Good morning.
- Beauty and God.
- Considering the F-22. More here.
- Sing a little song … for little Timmy Geithner?
- Bailout and Enron (HT: John)
- Of Mormon and media.
- A “fight”
- Toyland and ethics.
- The real problem with green.
- Recession and place.
- Links.
- Ephrem!
- Where in the world … is Anastasia?
- Big brother expands his tentacles.
- Images from St. Pete.
- An argument I’ve made.
- Oops.
- Boxing analogy and a stem, a tire, and a gruppo.
- Mr Obama’s marketing folly.
- Disenchantment on the left continues.
- Heh.
Disenchantment on the left continues.
You mean Mr. Obama is not the most liberal person ever in the history of the universe?!?! I’m SHOCKED. The Republicans have been lying to us!
Disenchantment on the left continues.
You mean Mr. Obama is not the most liberal person ever in the history of the universe?!?! I’m SHOCKED. The Republicans have been lying to us!
They promised us he was a socialist!
JA,
Hmm, how is “not the most liberal” the same as disenchantment over corruption related?
I don’t see any corruption. I see a president picking someone in bed with Big Finance. That’s very unliberal.
JA,
I guess I’m just a dumb conservative. ‘Splain to me how “Great, more money laundering in the bailout and another furtive executive power grab.” has anything to do with conservative principles (and how it isn’t a notion of corruption).
Mark,
It’s conservative-as-conservatives-walk rather than conservative-as-conservatives-talk.
Conservatives talk fiscal responsibility. Conservatives (Reagan, Bush) walk borrow-and-spend. Conservatives talk small government. They walk putting foxes in charge of henhouses. Just look at Bush’s SEC guy.
JA,
I should be more fair. Liberals often confuse the conservative principle (or perhaps logical notion) that a environment conducive to conducting private enterprise aids economic growth. In practice this often slips into “being in bed” with business, but the principle remains.
On the contrary, Liberals tend to think on the other hand, hampering business is conducive to growth … which is in itself somewhat puzzling, but perhaps explains their long (lingering) love for Marxist/Leninist regimes. And yes, I know you personally don’t admire those regimes … but you’re in the party with a large number of people who do.
Are you really claiming creating an environment in which business can prosper is “unliberal?”
Mark,
Liberals do not want to hamper business. We want to regulate business so that the market can function more fairly and more effectively. For example, liberals believe that businesses should not be allowed to externalize costs while retaining the profits. Liberals believe in trust-busting. Liberals believe that businesses shouldn’t use power or information asymmetries to take advantage of unwitting consumers. (Insider trading, junk bonds, etc.)
As far as I can tell, conservatives believe in magic. Magic, as in the market is self-regulating. It isn’t. Magic, as in businesses should be allowed to police themselves. They don’t. Magic, as in cutting taxes always increases revenues. It doesn’t.
And yes, I know you personally don’t admire those regimes … but you’re in the party with a large number of people who do.
Define “large number.”
Are you really claiming creating an environment in which business can prosper is “unliberal?”
No. Creating an environment where conflicts of interest are rampant is unliberal. Creating an environment where “regulators”care more about making big business happy than about doing their jobs is unliberal. Creating an environment where corruption is normal is unliberal. Etc.
Follow up:
Would you say that the number of Democrats who admire the Stalinist/Leninist regimes is greater or less than the number of Republicans who think that Latinos and blacks are inherently inferior to whites?
I’m sorry, what evidence is there that anyone in the Obama administration is guilty of money laundering?
And I’m not exactly clear what corruption Mark is talking about. Larry Summers worked at a hedge fund last year and got speaking engagements from lots of Wall Street firms like Citi, Lehman Bros, Merrily Lynch and Goldman Sachs. This is not very surprising considering that Summers won the John Bates Clark Medal in economics (basically almost like winning the Nobel), was Treasury Sec., and was President of Harvard.
This is what I’m talking about. Mark has no idea what he is talking about when he goes into economics. OK so what’s the line? Are Democrats Marxist lovers? Well then, Summers seems like an odd choice. Or is Mark playing the Marxist…saying that Obama should appoint someone to an economics post that has no connection to Wall Street or high finance? Who would that be? Someone like Doug Henwood?
All his economics criticisms smack of throwing everything at Obama to see what sticks. The appointments are radical leftists. They are not leftist enough. Inflation is on the way. It’s getting worse. It’s not really bad Obama’s just saying it is etc. You lack a core message here.
Boonton,
What the heck are you talking about “my core message”? My message is encapsulated in my essay posts. Links are primarily to pique interest and encourage discussion. I take no ownership of, for example in the above, Ms Beyerstein’s opinions on economics. “Mark has no idea” what he is talking about, should read “Ms Beyerstein” has no idea … not Mark.
Mark is not “saying” anything here about “what Obama should or should not do” he is linking a post by an noted liberal blogger who is critical of Obama’s choice and remarking on that. You’ll note it the above I never defended or described these opinions of my own. When asking for clarification, I referred to her quote … and asked for how JAs comment connected to that.
JA,
Democrats rarely it seems to me factor in the cost of their regulation … which is the problem.
Hmm, emergent behavior is seen as magic by Democrats. Why is that? What particular blindness causes that?
When I was in Grad school in the 80s the number of liberals in that community who were soft on Marxism approached unity. It depends on the community, as I suspect that the numbers in the inner city was a far less. You ask for a number. I’d guess that of Democrats who a post-graduate degree and have had or still have Marxist/Leninist/Socialist alignments are greater than 40-50% still today.
As for GOP supporters who think Latino/Black’s are racially inferior … in my personal experience the number is small, actually that would be basically only my blue collar conservative in-laws are the only ones who I’ve ever met. Do you actually have personal interaction and intercourse with conservatives who think that way?
Boonton,
Oh, and as for
Actually I link a lot of criticism. Isn’t that the job and deontological duty of the loyal opposition?
Democrats rarely it seems to me factor in the cost of their regulation … which is the problem.
Republicans never factor in the cost of NOT regulating. They think the market works by magic.
Hmm, emergent behavior is seen as magic by Democrats. Why is that? What particular blindness causes that?
No. Corporations policing themselves and voluntarily choosing to not externalize their costs are not emergent behavior. Republicans just have FAITH that that will happen.
I’d guess that of Democrats who a post-graduate degree and have had or still have Marxist/Leninist/Socialist alignments are greater than 40-50% still today.
CRAZY.
Do you actually have personal interaction and intercourse with conservatives who think that way?
Yeah, I’ve known… hmm, 10? 20? overtly racist Republicans. Many more hint at it but never quite go there. I’ve known 1 — that’s ONE — Democrat who self-identified as a socialist, and no communists.
JA,
I’m curious, did you catch the demographic qualifier on the 40-50%? That is democrats with post-graduate degrees?
Oddly enough on reflection besides the few in-laws (who self identify as “white trash”) basically the only other overtly racist person I know is a democrat (although no post-graduate degree there). Go figger.
I’d also note that attending a church with a significant Slavic population I am now in contact with a lot of very fervent anti-communists (with a lot of recent personal animosities in that regard).
I don’t know what you mean by “not externalizing their costs”. That sounds like you think making a profit is a bad thing. Is that what you meant by that phrase?
I take no ownership of, for example in the above, Ms Beyerstein’s opinions on economics. “Mark has no idea” what he is talking about, should read “Ms Beyerstein” has no idea … not Mark.
OK then neither of you have any idea. Should you discover you do, in fact, own any economic ideas, please let us know.
As for GOP supporters who think Latino/Black’s are racially inferior … in my personal experience the number is small, actually that would be basically only my blue collar conservative in-laws are the only ones who I’ve ever met.
Ironically that would be my in-laws as well….my uncle-in-law actually had one bias cancel the other out. He was pro-obama in the primary because he felt having a woman as President would be a diaster (“what if there’s a war and she’s having her period!”). On the other hand they don’t vote and it is kind of hard to tell how serious they really are. I suspect they are inclined to the performance art and also like taking on the Archie Bunkerish role….call it a kind of counter-culture for the nursing home crowd.
