This is a great article on what just occurred in the financial crisis. The public revolt was enough to change the way business is done for some time now. We had a glimpse of what our parents went through during the great depression and are nbot going to stand by idly while the rich elite do it again.

How dare Mitt Romney suggest it was anything more than a revolt against corporate greed. Politics of envy my ass, it was politics of greed that got us here and common sense that will get us out!




Complete story

Take off your liberal glasses and go back and reread the article with an objective perspective. I think you would be surprised to learn that you have badly mischaracterized the content of the article.

In terms of reframing the issue, please elaborate regarding how you think the issue should be framed.

I can only assume that you've finally come to realize that you can't hold your own in a discussion with me, thus you concede the argument and send me pretty pictures.

We Know That The Money Debt Is Growing Yet We Got to Get The Money Flowing. If We Are To Get Going our leaders who are demanding oversight and accountability by opening the chances that clearly enhances the chance that the peoples get paid back though law and fact.

I agree, but it's not enough yet. The replacement framing isn't yet even in view. All "Main Street" people know is that they are pissed and tired of bailing out Wall Street. But they don't yet know (or remember) what a government which sets policy for Main Street looks like.

Wall Street is based on ME, on accumulation in a zero sum game (money). Main Street is more WE oriented, on family, neighborhood, community oriented, on shared risk to help ensure survival, and perhaps even prosperity. Wall Street doesn't care about survival, nor general prosperity.

For the last 35 years, we have see the ME types reset the frame of how we think about household financials. The "Great Communicator" told us that government should be small, the smaller the better, that it was your enemy, that the unregulated free market would solve all our problems, and that we just got out of the way of all those people on Wall Street who were so ME oriented, that all of their success would "trickle down" and families would be well off also. The Great Communicator told the Great Lie. We are seeing that not only does Wall Street financial success NOT "trickle down" to Main Street, but Wall Street Pain does. We have the worst of all possible worlds: (1) policy focused on corporations, not people (2) upside doesn't move from Wall Street to Main Street, and (3) downside does.

What would a government focused on Main Street look like? The most important thing is to develop a set of METRICS for what you are trying to optimize, or at least improve, or even maintain. If we are after the "greater good", it seems to me that we should be looking at the financials of HOUSEHOLDS, instead of the financials of CORPORATIONS, in aggregate of course. A COO I used to work with often said "You can't manage what you don't measure." He was talking about corporate operations, but the same is true about our economies: household or corporate. Until we begin to INSTRUMENT household finances to get a view of them, we will not be able to optimize, improve or maintain them. That is why we were caught by surprise when "trickle down" / deregulation failed so spectacularly.

If we had metrics by which to measure the financial health of households, we could begin to ask for "impact statements" of proposed legislation, in quantified terms. At present, we can't even demand accountability. Even with this $1T banking bailout, we haven't talked about the impact on households, even though it is quite substantial.

I know the Wall Street / Main Street distinction is seeming a little hackneyed. But it is a critically vital framing distinction, and until we OPERATIONALIZE the new frame (trickle UP, corporate regulation in support of Main Street health, instrumented) we won't be outside of the old frame (trickle down, unregulated free market).

I just caught the end of Obama on Face the Nation. He pretty much said the same thing, in his words. I am certain he will push this shift once in office. For now, he must lead the electorate in reframing how we thing about how this government operates for citizens.

True to your conservative Republican ways you can now rationalize everything as liberal in view and therefore wrong irregardless of it's meaning.
I am referring to Romney's spin that this is "Unfortunately, politicians have seized on the politics of envy," as in they got wealthy and now you want to fault them for it. That is an old conservative ploy and really shows your desperation.

This article shows how the back lash of public anger will effect the business as usual atmosphere for some time to come, do you deny that?

This mess, that most blame here on the republicans was actually a mess created by the democrats with republicans looking the other way. The lessening of lending standards is at the root of this problem. These are the bad loans. Banks, without the encouragement and demand of the federal government, would have never made these loans. It was the lessening of standards that allowed millions of americans to buy and refinance homes at levels that were irresponsible. The government set the rules and wall street ran with it, knowing all allong that the federal government would honor the loans. The end result will be very bad for the democrat party. Yes, there will be further regulation of the financial community, but that will be meaningless as the problem will go away anyway as we go back to demanding 20% downpayments and reasonable income levels to qualify for a loan. These changes will cause the poor in this country to be denied the ability to buy homes that they should have never qualified for in the first place. This will send the Jessie Jacksons and Al Sharptons into a frenzy. Who will they blame? It will have to be the democrats as they will most likely control all three branches of government. Money that was invested here in these securities that will probably go away, will go somewhere. If not here, then they will go overseas for investment resulting in a decline in our economy and thus, a decline in our tax base.

