It’s unclear why The New York Times is running op-eds on finance from a guy who is still operating under an SEC ban as part of a settlement in a kickback investigation. But Steve Rattner, Obama’s former car czar, gets prime space to argue that Too Big to Fail banks should remain Too Big to Fail.
A bit of recent history: none of the institutions that toppled like dominoes in 2008 — the investment banks Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, the mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the insurance company American International Group — were commercial banks.
Matt Taibbi rips this apart:
Not just some, but many of the institutions that “toppled like dominoes” in 2008 were giant commercial banks of the TBTF type. Does Rattner remember Washington Mutual, which was only the sixth-largest commercial bank in America when it collapsed in 2008? How about Wachovia, the fourth-largest?
More to the point, does he not remember all of the other commercial banks that required massive federal bailouts to avoid “toppling like dominoes” that year?…
Rattner wrote some other crazy things. He said, “it is wrong to think we can shrink [banks] to a size that eliminates the ‘too big to fail’ problem without emasculating one of our most successful industries.”
One could go on at length in answering this ludicrous passage, pointing out for instance how insane it is for Rattner to call TBTF banking “one of our most successful industries” when the business is now known all over the world to be so totally corrupt that nobody was even surprised when they found out that global interest rates were being manipulated.
— Jessica Pressler’s New York profile of paranoid billionaire Democrat Jeff Greene is fascinating:
It’s hard to think of any superrich person as vulnerable, just as it’s hard to think that a bear with outstretched claws and giant teeth is more afraid than you are. But over the past few months, it’s become clear that rich people are very, very afraid. Sometimes it feels like this was the main accomplishment of Occupy Wall Street: a whole lot of tightened sphincters. It’s not a stretch to say many residents of Park Avenue harbor vivid fears of a populist revolt like the one seen in The Dark Knight Rises, in which they cower miserably under their sideboards while ragged hordes plunder the silver.
“This is my fear, and it’s a real, legitimate fear,” Greene says, revving up the engine. “You have this huge, huge class of people who are impoverished. If we keep doing what we’re doing, we will build a class of poor people that will take over this country, and the country will not look like what it does today. It will be a different economy, rights, all that stuff will be different.”
More often than not, fears like these manifest as loathing for the current administration, as evidenced by the recent wave of Romney fund-raisers in the Hamptons. “Obama wants to take my money and give it to do-nothing animals,” one matron blurted at a recent party at the Pierre for Dick Morris’s Screwed!, the latest entry into a growing pile of socioeconomic snuff porn geared toward this audience.
There’s a prime anecdote about Niall Ferguson and the piece ends with Greene talking about the gates he’s installing to thwart the “50,000 angry people coming across the river” he thinks could come someday.
My only beef is this piece should have been given more space.
- 1
- 2
LOL!
Anyone who is afraid of these worthless "Occupier" bums needs a shrink, in my estimation. Pronto.
The Occupiers are nothing but a bunch of dope-smoking kids and other societal rejects with congenital work allergies and poor hygiene.
These punks will never amount to anything. They lack ambition, direction and leadership in addition to numbers of any significance. They want free food, free dope, free sex and fast internet - all on Somebody Else's dime. They don't care about politics, jobs, social issues, etc, and they don't have the gumption to do anything but whine. Most of them came there to party, and they were the first to say so.
They don't even know what they what, aside from Other People's stuff. A third of them wanted anarchy, another third wanted totalitarianism, and the rest were either too stupid to know what they wanted, or too crazy to inform anyone.
I drove my kid all the way from Virginia to Zuccotti Park to witness the "Occupy" silliness last fall - and what a comedy it was!
There were about twice as many cops as "occupiers" and about three times as many bankers on the streets laughing at them. They had rows of tents lined up behind piles of filthy garbage (mostly abandoned, nasty tents from former Occupiers). The funniest things I saw were the signs protesting the "snobs" - apparently all Pigs were not equal in Zuccotti Park - some aristocracy had bloomed and these Unequal Pigs used the "security" to keep the lowlifes out of their exclusive section on the other side of the kitchen tent.
One guy was renting his laptop for cigarettes - reselling wireless internet that he managed to steal from an accounting office. Another guy was rolling bracelets in exchange for subway passes. A couple of girls were working the kitchen tent and handing out nasty bananas like they were gold. And they were chasing away the homeless guys who weren't "real" Occupiers... Too, too funny. Free enterprise at work!
