn that we CANNOT consume and spend and consume and spend without consequences. Nobody likes consequences but they are how we learn better behavior. Consequences, no matter how painful, are necessary for survival. We are slowly learning this lesson with our environment, but once again, that has taken a backseat to the issues that we can more easily see and more quickly feel in our wallets.
The bail-out represents a delaying of consequences. It appears to wave a wand and make our inability to spend more go away. Notice that it is only a delay. It does not solve ANY problems on a long enough time horizon. Our government/nation currently has around 10 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT. This is the equivalent of 1000 million dollars times 1000, times 1000, times 10. This is close to $32,000 worth of debt for every single man, woman and child in the United States.
Who gets to pay for this? We do. And it’s not JUST us. Assuming that our nation does not self-destruct, the debt service for our astronomical spending habits will be saddled on each and every successive generation of US citizens. Once again, our forefathers might refer to this as taxation without representation. Need I remind anyone that this was a catch-phrase used to drum up support for revolution? Might we need a new American dream? One where it isn’t all about my ability to consume haphazardly? Somehow I get the feeling that our forefathers might not recognize the nation that we have let ourselves become. But I digress.
I’m sorry, but I am not on board with this 700 billion dollar bail out. Once the government’s commandeering of foundering Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac is taken into account, this short-sighted economic panacea adds well over a trillion dollars to our current national debt. That is a 10 PERCENT INCREASE in a single shot!! This is ridiculous and should not be signed off on.
It’s time to reap what we have sown. I’m sorry for our wayward college student protestor who thinks that someone else is responsible for her 4.0 GPA and her $90,000 worth of debt. I wonder if she is unemployed because she cannot get ANY job, or because she won't work somewhere that she thinks is "beneath" her or won't finance her consumption obsession. She is delusional. Unlike many people around the world, SHE has had choices and SHE elected to put herself in this situation.
I have the audacity to suggest that SHE should find a way to deal with it. Her garbage is not something any of the rest of us should have to subsidize. The same goes for Wall Street and Main Street. On a larger scale, do we really want to subsidize greedy corporations’ mistakes so that they and their CEOs can dance away with millions of dollars in their bloated pockets? Do we want perpetuate the saddling of future generations of Americans with unfathomable debt just so we can continue our irresponsible consumption and selfishness? I hope not.
There’s only one conclusion for action I can draw:
We have got to live within our means and be personally responsible for our own bad decisions. In the immediate situation DO NOT SUPPORT THE "BAIL OUT"!!
Got to say that I agree with you on this. I'm furious that so many of our so-called representatives want this to happen. It is an economic time-bomb just waiting to happen. It seems that the only thing the Bail Out has done is bring President Bush and many Democrats together on an issue for what seems the first time in this administration's history.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, if we are to have a capitalist society that means the government must let certain businesses suffer the consequences of either poor decisions or corporate greed. At this point I don't much care who is responsible, since there seem to be many people in the media trying to point fingers, as there is no point. Responsibility should only be used to not repeat the same mistakes. In the mean time, we have a severe economic problem and we may as well deal with it here and now, not put it off for a decade or two. I agree with your statement that the Founding Fathers wouldn't recognize our country. They fought and sacrficed for what? High-definition, flat-screen TVs and Hummers? iPhones? It would seem that we have had the soul of our consumeristic society laid bare, and we are trying to find a way to let it be. America has long delayed the consequences of its excesses. Perhaps it is time to stand up and take one.
I don't want to have my lifestyle impacted anymore than anyone else, but at least I understand living within one's means and making lifestyle choices to decrease expenses. We can't continue to rack up debt as a nation. It will kill us economically, make our dollar decrease in value world-wide, and create unnecessary burdens on future generations. So, repeating your cry, NO BAIL OUT!
Right on. For a second there, I thought the whole economic bomb a couple weeks ago was a cleansing of the economy. Now the bailout makes it like we're simply making the next inevitable bomb more catastrophic.
ReplyDeleteIs it too late for me to frickin' love Ron Paul?
I agree, man. The girl has choices, same as all of us. If I'm in a situation (like right now) where I feel like I need more money to get caught up, I don't stand on the sidelines waiting for a handout. I get my ass out there and take care of it myself. My mom always said, "If you want to quit a job, make sure you have another one lines up before you do. Always have a job." peace, man.
ReplyDeleteamen brother!
ReplyDeleteI think it's great that most of US are ABLE to get out there, get a job, and support ourselves, however frugally.
ReplyDeleteBut I hope you're not making a blanket statement on EVERYONE's ability to do that... I work with homeless teenagers who are trying EXTREMELY hard every day to find a job and pay for the bare minimum expenses of living, i.e., food, shelter, soap.
I agree that it's unfortunate that there are so many who are fiscally irresponsible, but "trickle-down" is real, and it really does affect MILLIONS of people who really are working hard, regardless of whether they've slept in a bed for a week, have a shower, or are sick and can't afford medical treatment.
Before you embrace the "bootstrap theory," I hope you've analyzed the entirety of the situation for all people - and if you see a better way to help personally, then I hope you're doing it.
No, I don't think this is the land of opportunity for everyone. I recognize that if you don't have a permanent address or telephone, you probably are not going to get regular work, at least not to the extent that you CAN get an address and related digits. This is the land of opportunity for those who already have or who can find a benevolent friend to help them get a leg up. As I have written elsewhere, this is the fundamental problem with capitalism: On its own, it engenders no sense of responsibility or help for the less fortunate members of our (local and worldwide) communities.
