June 5, 2013
Why do we comment in political columns? It may be necessary. Democracy depends on well framed usually moderate arguments that sway people rather than extreme arguments that insult intellect and isolate ideas.
A fine tipped right wing refutation of an unconvincing left wing assumption makes this interesting. It is worth wading through all the trolling and insults for those gems. Similarly, a left wing contrast on the effects of greed temper the right wing stomp to success so encourages social behaviour.
Comments in newspapers and on websites like this allow arguments to be refuted and no blood spilt.
Example of democratic discovery.
August 31, 2012
The Republicans are running with Romney and Ryan. After a lame introduction by Clint Eastwood – Romney gave a speech that has been noted for being fairly lacklustre. And what about the presumptive VP nominee Paul Ryan. He seems to be just there for the 1% and tells lies to the rest of us.
June 20, 2012
The UK Prime Minister David Cameron takes time to criticise entertainer Jimmy Carr for putting £3.3N through a tax shelter scheme – one that may yet be undone. Carr made headlines as he has satirised the banks and tax avoidance as a comedian.
At least Jimmy Carr creates laughter. Perhaps he will make a big charitable donation so we can forgive him.
Mr Cameron convinces that he puts his panic, preference and public image ahead of any constructive logic, attacking an individual from his office, really. His job is not to be a whip wielding critic of those following the laws he is making a fuss about – it is simply his job to write viable new laws so that inherent unfairness in the system being used even by the likes of Mr Carr is prevented fairly. Takes a steady hand, and a cool head.
It is great that Mr Carr has donated his public profile in protest at so many others getting away with it and maybe he will pay his dues ultimately but is hardly a reason for the Government to pull laws out of a straw hat. Depopulating the HMRC says it all, really.
This is grandstanding at its most inept.
October 11, 2011
So many convoluted answers and the likelihood is that those we elect into power will have none of it.
The real answer is simple enough. The tax payer bailed out the banks, and now there is not enough cash in the system to stimulate demand. When we have demand we buy the stuff that is offered, investments that do not benefit the client as much as the provider because those providers are endlessly trying to dig themselves out of the hole they dug with securitisation assets that require an economy 100 times larger to support. It is not demand that is lacking, it is the ability to demand.
Cameron can achieve his blundering objective, make credit card interest illegal or fix it at 3%. Make all private mortgages fixed at 2% and regulate the hell out of bank ponzi schemes. Get back to a fair economic playground where the citizen is more important than the corporation and the dollar. Get back to a political environment where politicians serve the electorate, not the ruling elites. And do not bail out failing gambling banks. Put the bailout cash in the hands of the citizens to buy what they need and restart the engines. Make business that produce exports our priority. Reduce our reliance on gambling to get by.
We get two things remarkably wrong, both are our own purely human inventions: politics and economics. We just need to wake up one fine day and realise that all our assumptions about both are out of date and work out a way to do things that will work. We have the computers and can do the modelling. We need a financial revolution and to realise that capitalism and socialism, neither one, will solve it.
A comment added to this article:
September 25, 2007
On a MB (Message Board) on The Agonist – one of the best blogs in the business:
“I meant Trade Center Bombing 1993, first year of Clinton in office same as 2001 for Bush. I think Al Qaeda likes first term Presidents, a point of weakness before they get their bearings.”
Perhaps that is the pattern and why the USA developed a pattern of inevitability on election day every two cycles – GW Bush should not have won the last two elections on merit alone. Greeting a President with a potentially life changing act of terror gives Al Qaeda an agenda setting edge. How can the incumbent ignore the taint? It is this understanding of the political behaviour of their enemy – that is a concern as it has created a sense of preordained destiny in the political narrative of “America” (I think George Bush calls the U.S.A. “America” over and over and it leaks into the media, but Bush is the President of the U.S.A. – and referring to it as “America” is just winding Hugo Chavas up).
It is too late to save the Bush Administration from itself. “America” will suffer terribly as a result, and economically, if you read between the lines.