In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff


We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.







Try Advanced Search


  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...


CultureBlogs
Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
PhilosoBlog
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Gregdotorg
BookSlut
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Cronaca
Plep
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Seablogger
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette


Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Samizdata
Junius
Joanne Jacobs
CalPundit
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Public Interest.co.uk
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
Spleenville
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
CinderellaBloggerfella
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
InstaPundit
MindFloss
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes


Miscellaneous
Redwood Dragon
IMAO
The Invisible Hand
ScrappleFace
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz

Links


Our Last 50 Referrers







« Hits and Misses: New York Forecasts | Main | Meet Sally Fallon »

September 30, 2008

It's Hank's Fault

Friedrich von Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards,

Well, the Mother of All Bailouts went down to defeat yesterday in the House, to the obvious consternation of bankers and stock markets everywhere. Many have assigned blame to Republican politicians who took a look at the strongly negative response to the bill from the public and, facing very dicey outcomes in next month's elections, decided to surf a populist wave.

While the Republicans are, indeed, in big trouble and like the desperate men and women they deserve to be (having blindly followed the lead of the most feckless president in history), they are probably feeling reckless. None the less, I think this explanation overlooks the real issue.

Bryan Caplan examines the three national polls taken on the subject by Rasmussen Reports, USA Today/Gallup, and Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times. He concludes that they all tell roughly the same tale:

The LA Times survey has the best-crafted responses - at least it mentions the main arguments for each side. But the USA Today poll, which gives an intermediate choice, probably tells us more about what the American public is thinking. Namely: They want government to do a lot, just not this. [emphasis added]

I believe that it would have been trivial to pass a variety of bailouts, certainly a Swedish-style bank nationalization bill and probably a number of others as well. The public doesn't want the benefits of a functioning financial system to go away; they however (IMO correctly) don't want the current people who have profited immensely by steering that system into the tarpits to be further rewarded or protected from the consequences of their own actions. Unlike many 'pragmatists' the public may actually think that this would not only be annoying in the here-and-now, but a very dangerous precedent for the future. Is that really so astonishing or short-sighted?

In other words, blame Hank Paulson for devising, and utterly refusing to part with, a bailout that is entirely painless for the bailees, or at least the bailees that Hank happens to like. He could have, with a little common sense, had a perfectly functional bailout bill passed by a unanimous vote already if that's all he wanted.

Cheers,

Friedrich

posted by Friedrich at September 30, 2008




Comments

this didnn't post too well on your blog yesterday night..

turn on html in your comments section pl?

http://rameshpolitical.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/agriculture-vs-the-world/

Posted by: ramesh on September 30, 2008 10:15 AM



to rebut the libertarian right(the buchanan republicans)

I have read te reactions to the subversion of the bailout by house republicans, and my reaction is:

either they are sub intelligent or they thing everybody else is,

That , as political strategy works when your audience is the rural redneck who'se been sold the idea that America (and maybe the world)belongs to them.

When they try this with Wall street and serious money, it's likely that bad things will happen to them, quick...

Posted by: ramesh on September 30, 2008 11:07 AM



It's certainly a facile POV to call Bush feckless and reckless. He's had one of the most challenging presidencies probably since Truman. He's been under endless siege from Day 1, due to the rancor of that first election. The fourth estate has been dishonest and manipulative. Our government is being hijacked by corruption and partisanship, all of it, including this financial crisis, from the LEFT. Seriously, thank GOD for the internet and the indefatiguable bloggers, it's all out there if you care to seek the TRUTH. You disappoint me with this latest posting...

Posted by: Jess McMahon on September 30, 2008 11:17 AM



Friedrich, Bravo! Well said. Also, blame the Democrats for applying a few bandaids and making this ghastly thing theirs.

Posted by: Lester Hunt on September 30, 2008 1:38 PM



I haven't always agreed with your financial posts in the past but I must be coming around because I agree with this 100%. I'm even thinking I should vote for Obama, just to punish the Republicans.

Posted by: Todd Fletcher on September 30, 2008 2:04 PM



Todd, be careful what you wish for. The only reason to vote for Obama will be to punish the Democrats. Think about it.

Posted by: Charlton Griffin on September 30, 2008 3:17 PM



You mean it's a two-for-one deal? Even better...

Posted by: Todd Fletcher on September 30, 2008 6:55 PM



Precisely.

Posted by: Charlton Griffin on September 30, 2008 7:54 PM






Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:



Remember your info?