Obama has made a ton of promises requiring tons of money. The tax base will not be there. He will be forced to jettision almost all of his programs. No tax cut for the 95% of americans, the money wont be there. No tax increase for the rich as we will need to make sure we do nothing to chase money out of this country. No money for healthcare for all.

It is very possible that the winner of this election will ultimately be the loser. There will be a decline in projected tax revenue next year as people and businesses write off their losses in these investments. Can you imagine the effect if Obama raises taxes that he claims will bring in more money and actually the tax base declines? It will make heroes out of the trickle down theorists who already have evidence that lowering taxes raises revenue. The financial institutions will go through a change that main street will not see. Main street will see it much harder to get loans for business expansion and buying homes and there credit card rates rising. This main street will see and will eventually blame the democrats for. So as I said, the winners will probably be the losers.

Way off.

This crisis was not caused by "lessening of lending standards". That was just one step along the path of the lie of trickle down, deregulation, celebrating greed.

Sure, the financial industry will try to guarantee its survival by obfuscation, lies, and coopting this government. That is why this CLASS STRUGGLE (investor class, vs working class) is a fight for life, air, water. You sketch what you think the battles will look like, but you don't account for a mobilized citizenry. That will always win.

IMO what also needs to be re-framed from the article is this section here.



The GOP and their conservative pundit puppets will use this crisis to prevent Obama from making necessary reforms and continue to curtail much needed social spending.

That has been the ultimate goal of Reagonomics and deficit spending. This financial crisis will be used to hamstring Obama's Administration.

They will try, and certainly this is a huge millstone around the neck. But I think they misjudge the power of the bully pulpit and a mobilized citizenry. The battle lines are getting clearer, and it's not US vs al Qaeda.

Exactly what will a "mobilized citizenry" do? and to whom?

That's where a 60 vote majority comes in. With full control of the Senate we can have a congress that does something for a "Change" no more obstructionist Republicans to stop legislation that just doesn't suit them. they were so intent on stopping legislation they even stopped some that they supported.

On the bailout issue, I support Paulson's plan, and agree the house Republicans are making it harder to get a deal done.

In terms of the article, I agreee with your assessment regarding a backlash of public anger. In terms of Romney's statement, I think he is dead on. Politicians from both sides of the political aisle will seize upon this to gain political advantage.

In terms of my response to you, it was focused on your beating up on Romney. His comments were but a very small piece of the article, yet you singled them out for special treatment.

So in other words, the GOP should just get out of the way and let Obama do whatever he sees fit?

Typical conservative MO - deregulate everything, blame the Blacks first when it all comes crashing down.

Don't you know nobody buys this old line, anymore?

What you are really saying is that we can now enjoy the infinate wisdom of Democratic party rule.

Assuming Obama wins the election, the Republicans will be unable to stop anything except through a filibuster, but that will never happen as the economic reality of these times will not allow. The Obama presidency will then be a total disaster as he is unable to follow through on any of his promises. If his promises would have been good during normal times, then they should be even better in tough times. The reality is, it is based on class warfare and taxing the rich and redistributing that income. The only problem is the rich are far less rich today and with the inevitable tightening of the financial industry, investment funds will go overseas making the situation even worse. Coming up? Huge layoffs of construction workers due to a massive number of empty foreclosed homes. The most assured tightening of lending standards will prevent these homes from being gobbled up quickly. Small businnesses will be unable to get loans as they have in the past for expansion, tax revenues will decline from their projected levels, causing a serious budget deficit for the foreseeable future.

What's the budget deficit now, warmonger?

Who are you trying to kid? LOL!

Now your getting it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqsT4xnKZPg

Figure it out and stop being so willfully obtuse.

Ah, Republican humor.

Oh, please do show us your evidence for this, because there's only a TON of it that shows the exact opposite arising from the wreckage that was the Reagan/Bush Administrations.

In fact, you're still paying interest on the piss they piddled onto your head when they "trickled down" all those "benefits".

rightoftheroad..... Rank-and-file Republicans must LIKE getting reamed.

the Citizens Of the United States See The Obstruction From the Republicans corruption Thats Leding To The Constitutions Destruction
And Our Vote For The Disruption to enter into the discussion and get some Relief for us again. And Realise The Bonds Of The Republicans Grief that have staled the advancements thurgh deceit.
Than We Can Get Impeachments And end the Contempt of Crongress with the return of Justice Thurgh Law and Facts Thats For Us.

