Who's To Blame?
I don't have a lot of time this morning, and I'm getting pretty sick of all attempts to complexify this question, so I'll lay it out for you right here.
Who's to blame for this incredible mess? It's really clear.
No, it's not Wall Street. Wall Street is there to work within whatever rules there are to make people who invest in stocks and other instruments (and pay their broker fees) as much money as possible, with billions left over for Itself.
No, it's not Greedy People. Captialism is all about rewarding the greedy. If Greedy were a crime, they'd have to set aside Kansas, Nebraska and the Dakotas to hold all the felons.
No, it's not the Banks who pressured the Feds to change the rules, jobbed the system and did whatever they could to build double-digit growth into a machine set up to operate in the low single digits. They were playing by the rules they were allowed to set up for themselves, and, more importantly, by the demented rules of the Street.
And no, it's not the fat cats who profited, or the weasels who sold the same bridge over and over again, or even the realtors who squeezed every last bit of juice out of the blood orange that was offered to them. These are all shallow, self-interested, slightly sleazy, ambitious, avaricious, mendacious forces that are DESIGNED to do what they did: Get away with whatever they could. Make the most money. Figure out rationalizations to make it all sound good. So you can't blame the intellectual courtesans in academia, the press or the research departments of now defunct institutions who helped them do that either, no matter how tempting it is to do so.
It's the guys who were supposed to watch this sorry bunch and prevent them from taking over the funny farm. They're the ones to blame. How simple do I have to make it?
Guy #1's job is to eat as many pies as he can before he dies. Guy #2 is hired to make sure that everybody gets his or her fair share and plays by the apple-pie rules. If Guy #1 and his pals get all the pies, he's just doing his job. It's Guy #2 who isn't.
So I'm looking at Guy #2, who changed all the rules when Guy #1 asked him to. Who didn't enforce the few, tattered rules that remained. Who, over the course of the last couple of decades, never learned the most simple two-letter word in the English language, one that translates pretty well into virtually any global tongue. That word is NO. Who, in a very real sense, simply went missing. Who got gone.
The system is built to reward the fast, the greedy, the sharp, the amoral. In a totally free market, it is they, unencumbered by restraint, who do what's necessary to reach their objectives. That's why we have laws and regulations and people to manage them -- not to destroy freedom, but to make it possible in a world that is not set up to truly establish it.
I blame Guy #2. Isn't it time we took him out behind the barn?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
fraud and anti-trust are free market regulations. we have not allowed these crooks to be enronned.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfvMTsKn_Bc
Greeeeaaaat analysis.
I am now going to take my car out on the freeway and accelerate to its electronically limited top speed, maintaining that speed until stopped by the authorities. At that point I will claim immunity from whatever penalties may accrue, due to the carmaker and NHTSA's failure to set my 335-hp vehicle's rev limiter to a safer speed.
Stan, you're a smart guy but what you're describing isn't America, it's "Lord of the Flies". How did we get to the point that we condone mass sociopathy? If you think "sociopath" is a strong word, look at these symptoms from the DSM-IV and say they don't apply to Wall Streeters (only 3 out of 7 required).
- Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;
- Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;
- Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;
- Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;
- Reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
- Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;
- Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
Sorry Stan - NOBODY gets to abdicate responsibility for their actions to whatever governing body may apply (well at least if you're poor or of color you don't).
See Jon Raymond's Profile
I don't think so. Firstly, analogies suck. Secondly, there's no such word as firstly. Apparently you read Lord of the Flies but you failed to comprehend it. Without the rule of law or some kind of deterrent, we are Lord of the Flies. Do you have kids? If so, do you let them eat whatever they want? Stay up as late as they want? Play hooky? No, you regulate their activities. Regulation is a necessity. It's just the amount of it that is in question. Money wasn't tagged the root of all evil because people have self control around it.
Not sure what sparked this response - I absolutely agree that regulation is a necessity. I just don't think that its absence should be any sort of justification for antisocial behavior.
Sorry if you think my understanding of "Lord of The Flies" is off the mark - I was just a dumb groundpounder, not some "Chair Force" guy reading paperbacks in a JSTARS somewhere:)
Your Honor, I plead not guilty. It is the cops fault for not telling me no.
How many seniors are now left with just Social Security?
Perhaps society should tell these greedy guys no by using a gun.
How is this white-collar sh*& not violent? They have raped this country and maybe even the world.
Man asks "How many seniors are now left with just Social Security?
Well if they were invested wisely than this would actually have little effect on them and in some maybe seeing better returns. How can this be? Well most financial advisor would have adivsed retirees to move all monies in to low risk money markets, cd's etc. Those, with the exception of 1 money market fund have not dropped below the standard $1 per share. Some money market funds have lower interest rates but some rates have also gone up. Most seniors are not invested in individual stocks.
The IF you mention is rather large. Most people are not in the market individually and rely of funds thereby they are relying on professionals. I would have more "faith" in the financial community if the system were set up so that they receive pay based on a percentage of profits for the investor. A system in which the no profit or a loss for me means the "analyst gets nada.
Dude average 401(K) and retirement pension funds just took the worst beating in over 40 years
Vote for McCain so we can put our Social Security in the market too!