But there are more inlaws out there than graduate students…. As for being soft on Marxism, well look Marx does have a theory, one that’s tricky to understand and many who seek out truth do try to look in hard to understand places to see if anything is hidden there. AS for economics, orthodox Marxism is pretty much dead. He remains valuable both as a historical reference and as intellectual salvage (think of a junk yard were a dead car is stripped down and its working parts are sold off….some very specific observations and ideas of Marx such as his detailed historical observations of 19th century working class conditions and the idea that the business cycle is endogenous still have currency…which is why even an economist you like like Megan McCardle will sometimes talk about Marx with something other than contempt).
Actually I link a lot of criticism. Isn’t that the job and deontological duty of the loyal opposition?
Keep in mind that ‘loyal’ is 50% of the phrase ‘loyal opposition’. The loyal opposition is supposed to be trying to make things better by playing devil’s advocate…finding real problems with the opposition’s policies. To the degree you’re just a linker pointing out what you are finding among the voices of the ‘loyal opposition’ then perhaps the problem is not so much yours but the opposition as a whole. Their arguments and criticisms of Obama seem incoherent, lacking a clear focus and lacking any sense that they really understand what is going on.
I’m curious, did you catch the demographic qualifier on the 40-50%? That is democrats with post-graduate degrees?
I did. It’s odd that you pick such a minuscule group to represent Democrats. (You started by saying that “Liberals… [have a] long (lingering) love for Marxist/Leninist regimes.” Even so, I do know a number of post grad Dems and the number who are sympathetic remains zero.
I don’t know what you mean by “not externalizing their costs”. That sounds like you think making a profit is a bad thing. Is that what you meant by that phrase?
No. Externalizing their costs is when they get society to eat their costs while they alone get the profit. For example, dumping waste in public waters rather than paying to have it disposed of.
JA,
Did their sympathies fall with the wall? Are you suggesting their (assumed) support for Mr Obama’s administrations micro-management/centralization of today’s economy is based on partisan allegiance not a trust in those means/methods from their sympathies for sponsors of the old Soviet five-year plans?
And I picked that group, because that was the largest group of liberals in my experience. They do however have a disproportionally large influence intellectually in the liberal eco-system I think.
Boonton,
I’d grant the point that the opposition doesn’t have a clear focus or lack any sense that they understand what’s going on if there existed (and there doesn’t seem to) any sense that the Administration or those on the left could present a coherent defense/argument or sense that they understand what’s going on either.
There is a problem with your complaint. There is a definite paucity where thoughtful foundational and issues oriented liberal/progressive blogs. Where is the analog to blogs like The Belmont Club on the right, any number of Christian blogs on the religious front, or the Agora/Chicago Boyz/Positive Liberty on the libertarian front. I have no equivalent good left leaning bloggers or blogs which are doing the job of defending or explaining the positions of the left. Do you know any? If not … you’re going to have to back off your complaint about incoherence on the right seeing that there is nothing there there from the left.
Are you suggesting their (assumed) support for Mr Obama’s administrations micro-management/centralization of today’s economy is based on partisan allegiance not a trust in those means/methods from their sympathies for sponsors of the old Soviet five-year plans?
Get back to me when you want to have an honest conversation. This is just ridiculous.
Well on the economics side there’s Krugman and Brad De Long. The League of Ordinary Gentleman often has good stuff but I’m behind on them.
I’m not sure what is not coherent to you. You found my posts coherent enough to point out that my perspective is more Keynesian than Hayekian on this morning’s list post.
Are you suggesting their (assumed) support for Mr Obama’s administrations micro-management/centralization of today’s economy is based on partisan allegiance not a trust in those means/methods from their sympathies for sponsors of the old Soviet five-year plans?
Where’s the micromanagement? Where’s the centralization? Where’s the 5 year plans?