---
We all know that there was a recent downturn. It got Ben panicked. He, Timmy, and others have been allowed to experiment like mad this past year. How long will it take to deconstruct and analyze all the madness that resulted thereby?
Even Goldman Sachs seems to have taken notice, especially given the public's reaction to the best-and-brightests' shortfalls, in particular not knowing about several things, such as the concepts of on the behalf of, near zero and much more.
J. Bradford DeLong and Stephen S. Cohen have a book out now that will be of interest (The End of Influence: What Happens When Other Countries Have the Money).
Well, we need to think about how we (some) will need to live in a scaled-down manner. PhilG used $2,000 per day as an example of wealthy living, albeit this was being spent to house (alleged) terrorists. Many survive on pennies. PhilG's view is used here in that he has proposed his economic recovery plan that we'll be using from time to time here in the discussions.
Of course, people have looked at frugality at lot as blog space shows. Actually, many live it. We know that 'fat cat' ville is the exception, not the rule.
Savings are an important part, as Ben needs to learn. Of course, 'what does that say about debt and equity?' is something to discuss.
We'll continue this later but, for now, start to think about a sandbox and a change in worldview that will allow realization of the near zero as the best that we can get. Too, how did the 'hype' related to the house of cards get such traction with economists?
Remarks:
09/27/2010 -- Capitalism is for the good of us, let's bring that forward.
01/03/2010 -- More news on Goldman Sachs as the uber example of 'not on the behalf' comes to fore regularly. It'll need to be a separate subject at some point. Thanks to McClatchy: Nov 1, 2009 & Jan 3, 2010 (update). Goldman has to respond, of course.
Modified: 09/27/2010
Modified: 09/27/2010
No comments:
Post a Comment