Last Night's NBC news Opening Segment: Bailout Backlash
46 comments on “Last Night's NBC news Opening Segment: Bailout Backlash”
T19 Access
Search
Categories Main
Categories Exhaustive
T19 Resources
T19 Access
Search
Categories Main
Categories Exhaustive
T19 Resources
Such hypocritical baloney. Where were Santelli and his greedy traders when corporate America led by CEOs and a whole army of looters, aided and abetted by little or no regulation from their ideological buddies in the government, stood silently by and profited from the mortgages handed out like candy by the Countrywides and Washington Mutual? We didn’t hear any complaints when mortgage lenders talked potential homes into dreams of speculative profits with low interest that suddenly became exorbitantly high interest mortgages. Santelli and his friends killed all the chickens in the hen house, and now screaming at the hens for not being being “responsible enough” to keep them out. Yeah, his rant is viral all right. And a superb example of the kind of hypocrisy we’ve come to expect from his crowd/
Dan, viral is a reference to the circulation it got on the internet.
And while it is fashionable to rant against Wall Street now, and many there deserve some of the blame for this fiasco, Santelli was quite worried about how it was developing. He was one of the better ones before this all blew up, for the record.
The key point is the one calculated risk made yesterday about who bought these homes and why. Mark Zandi in the piece is correct, some of the people involved are in trouble now because their pay has been cut or they have lost their job. The problem is numerous others took on far more house and far more risk than they could afford. The plan falls short in failing to distinguish between types of borrowers.
The Government bailout of bad home loans is like parents buying their kids drugs to keep them from stealing. Our government is broken. As one example, Nancy Peolosi’s trip to Italy with her husband was on a private jet funded by taxpayers. The ruling elite are as out of touch as the wall street crowd they are scolding.
for going viral see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_phenomenon
What Santelli and some others are inchoately sensing, but not yet elaborating is the key underlying core principle:
[b]Avoidable dependency is parasitism.[/b]
As never before, producers in this country are under attack by those who depend upon the votes of parasites to maintain their electoral coalition. The entire focus of the present ‘stimulus’ bill is to [i]create[/i] additional dependency, later easily demagogued as “If you vote Republican, they’ll take it away.”
One classic definition of addiction is that the joy of anticipation comes to be replaced by fear of withdrawal. In the case of the ‘stimulus’ bill, that process will be compressed between now and the 2010 congressional elections.
If we are to decry reckless mortgage lenders, we need to equally condemn reckless borrowers and also government intervention in the mortgage markets which encouraged making bad loans for “good reasons.” And now we are trying to fix these problems by further interfering in markets without trying to distinguish between the unfortunate and the merely reckless.
Bart in #5 has it correct. Our political process now stokes the fires of class envy and covetousness of the fruits of others success (and yes, there are enough cases out there for politicians to make voters think that anyone successful must have stolen it from the workers). We’ve been here before, it did not work then and it will not work now. As FDR’s New Deal advisor Harry Hopkins said “We’ll tax and tax, and spend and spend, and elect and elect.”
You know, if it could be shown that 90% of illegal Mexican immigrants voted Republican upon becoming citizens, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid would have put enough money in the bail-out bill to electrify and mine the fence being built between the U.S. and Mexico.
The cost of this problem is going to be spread out amongst the USA population either way; if someone goes into bankruptcy the cost is borne by others; if their is a bailout the cost is borne by people other than the ones holding the loan. And we know there will be substantial fraud; there always is. We need to be pragmatic and ask, is this going to stabilize real estate values ( we all benefit)? Is this going to lower the instances of families going through bankrupcy? One thing that troubled me is reading that a substantial number of the laons in trouble are “Jumbo” loans, in amounts of $400-700 K +. It would seem to me that we should be aiming for the lower and middle markets
We may not want to help our neighbor, who made a mistake, but by not helping, we end up also doing ourselves in.
But just scratch the surface of his rant, and I’ll bet you find hypocrisy, selfishness and resentment. Ugly.
“Avoidable dependancy is parasitism”.