They had a "General Assembly" with some sort of committee structure, and when we were there (around 3 or 4 on a Thursday afternoon) a bunch of academic-looking types hooked up outside the park, looking for attention from each other and from the press (no press to be seen that day) but doing everything they could do to avoid contact with the tent-dwellers. Such was the "governance". Everywhere... And I mean EVERYWHERE, the bums were griping about the donations made to the OWS movement. There were more rumors about the amount and source of the donations than people. They all wanted a check, and I would estimate that more than half of these losers were hanging around ONLY because they expected to get a cut from these donations.
This "Occupy" Hissy Fit started only due to Soros astroturing and it ended when it got cold and when the donations dried up. The chances of these pathetic losers ever expending the energy it takes to accomplish anything is nil.
#1 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 4 Aug 2012 at 03:47 PM
"This "Occupy" Hissy Fit started only due to Soros astroturing and it ended when it got cold and when the donations dried up"
It was a lie the first time you claimed it, it's a lie now. And yeah, when the cops started pulling the pepper spray, batons, and tear gas out, the party went indoors. Gee, with all the hours you must have spent documenting all of your on the ground observations, you'd figure you'd avoid the basic mistakes.
But anyways, this thread wasn't about OWS until you brought it up so... Back on topic, the thing I thought was interesting about Mean Jeff Greene is that the guy is willing to talk to people about investing in the public commons (education etc) and was trying to sell the idea that a top heavy economy eventually topples to his fellow elites and well to do, and they were more interested in reading Charles Murray's and Dick Morris's "socioeconomic snuff porn".
The problem is that these top dwellers are commited to a narrative. One written by Ayn Rand. They believe that the world would collapse if they stopped holding it up and instead headed for the gulch. They believe that 'productive dependency' by the lesser classes give them claim to personal entitlements (such as a prefferential tax system and a government safety net for their bad betting) and stratospheric compensation.
They don't see themselves as American so much as they see themselves as owners of America. They are not invested in the welfare of the country, they can afford their gates and personal police forces and live in communities far above our America - a place from which they siphon the cream they believe they're entitled to.
They are fundementally different from you and I, though I guess it's class warfare to mention it.
#2 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 04:29 PM
You get more power brokers lurking behind gates and guns in collectivist societies than you do in capitalist societies.
That's just a fact.
#3 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 04:48 PM
"That's just a fact."
No, no it isn't.
#4 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 08:39 PM
If any of you leftists can name just one instance in history where democracy and liberty flourished under a non-capitalist government....
I'd love to read about it.
Because everywhere I see collectivism, I see gulags, oppression, starvation, dictatorships, and abject misery.
Now you'll find capitalist dictatorships here and there, to be sure, though they don't last.. But show me a single instance of democratic commie government.
You can't have liberty and freedom without a free market economy. That's just how it is. The ONLY way you can suppress a free market economy is at gunpoint.
#5 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 10:04 PM
Under a purely totalitarian communist government system, power corrupts. Under a completely capitalistic system, power corrupts.
You're a fool if you believe you can prove a point with extreme examples in which one system is allowed to accumulate all the power.
The problem arises when you have a monopoly of power develop and vacuum of force to say no to it. You keep trying to define one system as evil and another system as good.
I say all systems are evil when they are granted a monopoly on power. Human nature exploits power in the absence of opposition and consequence. We are dictatorial beings when we can be.
It is our job as a society and a press to restrict those opportunities.
#6 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:30 PM
Once again..
If you can show me a case where democracy and freedom flourished in a noncapitalist government, I'd sure like to see it.
The ONLY way to suppress a free market economy is at gunpoint.
#7 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:45 PM
Now you do have a point (one which I have conceded many times) that unfettered capitalism will also lead to oppression.
However, this is because such runaway capitalism ultimately erodes the free market through monopolization and collusion.
Governments should intervene in the economy only to the minimum extent necessary to keep markets free and competitive, just as governments should intervene in the affairs of citizens to the minimum extent necessary to preserve order and to protect personal rights.
Leftists have the misguided and rather silly notion that governments can run markets BETTER than the private sector can. This is just a stupid idea that is plainly and unequivocally refuted by the disastrous outcome of every single instance of its attempted application anywhere in the known Universe anytime in recorded history.
#8 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:54 PM