ReplyDeleteAs for trickle-down economics, I am not sure what you mean here. If it's Ronald Reagan's brand that you are referring to, I am having a hard time tracking with you. As he conceived of it, it has failed to do much of anything for those at the bottom.
Regarding "boot-straps," I am merely saying that those who have put themselves in bad situations should take responsibility for those actions instead of expecting someone else to "bail them out." I hope it is obvious that being injured on the job or getting your life wrecked by a tornado etc. isn't something that the afflicted can "take responsibility for." But being an alcoholic, chronic gambler or irresponsible in general sure is.
If we dare to let capitalism truly be itself, it will mean that stupid, inefficient corporations, governments and even individuals will amend their ways or weed themselves out. This is exactly what needs to happen, or we need to become the United Socialist States of America. As it is, we are trying to have it both ways, and we are going to pay for this in more ways than one if we don't wake up. The bailout is simply inconsistent with capitalism and it should not be taken seriously.
"The ultimate result of shielding people from the effects of their ofolly is to fill the world with fools."
-Herbert Spencer
-Corbin
No, I was certainly not referring to Reagan's version of trickle-down economics, but was referring instead to the more commonly used, current interpretation of the term in my field. This version can be explained simply: While financial gain definitely does not trickle down, financial woe absolutely does.
ReplyDeleteTo be clear, I do not in any way support the corporate actions that resulted in the necessitation of any kind of "bailout." But unfortunately, this is a time when there is so very much to lose for everyone, (and most significantly the struggling people at the proverbial "bottom of the food chain,") that it would be ridiculously irresponsible for our government, or for any of us, to stand idly by.
Maybe it's partially the terminology - the word "bailout" - that is bothering people? Does the new "rescue plan" resonate more easily? Because it's certainly not only the people who made the mess we are attempting to rescue.
Although I've been doing this work for several years, I am still shocked when an educated person is so quick and confident in publicly passing judgment on people with alcoholism or "chronic gambling." I'm assuming that you were then talking about the homeless population? Addiction in general is a horrible, painful, amazingly difficult obstacle to defeat: much more difficult in many ways than the rare natural disasters you mentioned. People with illness of such huge magnitude deserve our compassion and our assistance; not our accusations and blame. I'm thankful for my colleagues, and again reminded that America in general is in great need of advocates to treat and educate in regards to conditions that are so easy (for the unaffected) to dismiss as irresponsible behavior.
I typically don't disclose my motivations of faith through political context, but because you are a person who so publicly advocates your Christianity, I feel it's appropriate in this situation. So because of my faith, I find it unacceptable to do nothing while EVEN "stupid, inefficient... individuals weed themselves out." Capitalist or Socialist aside, I think what's right and what's wrong speak more volumes. Humanity was gifted with compassion, and therefore we have a responsibility to it. Capitalism is a great thing. It provides amazing opportunity, but as humans, it doesn't grant us carte blanche to discard mistake-makers. Even the big ones.
I won't quote scripture at you - I'm sure we're both aware that either of us could choose verses to support our opinions. But I will repeat a censored quote from a great friend in relation to helping people who so many feel are "undeserving." The language isn't flowery, but it serves to remind even the people who at times feel unworthy (on their own accord) that to be discarded is actually the more absurd idea for people of faith.
"Was Jesus skipping over the difficult ones? Maybe I read that part of the Bible wrong... Maybe he said, "all you "less than perfect" people need to get your stuff together like me and feed your own selves." Was that it? Cause that's not the way I read it..."
Ashley,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your passion, but regarding the actual benefit to us average Joes (and Janes), I think you are pinning a lot more good on the bailout than it actually represents. You are blending care for the stock market with care for people. While I must concede that the two can be related, I must also maintain that they are not the same thing. Could it be that the best thing we could do for people is divest them/us from a corrupt, greedy and broken system of selfish, conspicuous consumption and living beyond our means with no care for others, the environment and our own future children?
And no, I was not referring to the homeless population, but rather Wall Street investment banks (and the insatiable public appetite for more) as "chronic gamblers." They thought they could play the game forever and it turns out that they were wrong. I sincerely hope you do not intend to defend such irresponsible financial behavior. These lessons are never easy, but we've got to take our medicine. And just for the record, I don't think I have mentioned Jesus anywhere in this thread until now.
But as far as I can tell, this so-called "rescue plan's" main goal is to help Wall Street, not Main Street, and while I maintain that people should be held accountable for their actions regardless of which "street" they live on, I ESPECIALLY think that this should apply to corporate greed. The bailout isn't any Robin Hood fairy tale of taking from the rich to feed the poor. In fact, it represents the exact opposite of this scenario: stealing from the middle-class tax-payers (and unborn, future generations of them) to line the pockets of the already-rich (albeit less so as of late).
Everyone has faith, but not in the same things or people. I think that the current money woes can serve to remind some of us where our faith is and where it ought to be. It's tempting to put our trust in our bank accounts etc. but that's a fool's errand. Wealth is fickle and this is a reminder.
-CL
The act of Congress to force lending institutions to make loans with little or no equity so that category of people could 'own' a home was rediculous! Most anyone should know that they likely would not 'own' it very long. The Congress forced lending institutions to make suicidal loans and now Congress seems to think their reputations need to be covered by bailing out! What a discusting turn of events.
ReplyDelete