Monday, September 22, 2008

Three Times is Enemy Action

An interesting U.S. economic history article, from a decidedly "lefty" blog

Fantastic U.S. history financial writeup from yesterday's "Daily Kos" blog.

We've been hunting around for a good essay on the root causes of the current U.S./World economic meltdown. Here's one of the more interesting specimens we've found to date:

"Three Times is Enemy Action"

The floor is open to our gentle readers, who will no doubt enlighten the world blogosphere, about exactly what they think.

Don't assault the messenger BTW, gentle Republican readers. We have the uneasy feeling that this lefty author, posting at a lefty site... has the history just right.

Deviltower's fine article rings of important truths, wethinks.

Please take the time ro read it... and then offer your comments here.


Keisha said...

Thanks, Rudy! This article should be published on every newpaper editorial page in the nation.

This won't happen, of course.

D. Whitlow said...

Why are you apologizing for printing an excellent article that states the facts correctly?

You are guilty of making statements such as a "lefty article" from a "lefty magazine" to try to influence your predominantly Republican right wing readership to disbelieve the statments made in the article.

The facts as stated are correct. I know. I lived through the era.

Become refreshing and please quit labelling us as "lefty" or "rightwing".

We are all just very concerned Americans who are very interested in knowing the true facts of history.

RudiZink said...

Good question, D. Whitlow.

My main motivation in hedging (it wasn't an apology) on the publication of this statement is that I'm trying very hard to avoid splitting our readership along "lefty/righty" party lines. Whether you're willing to admit it or not, many people identify with those labels.

We have a cohesive group of both GOP and Demo readers here.

Busting it up would be bad stategy, I think.

All politics is local, or so sez the old ax... and in Utah... municipal politics is non-party partisan.

Above all, Weber County Forum aspires to be a non-party partisan blog.

National politics is seasonal. The Emerald City lumpencitizens' fight against Godfrey tyranny is perpetual.

Thus we'll preface our articles as we've always done, trying to show no preference for national political leanings.

Hope that answers your question.

Keisha said...

If Whitlow thinks WCF's readership is "predominantly Republican," he obviously hasn't been reading Weber County Forum for very long.

Good "netiquete" would compel any new reader to read any blog for a while, before leaping in with a kneejerk judgment.

Little Bird said...


And even it was published it would be under the same heading.

"Left hand (liberal) blog blames McCain for finacial meltdown"

Hey that was easy perhaps I should go work at Fox news.

With a heading like that only people who are liberal minded would even read past the headline. A.K.A wasted paper and ink!

RudiZink said...

"With a heading like that only people who are liberal minded would even read past the headline."

What a steaming load! YOU read the kos article, din'tcha?

danny said...

It was a good article.

But nobody is proposing we put things back the way they were. In fact, now they have allowed Goldman and Morgan Stanley to become banks, so they can take deposits and grow even bigger.

And BA has swallowed Countrywide, disavowing their debt, and has taken Merrill.

This is all to let the big get even bigger and more powerful.

They want all these entities to push more debt, to keep the economy moving. Madness.

$2 Trillion in bailouts and counting.

Folks, this is no joke. This is going to get really, really bad I fear. But hard times are good for the soul. We'll be a better nation on the other side of this.

Signed, Lifelong Republican who has watched Bush and the Republicans destroy our country.

Curmudgeon said...


You wrote: All politics is local, or so sez the old ax....

You were quoting, of course, Tip O'Neil, Democratic Majority Leader. Good. Very good. We'll bring you over to God's party yet. [Remember, when the time comes, I can get you safe passage into the Democratic lines. I know people. I have the password....]

Tip one of my all-time favorite Democrats. At a Utah Democratic Party campaign training meeting last year, they went around the room asking everyone who their favorite Democrat was. Most answers where the predictable names: Kennedys, Clintons, Gore. When they got to me, I said Tip ONeil. The older folk in the room nodded. The younger ones looked puzzled.

Tip was my idea of a pragmatist: able to craft compromises with The Other Side that got important legislation moving, while achieving as much as was possible of his party's agenda of liberal legislation. That kind of pragmatism serves the nation better in the long run than unbending ideological commitment [sadly the dominant ethic under the Bush/Republican majority Congresses of his first six years]. Thank kind of pragmatism not as prevalent as I would like to see it in Congress now, though it's better than it was.

Curmudgeon said...


In fact, now they have allowed Goldman and Morgan Stanley to become banks, so they can take deposits and grow even bigger.

While I'm no fan of the bailout proposed by President Paulson [is Bush still alive? Has anyone actually seen him breathing lately? Held a mirror up to his nose to see if condensation forms?], I think you're wrong about the above point. As bank holding companies, the two come under banking regulation, not SEC regulation. That means, for one thing, that the percentage of their loans that they must keep as cash reserves doubles. The larger reserve requirements will cut their ability to leverage debt in half. And provide a great deal more access to their books to federal bank regulations than they had to provide to the SEC as investment banks. So on this particular point, they are likely to shrink some in size, and their profits will be less because of the doubled reserve requirement.

The two new bank holding companies a couple of years ago wanted no part of this particular change. They're embracing it now as an alternative to collapse. It is designed to help them survive, by in fact limiting their ability to leverage their debt going forward. The increased scrutiny and higher reserve requirements are the price they are now willing to pay to stave off collapse.

There are some advantages too, of course. They now have access to the "fed window" so to speak for short term loans, which they didn't have as investment banks as a rule. Mixed bag overall, but they will now shrink a bit and operate at a reduced profit.

Little Bird said...

Yes Rudi, I did read past the headline, but I am also "Liberal" minded.

RudiZink said...

the terms "lefty" and "liberal" are NOT pejorative terms in my view.

America is made up of a "hot soup" of people of various political persuasions.

High time we think to abandon those foggy and politically useless categories, methinks, and to form a coalition of folks who are intersted in saving America from the greedy bankers, who are hell-bent to put us all in chains.

Post a Comment

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved