Originally Posted by Earl and Mooch

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I doubt that any bill is read by any politician at any time, unless they are actively engaged in writing it. Even then, they stick to the Cliff Notes, and hand the heavy lifting to staff.

I know of one three-term representative (Bill Orton, D-Utah) who made a point of reading every bill before voting on it.

I guess he had time on his hands. There are some bills that run volumes ... literally.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Sad but true. I was hoping that we might avoid the double pain that happened in the GP, but it seems that we're following that play book to a tee.

What is "GP?"

Originally Posted by playwrite

What is "GP?"

He may be referring to the Great Power Saeculum, the 4T thereof being the Great Depression/World War II.

Was wondering if the poster actually meant GD for Great Depression. Over on the five possibilities thread I recently posted an opinion that not much has really changed, and that most are waiting for the old ways to return. But I have more to add to that:

While we have seen some drop in both credit card usage and traffic congestion, it is not sufficient enough to create a radical change in thinking. Although we are giving a lot of lip service to concern over global warming, which, BTW, one writer in the newspaper op-ed column is trying to link to much of the eastern half of the nation actually experiencing one of the COOLEST summers on record. Much of the western half is baking, with normally cool cities like Seattle and Portland recording highs approaching triple digits.

And while there may be some inclination of a return to activism, it is a far cry from what it was in the 1960's when the name of the game was to buck the system any which way you can. There is not much of that happening now, at least not in any organized way. Big business has for the most part had everything their way for the last three decades, and most are afraid to question things they consider to be unjust. I'm sure more thoughts will come to me on this one.

And yet we have some reverse cases, such as the woman who scored a huge financial windfall over a spilled cup of hot coffee.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Ahh.. Representative DemocracyTM in action.

Oh, you know how long many bills are, right? there isn't enough time in the day for a congressperson to read all those bills, that's what the staffers are for. A lot of the stuff in many bills is highly technical stuff that most politicians won't understand and thus must leave it for the wonks and techies to translate the jargon into plain English for them. They are human beings, not supermen.

Originally Posted by playwrite

What is "GP?"

A typo. Sorry, it should have been GD.

Originally Posted by Odin

Oh, you know how long many bills are, right? there isn't enough time in the day for a congressperson to read all those bills, that's what the staffers are for. A lot of the stuff in many bills is highly technical stuff that most politicians won't understand and thus must leave it for the wonks and techies to translate the jargon into plain English for them. They are human beings, not supermen.

Funny, and yet the proles are expected to follow every one of those new laws to the letter -- remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse!

If even the lawmakers (who have no other responsibilities) cannot possibly read the laws they make, then under what possible just standard could people who actually do have real jobs be expected to keep track of them?

Guard troops may be needed in troubled Ala. county

WTF?

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Funny, and yet the proles are expected to follow every one of those new laws to the letter -- remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse!

-That's one reason why burdensome regulation ruins innovation; the innovator is likely to unwittingly run afoul of the law.

Last night, I revisited the book The Fourth Turning by Strauss and Howe. I specifically re-read their definitions and descriptions of all four turnings. Then, I looked at history of US and Russia, and I tried to apply S&H definitons of turnings to the eras. I know that most of you will disagree with me, but this is what I found. Please, don't kick me too hard in the head for what I am about to write.

1850s-1877, Crisis, US Civil War and Reconstruction
1877-c.1895, Unraveling, mostly unstable economy, time of robber barons, westward expansion, formation of towns in the wild West, mass immigration from Ireland, Scandinavian countries, Russia, Germany, and China, moving of people from towns to cities
c. 1895-1915, Awakening, Labor movement and Progressive era
1915-1919, Crisis, WWI, a very shocking war with most modern means of technology, martial law is declared in some US states. I think that this is too large of a war to be a mid-cycle war by any means.
1919-1930, Unraveling, Roaring 20s
1930-1939, Crisis, Great Depression
1939-1941, a little "High"-ish period with New Deal working, Depression under control, and economy recovering. Think of US World Fair in 1939.
1941-1946, Crisis, WWII
1946-1960, High. It seems to me from reading S&H books, that they wrote their definition of a quintessential High based on 1950s
1960-1967, Awakening, election of JFK, New Frontier, Great Society, and Civil Rights protests in 1963 and 1964
1967-1974, Crisis, Vietnam War, race riots, Watergate. There seems to be so much turbulence at that time that I don't know how that time could ever be classified as an Awakening. Vietnam War had affected US psyche so much and took so many lives that I would not call it a mid-cycle war. Also, Watergate could have easily resulted in the collapse of the United States, similarly to how USSR collapsed in 1991
1974-1983, Unraveling, the malaise. This seems to be a very nasty, pessimistic era with two large recessions and two energy crises near each other. And all the disco fever seems like a perfect decadent Unraveling era activity.
1983-1990, High, Reaganomics era.
1990-2001, Awakening, end of Cold War, Clinton era, fresh breath of Democrat rule after two conservative Republican Presidents
2001-?, Unraveling, a really nasty era.

I re-read parts of The Fourth Turning, and I looked at how they described 1990s, the time when the book was written. They wrote that 1990s were full of civic decay and people's pre-occupation with their personal lives. They wrote that people were interested in celebrity rummors and their cars and houses more than with anything else. From the way that I remember 1990s, I don't really recall too much decadence or celebrity circus or increased materialism. Perhaps, I was a small child at that time and I might have been protected from all those things. Still, I recall a much happier time period than now, when majority of Americans seems to be more content with their lives than they are now. When I watched TV in 1990s, I would see Arthur, Bill Nye the Science Guy, Wishbone, Magic School Bus, and many other educational children's programs. Almost 15 years later, several months ago, I went back to children's TV channels out of curiosity to see what today's kids are shown on TV. I was greatly disappointed, because there were some stupid cartoons shown on TV nowadays. Children's TV was far better just 10-15 years ago.
I could notice the mood change around 2001 or 2002, in the months after 09/11. Back then, I expected that Americans would unite behind US President and demand more order, as they would do in a Crisis situation. However, this mood quickly deteriorated. Then, in late 2002 or in 2003, so many reality shows appeared on TV. And they were really decadent. Also, at that time, lots of celebrity rummors began to circulate in the media everywhere. It seems to me that only MTV was preocupied with the celebrity circus in 1990s. But starting about 2003, I could see celebrity circus on many channels. And I still see lots of celebrity rummors and circuses now. Actually, with the recession deepening, it seems like more people are getting drawn into the world of celebrities, because they somehow need to get their mind off their great troubles. Also, starting early 200s, I had seen an unsettling amount of materialsm, with McMansions rising everywhere and with people being crazy about SUVs and Hummers, and I still see it even now. I barely encountered that in 1990s.
I have read many posts about the starting date of the Crisis. Some people have claimed that Crisis began on Septemeber 11, 2001, while others claim that Crisis is starting now with the recession. From my observations, it seems like the mood changed soon after 09/11, but it became that of a true Unraveling. Even though this recession is changing moods of people, I still don't see the Crisis mood. You will probably disagree with me, but I see a very, very nasty Unraveling continuing still.

Most of you will diagree with me, but I think that the turning procession of High-Awakening-Unraveling-Crisis-High-and so on can happen in a system that is unaffected and unperturbed by other systems. This model assums the complete stability of the system. It seems to me that a country can be attacked by another country and slip into a Crisis regardless of what turning it was in before. Also, a person can become President or an event can happen that can drive the country into some other turning.
For example, I think that in early 1960s, US renounced McCarthyism, elected the more liberal JFK, and began to work toward Civil Rights reforms, and thus, got into an Awakening from the 1950s High. But with the Race Riots and especially with the escalation of Vietnam War, US entered a Crisis. It seems like the Awakening went too far and deteriorated into a Crisis.
Then, I think that WWI Criss and Vietnam Crisis were not resolved successfully and produced Unravelings instead of Highs. Then, with Reagan coming to power, he placed a buckled on the disorder of 60s and 70s. With Reaganomics and with re-escalation of the Cold War, US went back to 1950s in 1980s.
What do you think about this?

Originally Posted by Odin

Guard troops may be needed in troubled Ala. county

WTF?

Poor community with 1/3 of county government let go, can do it every time.

Originally Posted by Chemicalbaritone

<snip>

Sorry man but I just don't see it. Maybe it's from a self-centered perspective. If what you say is true, then I belong to a Nomad generation. I'm sorry but that just doesn't bode with me. I feel like myself and the majority of my peers are too grounded in Hero ideals for that to be so.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

Sorry man but I just don't see it. Maybe it's from a self-centered perspective. If what you say is true, then I belong to a Nomad generation. I'm sorry but that just doesn't bode with me. I feel like myself and the majority of my peers are too grounded in Hero ideals for that to be so.

Agreed, whatever his concept is, it is not saecular. It's biologically impossible for human beings to have 2, 3 , 7 or even 11 year long generations. Also, a crises isn't just any tough time that a given event or two brings along. The burning of the White House in 1814 didn't start a 4T. The depreassions of 1837, 1873 and 1893 didn't spark crises. However, the panic of 1857 may have sparked the civil war crises because the event was close enough to the "due date" of the next crises when it happened.
And this is because a crises only happens when the generational allignment is ripe for a period of change that transforms a society in ways that, although necessary for the society's survival, are so scathing to those living through it that they seek to avoid living throuigh such an experence again. We're seeing right now why it takse a human lifetime to cycle around. It has taken over 70 years for America to have forgotten the lessons of the depression.

In their book the Fourth Turning, Strauss and Howe talk about their cyclical view of history vs. a chaotic view of history. So, my long post here was an attempt at justifying the chaotic view of history. I guess the cycles do exist, and I'll admit that WWI was a 3T war and Vietnam War was a 2T war, even though I will admit it with difficulty. Still, it seems to me that the previous 3T (1908-1929) was really a hybrid of an Unraveling and a Crisis, mostly due to WWI. Our own 3T was a much calmer era, with very little upheaval. There are not very many Xers who fought in the Iraq Wars or in Kosovo, while WWI had affected many more Losts. In fact, WWI was the ultimate tragedy of the Lost generation, and WWI was one of the main reasons why Losts got their name. Likewise, it seems to me that the 2T (1964-1984) was a hybrid of an Awakening and a Crisis, especially the first part of it, 1964-1974. Missionary generation had the Spanish-American War, but that war was won quickly. Boomers had Vietnam War, which was the cause of so many protests, race riots, and movements in late 1960s, and which was the generational tragedy. And it's very hard for me to accept that Americans born in 1943-1954 are the same generation as Americans born in 1955-1960. The first group was traumatized by Vietnam War and draft, while the second group had full productive lives full of post-Vietnam peace and post-Watergate prosperity.
Perhaps I am wrong, but seems to me that each turning is a hybrid with another type of turning. Perhaps, overall history is cyclical, but there might be a chaotic element with some hybridization of turnings. Perhaps, this 3T was a hybrid of an Unraveling and a High, because of peace and prosperity of Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and somewhat Bush II years. Also, the post-Civil War 1T could have been a hybrid of a High and a Crisis, because of Reconstruction, former slave issues, establishment of towns in Wild West, and industrialization. Also, Justin says that the Brezhnev years in USSR were a 3T, because the Soviet order was decaying and rotting. But there were so many High elements present, because there was still strict censorship, strict rules about how people must behave, conformity was expected at work, and there was a stifling hierarchy at work and in government. Russia today might be a 1T, but there are many elements of an Unraveling present there, with gangsters, prostitution, and bribery. The social stratification in Russia today is greater than what it was during the Brezhnev years. And this makes the Great Patriotic War (WWII for USSR) be an early 2T war with very strong hybrid with a Crisis.
I have new things coming up in my life, so I will be extremely busy for the next few years. I will be leaving this forum until about 2012 and this is my last post.
Hopefully, this 4T will not be nearly as harsh and tragic as the previous one. Hopefully, a total war on the scale of WWI or WWII or even Vietnam War will not break out any time soon. Hopefully, this recession does not reach the levels of the Great Depression and will end soon. I hope that Americans will not need such a large-scale tragedy to learn their lessons about their past 3T behaviors. And I hope that if this Crisis is meant to be, then it is very short, smooth, with minimal sacrifice and minimal loss of life. I want to believe that people shouldn't need a 4T to shock them out of the 3T mood so they could fix things and to make them work.
I hope that when I come back here in 2012, everyone will still be alive and no one will be swept up by the upcoming 4T. And I hope that the world doesn't end in 2012.
It was very pleasant for me to communicate with all of you.
Billy Jeffick.

The brouhaha about the President of the United States speaking to the country’s students says something about what is going on in the country right now. It proves to me that the country really did have a ‘change in mood’ from liberal to conservative in the aftermath of 911 when the country got behind Bush in the War Against Terrorism. It tells me that while elections have consequences, they don’t alter the ‘change in mood’ just because Katrina soured the country on Bush and the housing crisis caused the country to reject the Republican party and elect what they thought was a moderate Democrat.

It doesn’t matter if Silents and GIs, or even Boomers, are upset with Obama for his health care stances. It does matter if X-gen parents are concerned about what Obama might say to school children. That has struck much closer to my home than the birthers ever did. S&H make a point that how society thinks that the change of mood is going to affect the country is never how it ends up affecting it. That is because the nomads and young heroes get to approve what really goes into effect and together they outnumber the prophets who of course are divided in the first place.

Obama had better keep in touch with where the young people are on issues. They are more important than the Boomer and Silent liberal base.

Originally Posted by MaryT

The brouhaha about the President of the United States speaking to the country’s students says something about what is going on in the country right now. It proves to me that the country really did have a ‘change in mood’ from liberal to conservative in the aftermath of 911 when the country got behind Bush in the War Against Terrorism. It tells me that while elections have consequences, they don’t alter the ‘change in mood’ just because Katrina soured the country on Bush and the housing crisis caused the country to reject the Republican party and elect what they thought was a moderate Democrat.

It doesn’t matter if Silents and GIs, or even Boomers, are upset with Obama for his health care stances. It does matter if X-gen parents are concerned about what Obama might say to school children. That has struck much closer to my home than the birthers ever did. S&H make a point that how society thinks that the change of mood is going to affect the country is never how it ends up affecting it. That is because the nomads and young heroes get to approve what really goes into effect and together they outnumber the prophets who of course are divided in the first place.

Obama had better keep in touch with where the young people are on issues. They are more important than the Boomer and Silent liberal base.

Don't let the media fool you, these parents are a tiny minority of crazies frightening spineless school administrators. The mainstream media is egging the BS on because controversy sells (or at least gets heads for the advertisers), and because idiots on Fox News and right-wing hate radio are spewing outright lies about communist indoctrination. These people are comparable to the John Birchers complaining that water fluoridation was a Communist plot the contaminate their precious bodily fluids.

This BS should subside as the younger Xers, which are more liberal than the older Xers, become the dominant parenting cohorts.

Two of my neighbors have suffered a loss of income so severe that they have taken in renters within the last month.

Originally Posted by Odin

Don't let the media fool you, these parents are a tiny minority of crazies frightening spineless school administrators. The mainstream media is egging the BS on because controversy sells (or at least gets heads for the advertisers), and because idiots on Fox News and right-wing hate radio are spewing outright lies about communist indoctrination. These people are comparable to the John Birchers complaining that water fluoridation was a Communist plot the contaminate their precious bodily fluids.

This BS should subside as the younger Xers, which are more liberal than the older Xers, become the dominant parenting cohorts.

Not so quick, I think they will do whatever is right as parents. I was as naive as you once, you will learn as you get older this same truth.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Two of my neighbors have suffered a loss of income so severe that they have taken in renters within the last month.

Sounds like Kit Kittridge, from the American Girls dolls. In the story, her father's car dealership tanks in 1932, so to forstall foreclosure on their house, the family takes in boarders.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Sounds like Kit Kittridge, from the American Girls dolls. In the story, her father's car dealership tanks in 1932, so to forstall foreclosure on their house, the family takes in boarders.

And there's a good chance that it's more widespread. One of the things I've noticed in the last month is the larger number of cars in the driveways of said neighbors. Going by the cars in the driveway, it's as if someone is always home where that wasn't true before.
I will add that I've seen the same change in "driveway density" In a few other places around here. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the cause was the same.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Two of my neighbors have suffered a loss of income so severe that they have taken in renters within the last month.

where do you live, herbal t?

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

where do you live, herbal t?

Not too far away from this town.

Everybody pretty much knows everyone else around here and that accentuates the moods, both positive and negitive.

A year after financial crisis, the consumer economy is dead

Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: September 08, 2009 08:09:16 PM

WASHINGTON — One year after the near collapse of the global financial system, this much is clear: The financial world as we knew it is over, and something new is rising from its ashes.

Historians will look to September 2008 as a watershed for the U.S. economy.

On Sept. 7, the government seized mortgage titans Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Eight days later, investment bank Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, sparking a global financial panic that threatened to topple blue-chip financial institutions around the world. In the several months that followed, governments from Washington to Beijing responded with unprecedented intervention into financial markets and across their economies, seeking to stop the wreckage and stem the damage.

One year later, the easy-money system that financed the boom era from the 1980s until a year ago is smashed. Once-ravenous U.S. consumers are saving money and paying down debt. Banks are building reserves and hoarding cash. And governments are fashioning a new global financial order.

Congress and the Obama administration have lost faith in self-regulated markets. Together, they're writing the most sweeping new regulations over finance since the Great Depression. And in this ever-more-connected global economy, Washington is working with its partners through the G-20 group of nations to develop worldwide rules to govern finance.

"Our objective is to design an economic framework where we're going to have a more balanced pattern of growth globally, less reliant on a buildup of unsustainable borrowing . . . and not just here, but around the world," said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

The first faint signs that the U.S. economy may be clawing its way back from the worst recession since the Great Depression are only now starting to appear, a year after the panic began. Similar indications are sprouting in Europe, China and Japan.

Still, economists concur that a quarter-century of economic growth fueled by cheap credit is over. Many analysts also think that an extended period of slow job growth and suppressed wage growth will keep consumers — and the businesses that sell to them — in the dumps for years.

"Those things are likely to be subpar for a long period of time," said Martin Regalia, the chief economist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "I think it means that we probably see potential rates of growth that are in the 2-2.5 (percent) range, or maybe . . . 1.8-1.9 (percent)." A growth rate of 3 percent to 3.5 percent is considered average.

The unemployment rate rose to 9.7 percent in August and is expected to peak above 10 percent in the months ahead. It's already there in at least 15 states. Regalia thinks that it could be five years before the U.S. economy generates enough jobs to overcome those lost and to employ the new workers entering the labor force.

All this is likely to keep consumers on the sidelines.

"I think this financial panic and Great Recession is an inflection point for the financial system and the economy," said Mark Zandi, the chief economist for forecaster Moody's Economy.com. "It means much less risk-taking, at least for a number of years to come — a decade or two. That will be evident in less credit and more costly credit. If you are a household or a business, it will cost you more, and it will be more difficult to get that credit."

The numbers bear him out. The Fed's most recent release of credit data showed that consumer credit decreased at an annual rate of 5.2 percent from April to June, after falling by a 3.6 percent annual rate from January to March. Revolving lines of credit, which include credit cards, fell by an annualized 8.9 percent in the first quarter, followed by an 8.2 percent drop in the second quarter.

That's a sea change. For much of the past two decades, strong U.S. growth has come largely through expanding credit. The global economy fed off this trend.

China became a manufacturing hub by selling attractively priced exports to U.S. consumers who were living beyond their means. China's Asian neighbors sent it components for final assembly; Africa and Latin America sold China their raw materials. All fed off U.S. consumers' bottomless appetite for more, bought on credit.

"That's over. Consumers can do their part — spend at a rate consistent with their income growth, but not much beyond that," Zandi said.

If U.S. consumers no longer drive the global economy, then consumers in big emerging economies such as China and Brazil will have to take up some of the slack. Trade among nations will take on greater importance.

In the emerging "new normal," U.S. companies will have to be more competitive. They must sell into big developing markets; yet as the recent Cash for Clunkers effort underscored, the competitive hurdles are high: Foreign-owned automakers, led by Toyota, reaped the most benefit from the U.S. tax breaks for new car purchases, not GM and Chrysler.

Need a loan? Tough luck: Many U.S. banks are in no condition to lend. Around 416 banks are now on a "problem list" and at risk of insolvency. Regulators already have shuttered 81 banks and thrifts this year.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. reported on Aug. 27 that rising loan losses are depleting bank capital. The ratio of bank reserves to bad loans was 63.5 percent from April to June, the lowest it's been since the savings-and-loan crisis in 1991.

For all that, the U.S. economy does seem to be rising off its sickbed. The latest manufacturing data for August point to a return to growth, and home sales are rising. Indeed, there are many encouraging signs emerging in the global economy.

It's all growth from a low starting point, however, and many economists think that there'll be a lower baseline for U.S. and global growth if the new financial order means less risk-taking by lenders and less indebtedness by companies and consumers.

That seems evident now in the U.S. personal savings rate. It fell steadily from 9.59 percent in the 1970s to 2.68 percent in the easy-money era from 2000 to 2008; from 2005 to 2007, it averaged 1.83 percent.

Today, that trend is in reverse. From April to June, Americans' personal savings rate was 5 percent, and it could go higher if the unemployment rate keeps rising. Almost 15 million Americans are unemployed — and countless others are underemployed or uncertain about their job security, so they're spending less and saving more.

A few years ago, banks fell all over themselves to offer cheap home equity loans and lines of consumer credit. No more. Even billions in government bailout dollars to spur lending haven't changed that.

"The strategy that was stated at the beginning of the year — which is that you would sustain the banking system in order that it would resume lending — hasn't worked, and it isn't going to work," said James K. Galbraith, an economist at the University of Texas at Austin.

Over the course of 2008, the nation's five largest banks reduced their consumer loans by 79 percent, real estate loans by 66 percent and commercial loans by 19 percent, according to FDIC data. A wide range of credit measures, including recent FDIC data, show that lending remains depressed.

Why? The foundation of U.S. credit expansion for the past 20 years is in ruin. Since the 1980s, banks haven't kept loans on their balance sheets; instead, they sold them into a secondary market, where they were pooled for sale to investors as securities. The process, called securitization, fueled a rapid expansion of credit to consumers and businesses. By passing their loans on to investors, banks were freed to lend more.

Today, securitization is all but dead. Investors have little appetite for risky securities. Few buyers want a security based on pools of mortgages, car loans, student loans and the like.

"The basis of revival of the system along the line of what previously existed doesn't exist. The foundation that was supposed to be there for the revival (of the economy) . . . got washed away," Galbraith said.

Unless and until securitization rebounds, it will be hard for banks to resume robust lending because they're stuck with loans on their books.

"We've just been scared," said Robert C. Pozen, the chairman of Boston-based MFS Investment Management. He thinks that the freeze in securitization reflects a lack of trust in Wall Street and its products and remains a huge obstacle to the resumption of lending that's vital to an economic recovery.

Enter the Federal Reserve. It now props up the secondary market for pooled loans that are vital to the functioning of the U.S. financial system. The Fed is lending money to investors who're willing to buy the safest pools of loans, called asset-backed securities.

Through Sept. 3, the Fed had funded purchases of $817.6 billion in mortgage-backed securities. These securities were pooled mostly by mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae. In recent months, the Fed also has moved aggressively to lend for purchase of pools of other consumer-based loans.

Today, there's little private-sector demand for new loan-based securities; government is virtually the only game in town. That's why on Aug. 17, the Fed announced that it would extend its program to finance the purchase of pools of loans until mid-2010. That suggests there's still a long way to go before a functioning securitization market — the backbone of consumer lending — returns to a semblance of normalcy.

Another article on mortgages that will reset within the next few years:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/business/09loans.html

Yes--but over the weekend the Times had a story I'm too tired to look up about the latest in financial innovation--buying up peoples' life insurance at a discount (people often sell it when they get sick) and bundling it and turning it into a security! These guys need new products to sell. The madness continues.