I wrote The Shock Doctrine in the hopes that it would make us all better prepared for the next big shock. Well, that shock has certainly arrived, along with gloves-off attempts to use it to push through radical pro-corporate policies (which of course will further enrich the very players who created the market crisis in the first place...).
The best summary of how the right plans to use the economic crisis to push through their policy wish list comes from Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich. On Sunday, Gingrich laid out 18 policy prescriptions for Congress to take in order to "return to a Reagan-Thatcher policy of economic growth through fundamental reforms." In the midst of this economic crisis, he is actually demanding the repeal of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which would lead to further deregulation of the financial industry. Gingrich is also calling for reforming the education system to allow "competition" (a.k.a. vouchers), strengthening border enforcement, cutting corporate taxes and his signature move: allowing offshore drilling.
It would be a grave mistake to underestimate the right's ability to use this crisis -- created by deregulation and privatization -- to demand more of the same. Don't forget that Newt Gingrich's 527 organization, American Solutions for Winning the Future, is still riding the wave of success from its offshore drilling campaign, "Drill Here, Drill Now!" Just four months ago, offshore drilling was not even on the political radar and now the U.S. House of Representatives has passed supportive legislation. Gingrich is holding an event this Saturday, September 27 that will be broadcast on satellite television to shore up public support for these controversial policies.
What Gingrich's wish list tells us is that the dumping of private debt into the public coffers is only stage one of the current shock. The second comes when the debt crisis currently being created by this bailout becomes the excuse to privatize social security, lower corporate taxes and cut spending on the poor. A President McCain would embrace these policies willingly. A President Obama would come under huge pressure from the think tanks and the corporate media to abandon his campaign promises and embrace austerity and "free-market stimulus."
We have seen this many times before, in this country and around the world. But here's the thing: these opportunistic tactics can only work if we let them. They work when we respond to crisis by regressing, wanting to believe in "strong leaders" - even if they are the same strong leaders who used the September 11 attacks to push through the Patriot Act and launch the illegal war in Iraq.
So let's be absolutely clear: there are no saviors who are going to look out for us in this crisis. Certainly not Henry Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs, one of the companies that will benefit most from his proposed bailout (which is actually a stick up). The only hope of preventing another dose of shock politics is loud, organized grassroots pressure on all political parties: they have to know right now that after seven years of Bush, Americans are becoming shock resistant.
Loading comments…
Gone, baby, gone.
My thoughts
continued below
A friend's son, with loan approved and ready to start college, has been told that the money will not be available and he can't start after all.
This is getting scary.
being told the same thing. We are headed for a full fledged depression,
orchestrated by the anti-democracy corporatist, right wingers (Bushies).
They will blame liberalism and employ their ditto-heads to promote their
fear and loathing, just as they have done, following their 14 points.
Even a long and painful recession is not bad for this country. I prefer for us to go on a diet instead eating from the plates of our children and grandchildren.
PS – Paulson’s “compensation package, according to reports, was US$37 million in 2005. His net worth has been estimated at over US$700 millionâ€. Do you trust him to fight for the small guys? Source - http://en.
SAY NO TO THE BAILOUT
The alternative to Sarbanes-Oxley is giving citizens who lose money as a result of investment-related fraud the right to sue those who defrauded them. The elimination of liability to shareholders led to the crisis that Sarbanes-Oxley really didn't fix.
Gingrich would hate this solution, of course, because it creates accountability rather than meaningless paperwork. Corporate accountability is anathema to these people. But their criticism fo Sarbanes-Oxley as ineffective but inexpensive regulation is well founded.
So Sue me!
Bailout out the homeowners.
Let 'em eat fish!
Ask this question -- are the credit markets really about to seize up?
If they are then lots of business owners should be eager to tell how their bank is calling their 90-day revolving loans, rejecting new loans and demanding more cash on deposit.
If the problem is toxic mortgages then how come they are still being offered all over the Internet? On the main page AOL generates for me there is an ad for a 1.9% loan Why oh why or why would taxpayers be bailing out banks that are continuing to sell these toxic loans?
How does the proposal help Joe and Mary Sixpack who can afford their current monthly payment, but not the increased interest rate that has been or soon will take effect? Every day bankers work out loans with customers -- so why are taxpayers being asked to act when banks are largely on strike, refusing to negotiate revised deals with many loan customers?
How about interviewing small landlords who were drawn into these toxic loans. Are banks negotiating with them? Ask why banks are refusing (landlords I spoke to said they are) to negotiate with small landlords.
What steps are being taken to take back bonuses, fees and other compensation from the folks who got rich selling toxic mortgages and illiquid investments that Secretary Paulsen claims are threatening the whole system.
http://poy
http://kuc
1. Reinstatement of the provisions of Glass-Steagall, which forbade speculation
2. Re-regulation of the finance, insurance, and real estate industries
3. Accountability on the part of those who took the companies down:
a) resignations of management
b) givebacks of executive compensation packages
c) limitations on executive compensation
d) admission by CEO's of what went wrong and how, prior to any government bailout
4. Demands for transparencey
a) with respect to analyzing the transactions which took the companies down
b) with respect to Treasury's dealings with the companies pre and post-bailout
5. An equity position for the taxpayers
a) some form of ownership of assets
6. Some credible formula for evaluating the price of the assets that the government is buying.
7. A sunset clause on the legislation
8. Full public disclosure by members of Congress of assets held, with possible conflicts put in blind trust.
9. A ban on political campaign contributions from officers of corporations receiving bailouts
10. A requirement that 2008 cycle candidates return political contributions to officers and representatives of corporations receiving bailouts
"We do not want the impetus for capitulation or subservience to your Washington master to be a soup kitchen or an extended stay in a concentration camp -- Do we?"
Get on your knees and bow down before the great financial false God bringing idols of worship and missing substance and purity of principle. We cannot afford to listen to the same God that took us to hell and now wants to sell flame retardant underwear.
It was only a matter of time, if not long planned, before they saw no reason why the U.S. of A. couldn't be raided of it's wealth and left as a third~world~nation. Complete with a faux democracy that they control and a dumbed~down impotent citizenry, nothing but a population of managed consummers and cheap labor (yes even in the service~industry). And more ironic and poignant, turn a segment of its population into the military force that will carry out their will. Given the new economic reality and the rising cost of education this is a matter of simpl~incentives.
We are just about there and in dire straits, and I don't see an uprising that would change this. Instead most of our fight goes to attempt to wake up the thick half of our country that is ready to vote for more of the same characters that have enacted this final coup. The ones that all you need to do is wave a flag, a bible and a gun in their faces to herd~them into compliance.
George Soros has a parrallel career path, but instead of betting on the (British) market going up in a post-Waterloo victory, Soros bet the English pound would go down, lose (shed) value.
What is important here is that before any country can go to war, they must consult... THE MONEY LENDERS, just as the opening scenes of Shakespeare's Henry V has high church officials (the biggest property holder in England at the time) discussing their future support for Henry's wars, as long as the church profits from them.
Also the tremedoud importance of INFORMATION - and how, acting on bad or wrong information, investors and even countries can be ruined in even good times, much less acting on bad information in bad times.
"the guys with the gold make the rules" and the Fed has our gold.