I do. I think the anger is and will be directed at politicians especially those in power when their jobs are lost, homes are lost, credit card fees go soring, lending standards are raised and promises for tax cuts for 95% of americans and free healthcare for the uninsured are ditched. Also coming will be a tightening of small business loans and college loans. The next 4 years will not be a good time for politicians in charge. Especially politicians representing a party based on buying support with tax dollars.

Not even Bush 1 bought into it.

and if that were an actuality would you be happy or sad?

Your dream scenario, I'm sure.

you gotta watch the video to the end...

It is funny you pick Roosevelt as much of our problems today are directly involved with the massive increases that the democrats have made in 2 of his small, at the time, inititiaves. Social Security is very near to failure and Fannie Mae just went into recevership. Yep, happy days are here again. Now that Obamas whole list of campaign promises is going up in smoke, assuming he is elected, what will he actually do?

Is that you, Limpballs?

Oh but you didn't watch it all the way through Under Democrat control (the people who know how to make government work for the people) it can be fixed. Our problem wasn't government it's just been the wrong kind of government...

OK what is the right "kind of government" What should an Obama administration do? Start a whole bunch more Roosevelt type programs?

See, that's the thing. You never know what a mobilized citizenry will do, or to whom. They might just blog a little louder and longer. Easy to bring down politicians that way. They might talk to their neighbors, as Obama's Neighbor to Neighbor campaign encourages. Who knows what they'll come up with? I'm sure they'll try to express themselves "within the system", at least at first, as the Declaration of Independence recommends:



And if the system tries to suppress that voice, by election fraud, by secrecy, by force, then AS ALWAYS HAPPENS IN ANY OPPRESSED SOCIETY, an underground will develop. Countermeasures will be developed. Some will be peaceful: civil disobedience. Some will produce alternative economies: barter, tax resistance, alternative currencies, etc. And as always, some will be oriented towards violence.

When pushed too far, the people will be unified and will act as one, just as they have for all time, most recently and spectacularly in the French, American and Russian revolutions.

The notion that 1.5% of the population, the richest part, will overwhelm a mobilized grass roots with "central planning" is as ludicrous now as it's always been.

So what I read is class warfare. It isn't going to happen. Any revolt against government will have to be directed at democrats since they will most likely be in total charge.

Can you BE a little more disingenuous?

I wish you could actually discuss issues instead of just vent against me. But if that is all you have, go for it.

If they fully fund them with provisions that wont allow Republican tampering and if the people need them, by all means. Roosevelt programs got us out of the last Republican mess why not this one?

Take all the money from the whites and give it away to the blacks

Class "struggle" And it is happening. Maybe faster than you know.

Government doesn't have to oppress the people; that's just the Republican way. When it can be brought to do the people's bidding, then it is on the side of the people. That's what "of by and for the people" means. So the first step is to recapture the government. We do that by cutting out the cancer. With very high correlation, cancer=Republican. That's not to say that the cancer hasn't metastasized into Democratic ranks, so they are next.

I used to run change management programs in my corporate life. The rule of thumb was 25% would lead, 50% would follow, and 25% would obstruct. Our CEO's translation was "Carry the wounded and shoot the stragglers". Figuratively, of course.

So the first step is to remember who this government is of, by and FOR. Then make it so.

No as a matter of fact the public opinion of congress may go up. Once they get people thinking positive instead of always against everything.

Yep, more spending with other peoples money. I got it.

BTW, is there any existing social program that you would consider to be "fully funded"?

Well, the good thing for the Pelosi/Reid Congress is that it cant go much lower.

Getting rid of a few more Republicans will help that...

I don't "vent" against you. I call it like I see it.

I CAN discuss the issues, I just prefer to do it with a poster who is honest.

You...are anything but.

Shameful, I know...

Yes, one with enough money to make it work the way it was intended...

Well we got rid of a whole bunch of them 2 years ago. How did that work out?

And which program is that?

Again with the dishonesty?

We did a pretty good job of fully funding Fannie Mae. That worked real well. Social Security was fully funded. That was a ponzi scheme though and will eventually fail.

What was dishonest about that? We did get rid of a bunch of republicans 2 years ago. The approval rating of Congress has gone way down since? Please tell me the dishonesty there?