Guy #2 is in the White House and he already looks beat up....so, lets just bring in a real President Barack Obama who has the smarts to set this tilted system upright once again.
What exactly is Mr. Obama's plan? He was all for the bailout pacakge and the market has doen nothign but drop since then. So what exactly has he shown that leads you to this conclusion?
PS McCain has shown nothing either.
RIGHT. Let W lawyer up in Tx.
I blame Bernanke, Paulson and Cox. They are the governmental officials who are supposed to detect, protect and warn the citizenry about financial problems like this. And they have the "wisdom," resources and responsibility to do so.
There are also congressional oversight committess that lost oversight that they were to be the oversight.
1. Deregulation.
2. Con Men using a program designed to keep poor communities from falling into squalor and disrepair. Selling Sub Prime Mortages for homes that never would have qualified for the program but Bush hates oversight so there was none.
3. Investment Banks going around Fannie and Freddie to buy these subprime loans and never checking to see if the value was there for any of the loans. Fannie and Freddie had people in the feild checking to make sure the homes even existed. Fannie and Freddie only had 4% of bad loans on their books before the Fed forced them to assume the bad loans from banks and Lehams.
Yet the friends of Guy #1 made it very clear that Guy #2 hated America if Guy #1 wasn't allowed to gorge himself on all those pies and would use lethal force against Guy #2 if Guy #2 did anything other than walk away.
I agree. Remember the Anthrax attack on the Democrats in Congress?
Silly analysis, Stanley. The situation is more like "Guy #1 and friends control Guy #2 ". Then it approximates reality a little better if you add this to your scenarios.
I don't think guy #1 will ever be controlled, so I am willing to accept the fact that capitalism will always favor the few. Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor. But I would insist that the the many get something in return. Like the French, Danes, Swedes, Germans, and the Isrealies, we need a reasonable share of the pie.
We should demand single payer health care, day care for kids, paid maternity leave, 4 weeks vacation for everyone, free higher education as far as you are capable of going, easy unionizing, and more.
Europe is far ahead of us.
The world is LIGHTYEARS ahead of you.
Brilliant. This is as amoral an explanation of the current crisis as I have heard expressed anywhere. Mr. Bing is correct that a lack of regulation is a major underlying cause of the current debacle because there are always "bad apples" who will spoil the barrel. However, to assert that the players in the financial game have no moral responsibility for their actions is absurd. The blame here is plentiful enough to go all the way around to EVERYONE who had an ACTIVE hand in the process of gaming "the system". To argue otherwise is to suggest that not observing existing rules simply because no one is watching is not only proper to do but is to be expected. That argument in essence says that not being a thief is a character flaw. This is the sort of fuzzy thinking that we have avoid. Doing the right thing when NO ONE IS WATCHING is precisely the definition of character and is unfortunately all too lacking in the financial community.
You mean markets do not automatically self-regulate? Quick. Get Alan Greenspan on the phone.
They fired all the guy 2s, no need to change the laws when you don't enforce them...Think about speediing... The cleanest way is to TAX at a very high rate, so the incentive to be greedy is curtailed....and the Tax revenues would be colllected...Stop Offshoring and /or apply a VAT to incoming currency....
I say collect the revenues AUTOMATICALLY at the time of sale. The treasury needs the money.
This is the most irresponsible claptrap I've read in a long time. The fact is none of us are to blame but all of us must accept the responsibility. Based on the authors reasoning a serial murderer is not to blame he's just doing his job. The job is immoral and totally useless to society but he's doing it to the best of his ability.
Barack Obama seems to be one of the few people who isn't looking to blame others, he's talking about solutions. Of course, the right-wing wack-a-loons would rather point fingers and feel superior even when they have had a key role in creating this mess. Remember your $600 bribe to sing the praises of the Shrub?
Umm... people? I hate to be the one to tell you all this but, "We the People" are Guy #2. We've let our government become something separate from us. We only think we are Guy #3. The experiment of democracy, even one that takes the form of a republic, requires active participation of all its citizens to act in the best interest of their neighbors in order to have a just society.
Sure, there's still going to be greed. We've chosen a capitalistic economic system after all. Where was the oversight to make sure that Guy #1 didn’t eat all the pies? When we allowed our government to become separate from ourselves, it went away. This allowed for Guy #1 to evolve into his ultimate form, and much faster than any of us would like to admit.
The real question now, isn’t who’s to blame; although that is an important component of identifying a solution to this mess. The real question, IMHO, should be what do we want our nation to look like when we do come out the other side? Ben Franklin made it clear that a democracy is a fragile thing. There’s no guarantee that we’ll still have one when we emerge from the darkness unless we the People keep the ideals our forefathers originally laid out firmly in mind as we work through this.
The United States of America was once a Democratic Republic as defined by its constitution. At this time, as you read this, said constitution is a dead letter. The Republic is no more. We are in fact and in truth guy #3.
Part of the problem was changing the rules, this was enabled by lobbyists and the congressmen
who were willing to be slopped at the trough. The second part of the problem was the sheer
incompetence of the Bush administration, and appointing loyal Bushies who wouldn't enforce
the rules, and were probably breaking the law.
And, Guy #3 ends up paying the price by having to deal with the crap produced by Guy#1's pie-eating and Guy #2's heeding the warning to "not squeeze the Charmin."
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