Precisely. My 18 year old lives with a roommate in what amounts to a shack. I do pay her tuition, health insurance, and books for college but since she wishes to be independant, and not live with me, she sells vacuum cleaners door to door 5 days a week to pay for rent, cell phone and food, and bikes to work and to school.
I respect that.
When I was in college and medical school, I also lived in flea bags, and biked everywhere, rather than taking on debt I couldn’t afford to buy nicer homes or cars.
Every week I get 18-30 year olds coming to me to try to get “disability” for a variety of non problems such as fatigue, anxiety, “bipolar”, ADHD etc. I tell them that they do not qualify under the AMA guides (which are the only ones I follow) and that if they would like a job, Kirby Vacuum Sales is looking for door to door salesmen and the base pay is sufficient to provide food and shelter, while commissions could potentially provide a good deal more.
It is possible to live in the United States without being a parasite. It does require a change in mind set as to what we are “owed”.
“We may not want to help our neighbor, who made a mistake, but by not helping, we end up also doing ourselves in. ”
It is not WE who are helping our neighbor. What we are doing is hypocritically pretending to help while secretly passing the cost to nonvoting future generations. This allows us to continue to live beyond our means, while feeling good about ourselves and our “generosity”. Our children and grandchildren and their children are the generous ones. They are the ones who will be paying. WE are simply hypocritical parasites.
I do want to help my neighbor and do so through charitable contributions in addition to my tithe. What I resent the heck out of is the socialists who force me to do it via a wasteful, self-perpetuating, ever more bloated government bureaucracy; run by government employee unions who care nothing but for themselves and presided over by the cynical clowns we call Congress who pass out money for votes like it’s candy.
JW; I agree with you on the issue; but can we discuss it without demonizing someone who thinks otherwise? Why do assume because this Rick S guy has an opinion different from yours that he is a selfish hypocrite? Possibly he feels that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Did the war on poverty end poverty?
[blockquote]We may not want to help our neighbor, who made a mistake, but by not helping, we end up also doing ourselves in. [/blockquote]
Lovely, but can we not do it at the point of a gun this time around, John? Or is this another case of liberals not caring what people do with their lives, so long as it’s compulsory?
“I do want to help my neighbor and do so through charitable contributions in addition to my tithe.”
Ditto. “Helping” my neighbor via other peoples money (particularly that of unborn generations) is theft, not charity. Theft from future generations by Congress in order to buy votes and secure Congressmen’ current lifestyles is no different from the theft of Madoff and the other Wall Street fraud artists.
John Wilkins (and other clergy) should be ashamed to praise theft of this nature, under the screen of “helping”. What clergy should be doing is advising industry and thrift. That is what Clergy used to do before tolerance and niceness became the cardinal virtues. Clergy should stop reading Marx and go back to remembering what real virtue is. The so called 7 heavenly Virtues is what counter what used to be called the 7 Deadly Sins. Most of the trouble in Wall Street, TEC and America have to do with the 7 Deadly sins and the failure of Clergy to perform their basic duties as pastors to ward people against them.
Chastity (Purity) -the opposite and antidote to Lust- Embracing of moral wholesomeness and achieving purity of thought.
Temperance (-the opposite and antidote to Gluttony) Constant mindfulness of others and one’s surroundings; practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation.
Charity – (the opposite and antidote to Greed) . Willingness to give.
Diligence (the opposite and antidote to Sloth) A zealous and careful nature in one’s actions and work. Decisive work ethic. Budgeting one’s time; monitoring one’s own activities to guard against laziness.
Patience (The opposite and antidote to Wrath) Forbearance and endurance through moderation. Resolving conflicts peacefully, as opposed to resorting to violence. The ability to forgive; to show mercy to sinners.
Kindness (The opposite and antidote to Envy) Compassion, sympathy without prejudice and for its own sake.
Humility (The opposite and antidote to Pride) Modest behavior, selflessness, and the giving of respect. Giving credit where credit is due; not unfairly glorifying one’s own self.
Thanks, Jimmy DuPre #13. It’s important to remember that people of good will can think that very different answers are the right solution to a problem. A self-righteous insistence that people we don’t agree with are therefore selfish hypocrites is more damaging to oneself than to anyone else.
Rick might not personally be selfish. But he’s clearly giving voice to the selfish. What they should be doing is critiquing the waste that had happened over the last 8 years.
The war on poverty had some remarkable successes. But no, it did not end poverty. The best way to end poverty would have been to encourage full employment: but that costs more than the welfare state. And few politicians are willing to sacrifice their political capital to invest n ways that makes doing business in poor areas profitable.
Clueless, Industry and thrift are excellent virtues, but they are not necessarily Christian virtues. If anything, a responsible reading of Ecclesiastes and some of Jesus’ existential parables about wealth seem to indicate that industry and “thrift” are misleading. It is about grace and truth. Further, I think that it is God’s grace, not individual industry, that provide for the ability to produce wealth. Further, Perhaps it is time for the government to give people a Jubilee year.
And that’s biblical.
I don’t see taxes as theft: they are the dues for living in a free society. Churches will never be able to do enough because congregants don’t give enough to do the work that needs to be done. Because we are sinners, we are generally miserly toward our neighbors. Including in churches. I think Augustine had a clearer understanding of the state than the one worshiped by libertarians. He emphasized that humanity is fallen, and the state exists for that reason. Most people will never voluntarily pay their fair share because they are fallen and greedy.
I’m not sure where Clueless gets the idea that clergy are busy preaching about niceness and tolerance. I do preach about charity and love, and that by and large, we fall short. Christians are called to give everything they have to God, but by and large we’ve succumbed to the religion of individualism and consumption. I do preach that we are dependent upon each other, whether we like it or not.
The whole “unborn generations” is a canard. They will benefit from having stable grandparents who had work rather than having unemployed grandparents. Future generations will benefit from having us invest in green technology now and good roads. They will benefit from their grandparents having police, firemen and teachers.
Besides, nobody seemed to complain while Bush was accumulating debt to pay for his wars (without all his strange accounting practices, it looks like it comes to 2.7 trillion dollars).
I do want to also mention, clueless, that our disagreement is probably one of degrees. I’m not a manichean when it comes to economics. I believe in the merits of a commercial society (which you would call capitalist). I also think that incentives – monetary incentives – work. I probably share your general intuitions about state control and planning. That said, I’m not hostile to government and I believe the evidence is that government investment and spending contributes to the economy and can improve people’s lives – especially in cases like the one we’re facing today. I’m also a bit more cynical about human nature: I don’t think the wealthy are necessarily more industrious or more deserving of their wealth than others, and I abhor the justifications that people make for creating little monarchies. But I also don’t believe in a utopian society either of a single class or of a nation of shopkeepers.
My own personal inclinations are that people should be producers rather than consumers, but the common good – through our democratic processes – is properly managed by the institutions we’ve created as citizens.
As regards a Jubilee year, I agree. I think no mortgage should be greater than 7 years (it didn’t used to be), and if you can’t save up enough for that kind of downpayment, you need to keep renting until you have saved up the money. I think that it would be very good to have a jubilee year every 7 years that wipes away all debt. It frees the poor from debt serfdom, ensures that lenders lend prudently, and is a check on greed.
I also think it would be well have a Jubilee year for convicts. If you’ve served your time, in 7 years wipe away the criminal record so folks with a previous conviction can truly “rejoin society”.
I don’t see taxes as theft either. However I do see Debt that one has no intention of paying as being theft. It is theft if I take on debt to buy a house, and plan to walk away from it. It is theft if my government takes on a debt and plans to hand it down the line. I would rather see a stripped down government with high taxes but no budget deficit than our current government that has relatively low taxes and plans to soak future generations.
And yes, the future generations are real. The way to have employed grandparents is to simply get rid of the regulations that make it difficult to hire such individuals, the government bureacracy that enforces those regulations, and the army of lawyers that preys on anybody who might wish to lend them a hand.
The illegals in my church have no trouble finding work. They work under the table, and there appears to be no shortage of jobs available to them. The legal working poor in my community has trouble because they insist on minimum wage and would be quick to sue and to run to the regulators if they failed to get what they “are owed”. The illegals seem to manage doubling up in crappy apartments (like my kid) until they can buy outright in cash. The legal working poor insist on a “decent place to live” and that is why they find themselves with more house than they can afford and need a government bailout.
Future generations will be impoverished because we feel we are “owed” a “good life” at a “livable” wage and a “decent” place to live. I lived in a rat infested apartment (for which I paid 1,000 month) when I was a resident. I worked three jobs (including night shift) when my kid had medical bills. Nobody has a “right” to the “good life”, certainly not at the expense of future generations who will be called upon to pay for it.
But I point out, John that if you limit yourself to preaching about charity and love, then you are doing your parishoners a disservice. Some folks sins may indeed involve Greed, Wrath or Pride. As many need to be reminded about Lust, or Sloth, or Envy. Preach only on the one, and you will get a great deal more of the others. That is what has happened to both TEC and America. There was a focus of greed and pride in the FIRE economy, and a huge bonanza of lust, sloth, envy and gluttony on Main Street. Both contributed to the mess we are in.
“Clueless, Industry and thrift are excellent virtues, but they are not necessarily Christian virtues.”
Thrift falls under “Prudence and Temperance”
Industry falls under “Fortitude”
Both are certainly Christian virtues. And there is no doubt that Sloth and Greed and Gluttony are Christian Vices.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a7.htm
Rick Santellis for President – – QUICKLY, please!!!!
[blockquote]I don’t see taxes as theft: they are the dues for living in a free society.[/blockquote]
Does that mean there are no taxes in, say, Cuba or North Korea? Or are they just freer than us?
Taxation isn’t theft, so long as it spent on functions that are in common defense of society. When money is taken from some citizens and put into the pockets of other citizens with nothing of value returned to the payers, that is theft. And it doesn’t make a bit of difference whether the recipient is rich or poor.
RE: “We may not want to help our neighbor . . . ”
Could be, could not be. But what that has to do with the State redistributing money one can’t imagine.
People “helping their neighbor” as JW so righteously puts it is always voluntary. Otherwise it’s . . . well . . . it’s the kind of government that JW desires and of course contrary to the Constitution.
RE: “But just scratch the surface of his rant, and I’ll bet you find hypocrisy, selfishness and resentment.”
Naw — you’ll find revulsion at the violation of the Constitution, and you’ll find outrage at the gross abuse of power, and you’ll find disgust at the immoral theft. And that’s absolutely beautiful when people voice such sentiment.
Beautiful.
Ugly.
RE: “But he’s clearly giving voice to the selfish.”
Nope. He’s clearly giving voice to those who don’t want the power of the State to expand in violation of our Constitution.
RE: “What they should be doing is critiquing the waste that had happened over the last 8 years.”
Thankfully, we can both express outrage at the violations of the Constitution and critique the waste. But due to JW’s differing foundational worldviews, what I see as waste to be critiqued he will see as good useful spending.
Just as what he sees as ugly, I see as beautiful.
Standard, for members of TEC who believe in mutually opposing gospels.
What a great great expression of moral outrage from Santelli.
Good stuff!
Thank God so many are getting to see it too.
My sister-in-law just returned from a missionary visit to Cuba, where she says they take all but $25.00 per month of the money you earn ” for the greater good”.
The one thing I did not see discussed (as I quickly scanned previous posts) in the “mortgage bailout†is house values. The “market†is in the process of correcting artificially high values for houses that was created by easy money and speculation. If we bail out our “neighbor†we may well prevent a new generation from owning homes till very late in life due to a stabilization of artificially high values in the real estate market! If we stabilize artificially high values are we helping our neighbors, those you couples seeking their first homes?
Should read “those young couples” sorry, I am the typo king!
Two nights ago, I think on NBC news, there was a piece on this. A youngish (early 30s maybe) woman told us that as “a single mom”, she appreciated a bailout that would lower her mortgage $300-$400. She ran the “single mom” line around to close, like it was a deal-clincher. For the record, it’s no shame to be a single parent, but it’s no great honor either. Also for the record, I’m in favor of helping my neighbor, including through taxation and government assistance. But this woman lives in a $210,000 house. That’s not much house in some places, but this was a 2 story brick-and-stone suburban beauty.
Last night they ran a piece on a foreclosure court doing a booming business, and it would break your heart. One young woman’s husband died and now she is losing the house. That’s sad, and we can legitimately debate what help is appropriate. I went through lay offs in the 90s and ended up selling my house. What I would have done if the market hadn’t been good, I don’t know, but when my job situation stabilized, I bought another house, much smaller and not as nice. I miss my other house, but that’s life.
Here’s the point: we have people living in houses too large, too fancy, and losing market value. One news story I’ve seen was about a couple in an $850,000 house that’s now worth $500,000. Cry me a river. Indeed, there is avarice shot through the whole of society. And avarice is a sin as deadly as lust, our other social preoccupation.
Clueless, I don’t only preach on charity. But I admire the way you’ve classified thrift and industry. I don’t think Fortitude and Prudence quite have the same connotations, but I can understand what you are saying.
That said, I wonder how you would interpret some of the more challenging economic parables of Jesus. I think that they call into question the way most Americans normally think of thrift and industry.
#22 – I admit, I’m not sure if we saw the same video. I don’t think he mentioned the constitution in his rant. It seemed to be about moral hazards. It was dripping with resentment that the government would help undeserving people. Not that the economic package actually does what he thinks it will do. It’s the populism of the privileged who resent the poor.
I may be a little more cynical about human nature than Sarah. We might have the best intentions, but by and large we are unwilling to do what we need to do to live in society peacefully. I think people are by nature short sighted about helping others. They are generally depraved and sinful. For this reason, as Augustine (and Paul) noted, the state exists. We may think we are doing enough, but sometimes we must be told what to do. And sometimes we have institutions that coerce us in to doing what is right. Like, for example, marriage.
It would be really beautiful if we could all be like anarchists, living without the state, communally, with just churches running things. I like that dream myself. Eventually, we might get there. But for now, there is the City of Earth which we live in.
Sarah, it’s not just two different world views. You have the right and more perfect worldview, one which I’m sure is satisfactory. I have the wrong worldview. I’m just trusting in God’s grace that in spite of my mistakes my faith in Him will be enough.
[blockquote]Besides, nobody seemed to complain while Bush was accumulating debt to pay for his wars (without all his strange accounting practices, it looks like it comes to 2.7 trillion dollars). [/blockquote]
That’s the funniest line I’ve read in a long time! No – nobody complained about Bush at all, huh-uh, never happened…
RE: Santelli’s vocal dissent against the Ponzi er I mean bail out plan:
Dissent is patriotic.
(– Sen Hilary Clinton)
Let’s all practice patriotism in this manner.
Jim Elliott
The math does not make sense?! 92% of homeowners are current and pay on time. That mean 8% are in default. How can this be billions and billions of dollars? Does anybody know how many home mortgages there are, their value, etc? Or are we just trusting bankers for the numbers.
We are trusting bankers for the numbers and the Democrats for the solution. Both are very scary propositions, and can lead us into a world of trouble. As the CBO put it, “we would get out of this crisis faster if we do nothing then if we put the stimulus package into action”.
RE: “They are generally depraved and sinful.”
Yes — this is why our founding fathers decided not to concentrate the power of wicked and corrupt mankind into an instrument like the State — for they knew just how much more multiplied a wicked State is, made up as it is with depraved people and backed by the army — than a wicked individual.
But what is a little piece of paper, eh? Come come. We sophisticates don’t need such a thing.
Words written in water. Wink wink.
RE: “Sarah, it’s not just two different world views.”
Oh, not sharing the same faith is certainly enough, though.
#33 what are you talking about? the founding fathers certainly did believe in the state. But they did believe in different branches. You might want to brush up on your federalist papers, Sarah. They weren’t libertarians. And neither were the early church fathers. For most of Christian history, including our own provincial Anglican tradition, God ordained the state. What did Jesus say about Ceasar?
Granted, as someone who was once an anarchist, I share your skepticism about the state. But I tend to see our mistakes in our little expensive forays into the middle east. Expensive, no doubt (and you seem to have no problem paying a trillion dollars for a war). I don’t mind spending a trillion dollars on fellow Americans.
#34, given that it’s not your money which is being spent, of course you don’t mind. The journey from anarchism to statism is one that many leftists of a certain age have undergone.
Do you have a limit in mind on the amount of tax the evil “rich” will need to pay? According to an internet report, a Northern California congressman is talking about a return to the 92% tax rate.
The American founding fathers believed in a state limited in its ability to interfere in the lives of its citizens. The “living constitution” of the leftists is relegating the Constitution to the back of the book as a “historical document” which is interesting but no longer relevant.
#28 JW,
“We may think we are doing enough, but sometimes we must be told what to do. And sometimes we have institutions that coerce us in to doing what is right.” Are anarchists closet fascists?
#34 JW
“It would be really beautiful if we could all be like anarchists, living without the state, communally, with just churches running things. I like that dream myself. Eventually, we might get there. But for now, there is the City of Earth which we live in.”
When you make a statement like this, I think of Jamestown and Jim Jones.
RE: “the founding fathers certainly did believe in the state. . . .”
Heh. I see JW continues to argue against things people didn’t say. It’s a favorite rhetorical device of his. The rest of the filler doesn’t address what I said either — but that’s understandable.
#17 You echo Katrina Vanden Heuvel, the Marxist editor of the Nation – and you are a member of the clergy ? Among the subjects you “preach” on – is one of them called salvation ? Do you know what an altar call is or are you just to sophisticated ? You exhibit the absolute height of arrogance referring to the War on Terror as “Bush’s War” – an apropo description of your drivel would be Bush League.
#18 – No such thing biblically as a 7 year mortgage – the reference is to the number of years after declaring bankruptcy you can do so again.
#28 “It was dripping with resentment that the government would help the undeserving …..” ” …..It’s the populism of the priveleged that resents the poor….. ” ( from whence do you derive your wisdom ?) So, Wilkins, in your “world”, the state exists to protect certain groups from each other from an economic point of view ? Could you kindly cite a few specific and relevant examples ?
By the way, what seminary did you attend and where is your flock ? Or is there one ? God help them.
Juandeveras [#38]: No justification for directing such personal venom at John Wilkins.
#39 – One person’s attempt at intellectual honesty is apparently another’s “personal venom”. John Wilkins has an ongoing condescension to many on this blog yet his intellectual honesty is questionable at times. I’d like to see the comments of a few Jesuits concerning some of your and Wilkins’ views.
Juandeveras [#40]: Your comments on this and other threads evince a brimming bitterness, ready to overflow. It’s a poor witness, and it has little to do with intellectual honesty.
#41 – “….brimming bitterness, ready to overflow…” ???
I think you will find, on closer inspection, that I tend to challenge the particular views of you both. Nothing more. Your lack of discernment is somewhat amusing – my wife would find your above remarks amusing.
Jefferson, I did not say all taxes means a free society. I did say that a free society requires taxes. Taxes do not require a free society.
Modus Ponendo Tollens doesn’t work in this example.
#39 – Irenaeus, I appreciate your civility and defense. Your tone helps.
Juanddveras.
You mention Ms. Vanden Huevel. I know of her. Is she correct or incorrect? I’m not sure which of her arguments you are talking about. As a rule, I don’t use ad hominem arguments – although perhaps I get testy. I am not arguing from her authority, either. I do think she’s smart about Russia. I don’t always agree with the magazine, but I read them as much as I read the Economist. Your point?
“Among the subjects you “preach†on – is one of them called salvation?”
Yes. I do. All the time. That’s what people need to hear. That the knowledge of God is the source of salvation; and that the knowledge of salvation is the knowledge of God. And Jesus has the map of the territory.
“Do you know what an altar call is or are you just to (sic) sophisticated?”
Um, as an Episcopalian my “altar call” is the Eucharist. I don’t know what sophisticated has to do with anything. I probably have patterns of behavior that put me in a particular set (reading NYRB, a love of Greig, an enjoyment of good wine, a valuing of the liberal arts), but I think this is more a cultural set than a virtue. I’m as “ethnocentric” about my lifestyle as anyone else. I don’t understand Nascar or guns, but I enjoy new experiences and different cultures.
“You exhibit the absolute height of arrogance referring to the War on Terror as “Bush’s War†– an apropo description of your drivel would be Bush League.”
That’s a funny insult. Good for you. I’ll give you a point for that. But I think that the “war on terror” is a lot like a “war on evil” or a “war on badness, meanness, and murdering murderers.” It’s a slogan to justify a host of really bad decisions that resulted in more harm than good. Still, God works, so he’s working in Iraq to bring peace, in spite of our bad decisions.
Since our “war on terror” began, there has been more terrorism, and the victims have generally been Muslims. Not by our guns, perhaps, but perhaps we might learn that war is not as effective as love.
#28 “It was dripping with resentment that the government would help the undeserving …..†“ …..It’s the populism of the priveleged that resents the poor….. “
Well, it did seem pretty resentful that some people were getting a helping hand, while the guys on the floor weren’t. There’s a lot of resentment to go around, also of those who made a huge killing off of financial tools that nobody understood and barely created value.
Surely santelli wasn’t feeding anyone’s better nature. Remember the story of the prodigal son? Jesus told it. That is one place from “whence” I derive my wisdom.
“So, Wilkins, in your “worldâ€, the state exists to protect certain groups from each other from an economic point of view? Could you kindly cite a few specific and relevant examples?”
This is a blog. And I’m not sure what you’re referring to.
Look, nation states are complicated institutions. If you want, check out Robert Dahl’s books on polyarchies, or do a little reading on Arthur Bentley. In general, nation states protect people from tribalism. When they devolve, you get the Balkans or the former Chechnya.
The United States of America, by its simple existence, minimizes the value of ethnic identity. It doesn’t do it absolutely, but it helps mitigate it. Sometimes, bigger institutions (whether it be corporations or states) can be more efficient and more fair than smaller institutions because they use rules and policies, wherease smaller institutions are more likely to be run by personal preference, tribal loyalty. And look – I LIKE small institutions because they provide the warmth and care that people love. Don’t read absolutes into my sentences – I think you could probably find lots of corruption in big states, but not because bigness is bad, but because people are corrupt.
My argument about the state and the commercial society is that a commercial society requires an outside institution to regulate the rules of a commercial society. If you want to protect property, there are ways for a government to establish rules that ensure that people who play by the rules don’t get penalized. There are also institutions that allow for social trust to be maintained, and there is sociological evidence that in severely class divided societies, the social trust required for an effective commercial / capitalist society becomes undermined. We’re talking Louis xiv. If there is one thing a republic should do, is inhibit the growth of small monarchies. Those are severe disincentives to industry.
“By the way, what seminary did you attend and where is your flock?”
I’m easy to find. University of Chicago. My adviser was Paul Griffiths, now at Duke. Theology professors? Gerrish, Tracy, Schweiker, McGinn. By and large, not a liberal bunch.
Juandeveras [#42]: I’m glad bitterness doesn’t taint the rest of life. I hope it would taint your future comments.
The last sentence of #44 should read:
I hope it [i]won’t[/i] taint your future comments.
‘Tain’t no problem.
#43 – “… If you want to protect property, there are ways for a government to establish rules that ensure the people who play by the rules don’t get penalized.”
And what might those rules be as applied to our nationwide “property” issues ?
” There are also institutions that allow for social trust to be maintained…” .
And what might those institutions pertaining to the enhancement of social trust in our land be given this trillion dollar no name spending bill which has decreased the ‘social trust’ in the DJIA from 13000 down to 7000 in a very short period of time ?