The independent votes ushered the Tea Party into the Congress because TP were the only ones in 2010 whose sayings held the promise of rolling back “socialism and sticky benefits at the top”. In 2008 similar hopes were from Obama (unfortunately he had such an awful lot to handle together that he just lost out to the games of BigFin CEOs and could not rightsize it to new economic normal). Actually, the message from 2008 & 2010 is identical if you don’t see Obamacentric. But the message stands lost - even to those that the juggernaut sent into Government.
----------
This is a very good post. I would like to make a few tangential comments:
1) Let's for the sake of argument, say that the financial near meltdown of 2008 was an accident, that the BigFin guys didn't really know what they were doing. If they didn't know what they were doing, they do not, and did not deserve the compensations that they have/had been making, nor a tax code that makes them escape with taxation rates lower than real work executing people...At least, let's get THAT right then. What’s the point of pretending (and waste-showering money over) someone as our superhero when he’s really nothing more beyond Peter Parker?
2) Let's say, again, that they were unaware what they were doing. The bubble of cheap money-MBS formed and, as it got bigger, BigFin automatiche accumulated more and more employees and executives with SuperStar salaries (see point 1 above that these were, in that case, undeserved vis-à-vis any real talent or competence). Now when the bubble has popped, should not the greater part of this phony employment get shrunk? if the economy has to support these "Stars" with such comps, obviously it'll be sluggish in coming back. But these guys got summarily bailed out with no shrinkage. Even beyond the moral side of it, sticky and undeserved "Superstar" Compensation is a clear, practical drag on the economy. I can't but laugh in sadness when I hear that CEOs want to reduce personnel salaries and benefits to be competitive, without talking about what they intend to do about their own rather ridiculous payouts!
3) "Had we been trained to react at the mere signs of incivility when they arise, we could have avoided a lot of tears, fights and misery in our lives."
Firstly, agree. But also:
I'm really afraid these days that all the talk about civility is really going to make commons folk afraid of posting their thoughts and feelings on their facebook, twitter or linkedin accounts for fear of a 'civility police', while the real people (Leaders) that can affect crowds will just come back to old ways in the name of ‘giving voice to the feelings of the people’. Already in the Corporate World, only those in power have the freedom to 'call a spade a spade', and they do so when only it suits them. This cld well get extended to normal people's web life and telephone life as well. Already stuff you write on the internet is visible to recruiters and company executives, and i'm not sure if it's completely safe to post one's views on the web, yet public discussion and opinion formation WAS the biggest intellectual promise that the web ever held. Alas.
I shudder to think that the civility discourse might spin (unintended) an addition to the already "socialism at the Top and fend-for-thyself at the bottom" paradigm. Again, besides the immorality of it (it JUST DOESN'T sound right), it doesn't sustain, and snaps, at some point, real bad. Egyptian paradigm, even in diluter forms, is a virus that we shld guard against installing itself onto our systems, for it gets stronger over time - then yields disruptive change when people just can't take it anymore.
The message of 2010 election results was NOT the technical deficit hawkery and extreme Govt program shrinkage that the Tea Party core stands for. The independent votes ushered the Tea Party into the Congress because TP were the only ones in 2010 whose sayings held the promise of rolling back “socialism and sticky benefits at the top”. In 2008 similar hopes were from Obama (unfortunately he had such an awful lot to handle together that he just lost out to the games of BigFin CEOs and could not rightsize it to new economic normal). Actually, the message from 2008 & 2010 is identical if you don’t analyze Obamacentric. But the message got lost on Obama; and now it has gotten lost on the Tea Party – they are focusing on technically low budget, very small Gov, which is actually unimplementable – at least not right away. There’s a lot the Gov has to make right (before it can shrink from all sides): including amending the wrongs of 2008-10 that are so pointedly highlighted in this post.
----------
This is a very good post. I would like to make a few tangential comments:
1) Let's for the sake of argument, say that the financial near meltdown of 2008 was an accident, that the BigFin guys didn't really know what they were doing. If they didn't know what they were doing, they do not, and did not deserve the compensations that they have/had been making, nor a tax code that makes them escape with taxation rates lower than real work executing people...At least, let's get THAT right then. What’s the point of pretending (and waste-showering money over) someone as our superhero when he’s really nothing more beyond Peter Parker?
2) Let's say, again, that they were unaware what they were doing. The bubble of cheap money-MBS formed and, as it got bigger, BigFin automatiche accumulated more and more employees and executives with SuperStar salaries (see point 1 above that these were, in that case, undeserved vis-à-vis any real talent or competence). Now when the bubble has popped, should not the greater part of this phony employment get shrunk? if the economy has to support these "Stars" with such comps, obviously it'll be sluggish in coming back. But these guys got summarily bailed out with no shrinkage. Even beyond the moral side of it, sticky and undeserved "Superstar" Compensation is a clear, practical drag on the economy. I can't but laugh in sadness when I hear that CEOs want to reduce personnel salaries and benefits to be competitive, without talking about what they intend to do about their own rather ridiculous payouts!
3) "Had we been trained to react at the mere signs of incivility when they arise, we could have avoided a lot of tears, fights and misery in our lives."
Firstly, agree. But also:
I'm really afraid these days that all the talk about civility is really going to make commons folk afraid of posting their thoughts and feelings on their facebook, twitter or linkedin accounts for fear of a 'civility police', while the real people (Leaders) that can affect crowds will just come back to old ways in the name of ‘giving voice to the feelings of the people’. Already in the Corporate World, only those in power have the freedom to 'call a spade a spade', and they do so when only it suits them. This cld well get extended to normal people's web life and telephone life as well. Already stuff you write on the internet is visible to recruiters and company executives, and i'm not sure if it's completely safe to post one's views on the web, yet public discussion and opinion formation WAS the biggest intellectual promise that the web ever held. Alas.
I shudder to think that the civility discourse might spin (unintended) an addition to the already "socialism at the Top and fend-for-thyself at the bottom" paradigm. Again, besides the immorality of it (it JUST DOESN'T sound right), it doesn't sustain, and snaps, at some point, real bad. Egyptian paradigm, even in diluter forms, is a virus that we shld guard against installing itself onto our systems, for it gets stronger over time - then yields disruptive change when people just can't take it anymore.
The message of 2010 election results was NOT the technical deficit hawkery and extreme Govt program shrinkage that the Tea Party core stands for. The independent votes ushered the Tea Party into the Congress because TP were the only ones in 2010 whose sayings held the promise of rolling back “socialism and sticky benefits at the top”. In 2008 similar hopes were from Obama (unfortunately he had such an awful lot to handle together that he just lost out to the games of BigFin CEOs and could not rightsize it to new economic normal). Actually, the message from 2008 & 2010 is identical if you don’t analyze Obamacentric. But the message got lost on Obama; and now it has gotten lost on the Tea Party – they are focusing on technically low budget, very small Gov, which is actually unimplementable – at least not right away. There’s a lot the Gov has to make right (before it can shrink from all sides): including amending the wrongs of 2008-10 that are so pointedly highlighted in this post.
Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment