Skip to main content

  Taking a break from pointing out how Obamacare is the success that's still not appreciated by too many, and exposing the consequences of the Tea Party economic Jihad of Brownback in Kansas, Dr. Krugman takes a swing at the status of Dodd-Frank financial reforms. His conclusion is some good things are happening, and the way to tell is by the screams of pain from the usual suspects. His conclusion is this:

Did reform go far enough? No. In particular, while banks are being forced to hold more capital, a key force for stability, they really should be holding much more. But Wall Street and its allies wouldn’t be screaming so loudly, and spending so much money in an effort to gut the law, if it weren’t an important step in the right direction. For all its limitations, financial reform is a success story.
emphasis added

       It's tempting to dismiss Dodd-Frank as too limited in scope, too hobbled by compromises, to call it a success - but that's a mistake progressives make too often. It's a step in the right direction - and we haven't been headed in that direction for a long time. We need to build momentum.

      Conservatives always demand more - but they don't trash their own victories. They build on them and keep pushing. We need to do the same. Keep messaging it's just a starting point - we can do better, and keep pushing TO do better. There's a constant pushback against it from the right; less then enthusiastic support from our side only makes their job easier.

       We can keep the momentum building by focusing on other things that need to get done. The student loan reform issue is one that a lot of people can get behind. If we're going to demand academic investments by people in exchange for a future in the economy, we can't at the same time support policies that price that academic investment out of reach.

      We can build on the "too big to fail" issue by demanding the government start enforcing anti-trust laws again. The threat to the internet from giant telecom companies, the suffocating grip of cable monopolies - these are things that ordinary Americans can understand and demand be changed.

      We can use the successes of Dodd-Frank to date to argue for more of the same. It's all about establishing forward momentum and taking the initiative away from the other side for a change.

      Read Krugman's column, and reflect on where we can go from where we are now.

UPDATE: Initial comments in response to this post are, to put it mildly, disheartening. If I may summarize, snark in hand...


      Great opportunity lost - game over for real reform. Wall Street rejoices as Lefties abandon field. Congressional Democrats conclude no point in further financial reform, cite lack of enthusiasm from base. All hope lost for Main Street - Warren declares intention to "Go Galt". Mitt Romney says "I told you it was a mistake." Nattering Nabobs of Negativity Rule the Day. "Krugman is delusional" says disappointed former fan.

     Look, Dodd-Frank isn't what many hoped it would be. (Neither is Obamacare.) So what? You have two choices at this point.

You can bitch and moan about how bad it turned out, you can trash it from now till the cows come home, you can join the right wing attacking it from the other side and help build up their narrative of Liberals screwing up again, you can hold onto your narrative of being victimized yet again, you can disengage in righteous indignation…


You can gut it up, take the successes to date, and build on them. You wanted an instant fix? You wanted the world to see how right you were and give you everything you wanted all at once? Sorry, the world doesn't work that way. It takes time to turn things around. We're living in a conservative dystopia because they spent years working to bring it about, one small victory at a time. A bill passed here, a court decision there, a regulation rewritten… They kept going, playing the long game.

Well, it's not over. It's never over - unless we give up. We have a little bit of forward momentum here. Look, Krugman says Dodd-Frank doesn't go far enough - but what it does do is having an effect. So instead of using all that energy to piss on it, how about you take it and do something positive with it?

I swear, there are people here who wouldn't know what to do with themselves without despair and anger. Yup, a great opportunity was wasted - a huge disruption that could have been used to reshape everything was allowed to pass. Well guess what - there are more of them headed our way (be careful what you wish for!) and if we spend all of our time regretting the one we missed, the next ones are going to wash us away.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (27+ / 0-)

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:14:49 PM PDT

  •  Weak (5+ / 0-)

    Dodd-Frank is an extremely weak effort when you consider that 2008 was a once/twice a century level melt-down.

    There will likely never be a better opportunity in our lifetimes than what we squandered in the aftermath of the 08 crash to reform Wallstreet.

    If all they managed to get after a depression level crash was the nibbles around the edges they did then any hopes of ever making the dramatic changes that are needed just aren't ever going to happen.

    •  Dodd-Frank wasn't reform (4+ / 0-)

      It was regulation.
         and that's the problem. The situation needed reform

      "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

      by gjohnsit on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:45:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Regulation IS Reform at this point (6+ / 0-)

        In the sense that the narrative has shifted away from deregulation being the only political possibility. We may not be where we want to be, but facing in the right direction is a necessary first step.

        "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

        by xaxnar on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:57:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually, that's just not true (5+ / 0-)

          People who think we can baby step our way to real reform clearly have no fucking idea how politics works.

          If you go back and study every major measure of progress, in just American history, you will see that real reform never occurred as a result of baby steps, persistently spread out over the years, until, say, social security was passed.

          We got them all as a result to a cataclysmic, paradigm shifting backlash - you know, like when the rulers came begging with their hands out because their stupidity and reckless greed had bankrupted them all.

          You know, our opponents have long understood this quite well. This was the thesis behind Milton Freedman's "Shock Doctrine", which Naomi Klein unveiled to the public.

          Rahm Emannuel, quoting Churchill when he said never let a good crisis go to waste, was admitting that the financial crisis was a great opportunity for our enemies too.

          It was really just a matter of who seized the opportunity first. In 1935, Progressives siezed the moment.

          In 2008, Wall Street, through their presidential proxy, seized the opportunity.

          Liberals, who used to be the champions of the people, just clapped harder.

          •  It's a theory, but... (0+ / 0-)

            Those great shifts take decades of prep work to pull off. If you won't grease the skids ahead of time, don't expect things to fall your way.

            "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

            by xaxnar on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 04:30:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

              History has shone over and over again that people are just reactionary (normally that word means the opposite but I'm stealing it. It's too good a word to waste.)

              Anyway, what all that prep work does, and this is important, it shapes the reaction. The Great Depression was a case in point. From the late 1800s through the early 1900s, the progressive movement built the foundation for what would be the 2nd New Deal of 1935.

              In Germany, an altogether different movement was responding to the same economic crisis. And look what theirs turned into. Nazis.

              The juxtaposition of FDR versus Hitler as reactions to the same, global economic cataclysm is a cautionary tale.

              And one that serves your point. Building movements is critical, even though it will almost always be a shock that forces action.

              Thanks for the chat.

        •  regulation with out enforcement is what exactly? (0+ / 0-)

          BTW, I'm coming to the conclusion that Liz Warren is a Republican in deep cover so if she was your hope….

        •  Reform implies changing the way things are done (0+ / 0-)

          Dodd-Frank didn't do that. It just regulated a corrupt business model.

          "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

          by gjohnsit on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 02:49:54 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  When one realizes how hard the status quo... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        waiono, flowerfarmer, unfangus working to pass TISA, they'll understand that this entire exercise is little more than massive kabuki.

        With the passage of TISA, the TBTF banks are formally, for all intents and purposes, no longer subject to US law: "'Obama’s Latest Betrayal of America and Americans in Favor of the Big Banks: TISA,' by Bill Black."

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 09:15:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, the diarist has just added to this... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PrahaPartizan, NoMoreLies, unfangus

          ...spin mentality, with their "update." Regrettable. Reality-based reporting? Not!

          What part of "The Banks Own The Place," do some Kossacks not understand?

          Oh, and by the way, Krugman's also publicly noted his support and/or ambivalence about these brutally egregious trade deals, too.

          TISA stands a pretty good chance of being passed, unlike many of the other trade agreements currently on the table, which have drifted into disfavor by many of our trading partners--at least in any form which the United States supports. That being said, our government is still going full speed ahead as it continues to push for passage of virtually ALL of 'em: TAFTA, TISA/GATS Annex, TPP, etc., etc.

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 09:30:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Argentina is Exhibit 1 (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The 3rd world poor can't sue US corporations but our "judges" can always find a way to screw the 3rd world. If that fails then we just murder them(Libya).

      •  You're an anti-capitalist, IIRC, so there is no (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xaxnar, gramofsam1, Dodgerdog1

        "reform" that is possible that would satisfy you.  Neither Congress, nor the President, nor the public at large has any appetite to overturn capitalism.  Not even Elizabeth Warren is in favor of overturning capitalism.  Regulated capitalism is the best you can hope for, and so the issue is which regulations we are going to push.  But you reject "regulation" altogether, because "regulation != reform".  That's just meaningless babble..

    •  It Was a Never-In-a-Century (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wolf10, PrahaPartizan, NoMoreLies

      because its most necessary and sufficient causes have been known to be morally illegal practices. The entire preceding bubble shouldn't have been legal, the too-big-to-fail shouldn't have been legal, the ability of top individuals to take home the fruits of hyper profitability shouldn't have been legal and so the seeking of hyper profits shouldn't have even had any point.

      We might as well call Godwin deletion a once in a century event.

      No means no, zero means zero.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:48:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Translation: Nobody could have given us what we (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tony Situ, Willinois

      wanted but Obama, so if Obama did not give us what we consider to be the ultimate in important things we are doomed! And Obama has damaged us forevah!

      Actually, Elizabeth Warren has also said about Wall Street Reform:

      Thanks to the leadership of President Obama,
      Chairman Frank, and Chairman Dodd, that's about to change.

      Members of the House-Senate conference and their staffs worked through the night to produce the strongest set of Wall Street reforms
      in three generations.

      They created a strong, independent consumer agency that
      will have the tools to rein in industry tricks and traps and to
      cut out the fine print. For the first time, there will be a financial
      regulator in Washington watching out for families instead of bank

  •  I agree w/you. There's never and end (11+ / 0-)

    point to anything. It's either growing or decaying.  My definition of being a progressive is progress.  I certainly trust Paul Krugman to know what he's talking about!

    Thanks for the diary!

    I'm on Twitter: ThisMagicalEarth@MagicalEarth

    by ParkRanger on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:42:20 PM PDT

  •  If only Warren was elected in 2008. (3+ / 0-)

    She would have pushed that committee to get a stronger bill passed.

    "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:47:00 PM PDT

  •  Our Economic Policy Discussions in the Face of the (5+ / 0-)

    half century conservative takeover are the moral equivalent of debating "environmentalism" in the face of catastrophic climate change.

    Time to call a spade a spade and to call for doing to those wielding it destructively what civilization needs done with them.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:53:20 PM PDT

  •  Sorry, (4+ / 0-)

    this is like saying there's a point in putting a bandaid on a cut finger when the heart is in cardiac arrest.

    We've seen nothing but diversions. While things may seem back to normal for a small few, the vast majority will NEVER be the same.

    The once or twice in a life time event was not the crash but the system-shocking, staggering concentration of wealth and power. As with the TBTFB, NOTHING substantive has been done about that.

    Reports of recovery have been greatly exaggerated.

    I've never left a blank space on a ballot... but I will not vote for someone [who vows] to spy on me. I will not do it. - dclawyer06

    Trust, but verify. - Reagan
    Vote, but Occupy. - commonmass

    by Words In Action on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 07:57:25 PM PDT

    •  OTOH, (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, NoMoreLies, JohnB47, Tony Situ

      analyzing the situation from the opposite direction, we might as well rip off the bandaid.

      That's that same as saying that repealing Dodd-Frank, eliminating the currently-hobbled CFPB, eliminating reporting requirements, allowing secret internal derivative trading backed by imaginary virtual collateral again,  hiding the terms and conditions of predatory consumer credit card agreements again, removing federal authority to restructure or even audit too-big-to-fail financial institutions, and reducing the fees that banks pay for expanded insurance coverage for insolvency protection (putting that burden back on taxpayer victims as it was in 2009)....

      All than does nothing? No, I can't agree that the bandaid means nothing.

      However, I fully agree with the fundamental issues you describe.

      Dodd-Frank doesn't even point in the direction of the glaring and obvious big-time economic structure problems.

      We absolutely must get the Republicans the hell out of the way. We absolutely must get money and bribery out of politics and legislation. We absolutely must reinstate an aggressive, progressive tax structure that includes a substantial increase in tax rates that apply to the extremely wealthy. We absolutely must require a minimum tax rate for the wealthy and taxable corporations. We absolutely must eliminate all deferred income and investor-specific tax loopholes. We absolutely must eliminate tax exemptions for non-profits that use less than 100% of their funds for strictly-defined public charity purposes. We absolutely must put TBTF violators in jail. We absolutely must kick ass and take names for even a hint of anti-trust violation and break up violators and toss in a little jail time for the executives. We absolutely must reinstate, strengthen, restructure, and enforce Glass-Steagall provisions. We absolutely must prohibit trading and creation of multi-layered derivatives and financial instruments that obscure risk or value.

      How about recognizing that violent, organized anti-government gun-nuts are conspiring and promoting insurrection or worse. Stop ignoring the domestic part of that domestic and foreign part of their oath of office. Track these assholes like glue and prosecute every violation they make. Cliven Bundy needs to be put in jail. Why the hell hasn't that happened for over 20 years now. Yeah, I know that the FBI is working on their investigation of those who surrounded federal agents at gunpoint. That's insurrection. Period. Just start arresting these assholes on at a time. Do it, dammit.

      I'm just getting started....

      "Never wrestle with a pig: you get dirty and the pig enjoys it"

      by GrumpyOldGeek on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 10:04:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Krugman is incredibly disappointing here... n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

    by bobswern on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 08:17:13 PM PDT

    •  Dodd-Frank, aside from CFPB, is very weak... (4+ / 0-)

      Derivatives are virtually untouched, despite all the blather we may be hearing to the contrary. Far too much action is occurring off-exchange, still; and now, offshored, as well!

      But, it's all propaganda, all the time, as far as the greater truth that the TBTF's are allowed to grow larger by the day.

      But, don't take my word for it, here are Senators Warren, McCain, Cantwell and King telling it like it is...

      We need to rein in 'too big to fail' banks

      By Elizabeth Warren, John McCain, Maria Cantwell and Angus King
      updated 8:14 AM EDT, Thu July 17, 2014

      Senators: We still have banks that are "too big to fail," threatening another crash

      •    Senators want updated Glass-Steagall Act to scale back huge financial institutions
      •    They say new act would separate traditional banks from riskier financial services
      •    Senators: American taxpayers are still paying the price of saving "too big to fail" banks

      Editor's note: Sen. Elizabeth Warren is a Massachusetts Democrat; Sen. John McCain is a Republican from Arizona, Sen. Maria Cantwell is a Democrat from Washington state; and Sen. Angus King is an independent from Maine.

      (CNN) -- More than five years after the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers and the beginning of the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression, lawmakers should ask themselves whether they have done enough to reduce the risk of another financial crisis. In our view, the answer is no.

      The chances of another financial crisis will remain unacceptably high as long as there are financial institutions that are "too big to fail" -- entities that are deemed so important to the overall health and functioning of the markets that their collapse would bring down the entire financial system.

      But over five years after the crash, the big banks are more concentrated and more interconnected and their appetite for excessively risky behavior is unchanged. The biggest banks are substantially bigger than they were in 2008. In fact, the five biggest banks now control more than half the nation's total banking assets.

      Despite a marked increase in banks' overall stability since 2008, the risk of systemic failure continues to exist. In 2012, JPMorgan Chase suffered a $6.2 billion loss because of the so-called "London Whale" trades. The bank's senior management, board of directors, and internal risk controls failed to stem the rapidly expanding losses. In its settlement with federal regulators, the bank admitted wrongdoing and acknowledged that there were severe problems with its internal controls.

      That episode was yet another reminder that banks continue to engage in risky conduct and that regulators continue to lack the tools and willingness to stop such conduct before it happens…

      … Congress should not wait until the next crisis to address the "too big to fail" problem. Nor should it wait any longer in the hopes that regulators will end this phenomenon themselves. It's been four years since Congress passed, and rulemaking began on, the Dodd-Frank Act. The regulators have so far missed more than half of their statutory rule-making deadlines and many rules remain unwritten.

      Congress must step in. We owe the American people as much. The real cost of the financial crisis was borne, and is still being borne, by the men, women, families, small businesses, and communities in America -- American taxpayers. A report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas estimated that the financial crisis cost us as much as $14 trillion. That's $120,000 for every American household -- more than two years' worth of income for the average family…

      And, if anyone reading this thinks that any new Glass-Steagall-type bill with real teeth in it will ever make it off of The Hill, where "the banks own the place," they're either living in a dream world of kidding themselves.

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 09:00:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The White House can give all the lip service... (4+ / 0-)

        ...they'd like to this bullshit, but the REALITY is that they're STRONGLY in favor of enabling our nation's banks to become subservient to NO NATIONAL/SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENT, at all.

        One need look no further than this post to fully understand how strongly the White House is pushing for this: "'Obama’s Latest Betrayal of America and Americans in Favor of the Big Banks: TISA,' by Bill Black."

        Lip service. That is ALL we're ever going to get from the status quo on this. And, that's from the most senior people in the Democratic Party, and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., right now--as you read this, too.

        In fact, if TISA is passed by Congress, the President will definitely sign it. And, it makes this entire discussion moot.

        I truly wish people would take a look at the bigger picture here to understand just how deceptive all of this is; and, how incredibly stacked the deck we call the "public discussion" on this topic truly is.

        The public--and even many Kossacks--are being so incredibly played on this subject, it's beyond just being "a travesty."

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Sun Aug 03, 2014 at 09:10:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Krugman is always disappointing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bobswern, NoMoreLies, flowerfarmer

      You, my friend, are just now noticing.

      Krugman, who repeatedly claimed that speculation had nothing to do with 145$ oil prices. Hahahahaha. What an idiot.

      Who repeatedly defended so-called EMH (efficient market hypothesis) long after the empirical evidence proved otherwise.

      Who only made it to the big time at the NYT with his ideologue ramblings defending the WTO and globalization and "free trade".

      Of course, that wasn't really what took him to the big leagues. Idiot economists smoking the free trade pipe are a dime a dozen - since their whore job is dependent on it.

      No, what made Krugman a darling to the Wall Street loving NYT and the gray eminences over at the Council on Foreign Relations was his attacks on William Greider and his anti-globalization tome, "One World Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism" while he was still mopping floors at

      Greider, a widely read reporter, posed a severe threat to the globalist regime with his chronicling of the real world effects of corporate globalization in human and economic terms, using empirical dataa (imagine that novel concept) as opposed to the ideologically driven theories and conjectures and outright lies of its proponents.

      Krugman attacked like the dog that he is. And he got his biscuit.

      The funniest thing about Krugman is that, while many credit him with predicting the financial collapse of 2007-8, which was always complete bullshit (he barely acknowledged the mortgage crisis in 2007 while others wrote about it as early as 2005),

      Krugman actually lost a significant proportion of his life savings in 2008. He acknowledged as much in his fall, 2008 appearance on Bill Maher.

      Krugman: "I thought money markets were safe".

      Hahahahaha. I followed Jerome a paris here and took my and my family's money out of the market in 2006. They all think I'm the fucking market oracle now. Hahahaha. Krugman lost his ass.

      But it's worse. I can't find the article, but there's a Times column where Krugman asserted that the standard of living for middle class American may not have gone down in the days since Reagan. His line was something like, "it is debatable" and he cited TV ownership for evidence.

      I've spent hours trying to find that article, because it really exposed Krugman's views for what they are.

      But I don't need that column. I have this:

      You may say that the wretched of the earth should not be forced to serve as hewers of wood, drawers of water, and sewers of sneakers for the affluent. But what is the alternative? Should they be helped with foreign aid? Maybe--although the historical record of regions like southern Italy suggests that such aid has a tendency to promote perpetual dependence. Anyway, there isn't the slightest prospect of significant aid materializing. Should their own governments provide more social justice? Of course--but they won't, or at least not because we tell them to. And as long as you have no realistic alternative to industrialization based on low wages, to oppose it means that you are willing to deny desperately poor people the best chance they have of progress for the sake of what amounts to an aesthetic standard--that is, the fact that you don't like the idea of workers being paid a pittance to supply rich Westerners with fashion items.
      This is from Krugman's big defense of globalization column titled "In Defense of Low Wages." It's fucking Thomas Freidman 2: The Hideous Sequel.

      He's of course making the typical Neoliberal strawman argument that the only alternative to Chevron coming to your little village and giving the peasants jobs for pennies on the dollar while permanently poisoning their water and destroying their habitat is perpetual poverty. "They need Pepsi to save them!!!"

      But note the little slip about how financial aid is a path to "perpetual dependence".

      Should they be helped with foreign aid? Maybe--although the historical record suggests that such aid has a tendency to promote perpetual dependence.
      How many times have you heard any given right wing blowhard make this same argument on right wing blow hard radio?

      It's the same fucking argument for "why poor people don't need welfare."

      Krugman is as fraudulent as his fake "Nobel" prize.

      I've kept my mouth shut about this assclown for the last 4 years because, in spite of his closet right wing/neoliberal views, and his membership in the CFR, whose sole purpose is to globalize the fucking world into the hands of a few trillionaire banksters, he's been pretty good opposition to the Obama/Pete Peterson debt reduction stupidity.

      But even on that, he is a fake. He knows full well that our privatized, money as debt monetary system, which removes our sovereign right and ability to create money as it's needed to rebuild our nation, employ our people, and create a greater, sustainable and humane civilization in a measured way that does not create inflation but increases real value to the economy and real wealth to our people, is the true source of our economic decline.

      The banksters have tricked our nation into forcing us, the U.S. Fucking A., into having to borrow our own currency.


      His solution to the stagnant economy is to borrow more from the banking sector, which our grandchildren will have to pay the interest on. And indeed, that is better than the insane debt reduction agenda of the rightwing asshole Obama.

      But it is still the big lie. We could print 20 trillion tomorrow and strictly appropriate that money to building a new America, with 2000 new, smaller schools with 1 million new teachers, massive infrastructure investment, communication roads rail, massive energy refurbishments to maximize efficiency (main thing) and rapidly switch off the insane fossil fuel paradigm to a renewable one.

      There is so much work to be done, but our economy is shut down by the tyranny of bankster criminals who live off the labors of the people like parasites.

      Krugman needs to shut the fuck up.

    •  Krugman has been spot-on lately. (0+ / 0-)

      Admitting he was wrong on his demand to nationalize banks was a pleasant sign of him coming back to reality and not judging solutions strictly based on whether they fit with his particular ideology of choice.  And he's stayed in objective/reality mode ever since up to this point.  

      You could learn from Krugman, after all HE IS A NOBEL PRIZE WINNER ON ECONOMICS (that's the card you love to play when he agrees with you, well here is that card played right back at ya. lol)

  •  "Wall Street...wouldn’t be screaming so loudly" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bobswern, PrahaPartizan, NoMoreLies

    I disagree. To quote Chomsky: “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”

    The crimes that led the meltdown were so catastrophic that if this is the best the political system can produce then the system doesn't deserve to survive. Even the pre-crisis economic situation should have long been deemed intolerable.

  •  CFPB is working and is having an impact (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I see a lot of entities trying to adapt to comply with its apparent authority to investigate, audit and fine.  

    Also, Krugman crystallized the 'too big to fail' remedy that is in the current law (ordinary liquidation authority) that allows the government the ability to take over and reorganize systematically important banks without compensating the bondholders.  

    Global Shakedown - Alternative rock with something to say. Check out their latest release, "A Time to Recognize": Available on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Spotify and other major online music sites. Visit

    by khyber900 on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 05:06:36 AM PDT

  •  The problem with partial victories (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The problem with partial victories is that when there's a crisis, at least if the crisis recurs within a decade or so, people remember that they were promised that this would never happen again. A number of financial writers predict that there will be a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis before the Obama presidency is over. If they are right, people will blame Obama and the Democrats.

    So, sure, don't trash Dodd-Frank. But make it clear to any Democrats who will listen that they failed to produce real financial reform, that they failed because they are to some degree under the corrupt influence of the financial interests, and that they will be blamed--and justly so-- for whatever bad deeds those interests commit.

  •  Nader spent 10 years pushing for a CFPB. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xaxnar, Dodgerdog1

    After Obama did it, suddenly it wasn't worth mentioning anymore. If Obama does something it must be a disappointment, apparently. Personally, I burned out on the knee-jerk cynicism on auto-pilot from the third party left. It's as predictable as Fox News.

    I was pleasantly surprised with Krugman's column. Regardless of its failings, the reforms represented the reversal of Reaganism. It was the largest re-regulation of the financial sector since the New Deal. That kind of victory could be celebrated to build momentum for more if so many progressives weren't committed to spreading defeatist cynicism.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site