Thread: Stop the Bailout

Talk about your basic "putting lipstick on a pig' move, the Bush administration along with the tweedle this and tweedle that presidential wannabes are mounting a massive push for another turn at the bailout bill. I don't know about you, but I'm calling my Congressional delegation to thank them for having the backbone to stand up to the bankster bailout. I suggest you do the same. Call your representative and ask them how they voted and give them thanks or ask why they are stone deaf to the People. While it's true that the stock market will likely decline without a bailout, the problem I've had with the bailout from the start is that the main argument in favor of it seems to be that without it, the market will decline. Honest disclosure is a threat? A company taking excessive risks and being reckless should be saved? What planet are we on here? When the hell did America start live in fear of an honest reckoning of financial excesses and greed and agree to being held hostage for a $700 billion ransom by Banksters? Is the market overpriced? You bet! Is food? You bet! Has globalism stolen real tangible jobs from America? Uh huh! Could it all come down around the elite and a lot of uber-rich feel pain? Oh well... welcome to Main Street. But more to the point: What part of "NO!" was it they didn't understand?

Originally Posted by denmason

But more to the point: What part of "NO!" was it they didn't understand?

Dennis, normally you're the proponent of the thesis that 'US is a republic not a democracy', by which you seem to mean that it is representative, not direct democracy. The idea, as you are well aware is that the popular opinion can and often should be overriden by the elite, when they think that it's wrong. The majority is not always right.

As far as how bad things will get when the market overcorrects itself, that's just anybody's speculation. It seems to me that the reason americans oppose the bailout is that so far they have not been affected too much (in part because of the interventions so far).
Somehow though I have the feeling that either way those who will get it worst won't be the ones with the biggest losses (they'll have plenty left after that too).

In interest of full disclosure I'm probably more detached than most because I don't have much at stake - I can just leave the country if I don't like it here.

at denmason

I wouldn't go around blaming globalism for this. If you can't keep jobs in the face of competition, then you don't deserve them either. Globalism doesn't 'steal' jobs.

That's true for me and true for you.
The new norton factory is in mexico, and according to Howard, the hones are of better quality than when they were made in the US. So Norton made a good choice to close down the US plant.

Nationalism and business do not mix.

Originally Posted by gugi

Dennis, normally you're the proponent of the thesis that 'US is a republic not a democracy', by which you seem to mean that it is representative, not direct democracy. The idea, as you are well aware is that the popular opinion can and often should be overriden by the elite, when they think that it's wrong. The majority is not always right.

The representative republic is to send representatives back to the seat of government to vote the will of the people so that the people don't have to individually go to the polls every single time something needs voting on, it's not so they can vote against the peoples' will. Our (Utah's) Congressman Cannon was a prime example of what our legislators do wrong with their sense of entitlement. The day before the vote he was asked how he would vote, given the number of calls to the office saying to vote no. He said that he won't know how he's going to vote until he was actually casting the vote, and then he'd vote how he personally felt. He voted yes. In an interview last night he tried to play it off as the "right thing to do" and said he'd known all along, so easily forgetting his words just days before. He's not up for re-election because he got spanked in the primary for this sort of behavior. He, in spite the peoples' voice to the contrary, was pushing amnesty. In the primaries, the only thing his opponent did was speak against it, and he won by a landslide. Most times, it works when people get involved.

The idea, as you are well aware is that the popular opinion can and often should be overriden by the elite, when they think that it's wrong. The majority is not always right.

gugi


Gugi,

There are two things that stand out to me. One is that there shouldn't be an "Elite" class in this country. I admit there are some people who may have Gulfstream jets and Rolls Royces, but they are no BETTER than any other man in this country! There was no thought that there would eventually be a "Ruling Class" in this country, when The Constitution was ratified! I refer to dinosaurs like Robert Byrd, Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry and Jay Rockefeller. They are Poster Children for term limits! The idea of an "ELITE" class is repugnant to those of us who are Rednecks!
Second, The majority may not always be right, but they are always the majority! And they have the power to vote a bad politician out of office. It ought to happen on a very regular basis!

Speaking of John Kerry, I just wrote him (and my congressman as well):

I am very dissapointed to see that you are in support of the bailout bill.

Do NOT carelessly spend OUR taxpayer dollars on this boondogle.

If you continue to back the bill I will certainly be voting for another representative the next opportunity I have. Whether that occurs this election cycle or the next. I will not vote for anyone who supports this bailout bill.

Sincerely,

Originally Posted by maplemaker

The representative republic is to send representatives back to the seat of government to vote the will of the people so that the people don't have to individually go to the polls every single time something needs voting on, it's not so they can vote against the peoples' will.

Actually, convenience is the smaller part of it. Last time this came up in a discussion Mike posted a quote from Madison on the subject - take a look at it http://straightrazorpalace.com/conve...tml#post261182 .

As far as Elite class, I suppose some people could debate whether there should be one or not, but I don't know of a single country where such class does not exist. Whether we like it or not, children are more likely do go in the profession of their parents as they get all kinds of support if they do. To me that's the cause for it and it's on such a fundamental level that I don't see any way around it.
In any case I didn't say political elite class, I said elite. Whether or not they form a class, they are elite as their position grants them power and privilege, even if temporary.

And I most certainly agree that if the majority is determined to do something in the long term they can do it. What the representation affects is the short term decisions, such as this one. It increases the inertia of the system, which ensures stability. The judiciary branch is the one with most inertia and that is a good thing.

In any case I've said it before - to me the turnover in the representation only shows that the american society in general is actually happy with their representatives. I suppose if elections weren't so close, voting on this bill may be different. Two years is not a terribly long timeframe but it's significantly longer than month and a half.
In any case, I think it's a pretty good system - the public opinion can keep hostage 1/3 of the representation.

In North America Elite Class = those that are doing better than the average. If you don't want this I take it you are for a true marxist society, where everyone is equal hmmm. Who would of thought Americans would want a marxist society.

I think it all boils down to greed, the bankers were greedy, the investors (which are the average taxpayer and middle class) were greedy, now all the ones railing against the bailout mostly are doing so because they are short sighted and don't see anything it it for THEMSELVES. The US and the majority of the population are greedy and selfish, that would include myself too before you say it.

The Senate and house are now calling the bail out "The Rescue initiative" or som such nonsense! They figure it will make the idea of socialism that this bill introduces more palatable to the American people!

Originally Posted by Hutch

In North America Elite Class = those that are doing better than the average. If you don't want this I take it you are for a true marxist society, where everyone is equal hmmm. Who would of thought Americans would want a marxist society.

It comes down to this: I'm elite; the rest of you aren't.

In other words, the definition of "elite" it depends on whose side you're on. Sarah Palin is somebody's elite.

j