OT: What’s the deal with NPR?

[jpinpb]

CAR – when are you running? You have my vote. At a minimum, maybe you can make a trip to Sacramento and offer your input free of charge. I think Jerry might listen.

[CA renter]

Thanks, jp.

I’m working on it. 🙂

edit: Not running for office, LOL! But am trying to get this to him.

[CA renter]

Thanks, jp.

I’m working on it. 🙂

edit: Not running for office, LOL! But am trying to get this to him.

[CA renter]

Thanks, jp.

I’m working on it. 🙂

edit: Not running for office, LOL! But am trying to get this to him.

[CA renter]

Thanks, jp.

I’m working on it. 🙂

edit: Not running for office, LOL! But am trying to get this to him.

[CA renter]

Thanks, jp.

I’m working on it. 🙂

edit: Not running for office, LOL! But am trying to get this to him.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[quote=CA renter]
In the meantime, back in Realityville, the most successful, democratic, countries with high standards of living tend to have very socialistic (NOT communist — there is a difference) tendencies.

See for yourself:

http://www.nationmaster.com/statistics
[/quote]

If you’re saying that our system is broken and that it needs reform, I may agree.

If you’re saying that government should intervene to lift people’s earnings, starting with public employees, rather than race to the bottom, I may agree also.

It sounds like you’re saying a more socialistic system, with better distribution of wealth would be better. I think that you are correct there.

But within our existing system, people get paid what the market will bear. Fairness doesn’t really come into play. (I see the bailouts as preserving our way of life prior to the crisis. There was an opportunity to reform at the same time, but we chose not to, I suspect, for fear of making the crisis worse).

I don’t see a huge call for change from the people. In fact the poorest White Americans voters in conservative states seem to want less government involvement, not more.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[quote=CA renter]
In the meantime, back in Realityville, the most successful, democratic, countries with high standards of living tend to have very socialistic (NOT communist — there is a difference) tendencies.

See for yourself:

http://www.nationmaster.com/statistics
[/quote]

If you’re saying that our system is broken and that it needs reform, I may agree.

If you’re saying that government should intervene to lift people’s earnings, starting with public employees, rather than race to the bottom, I may agree also.

It sounds like you’re saying a more socialistic system, with better distribution of wealth would be better. I think that you are correct there.

But within our existing system, people get paid what the market will bear. Fairness doesn’t really come into play. (I see the bailouts as preserving our way of life prior to the crisis. There was an opportunity to reform at the same time, but we chose not to, I suspect, for fear of making the crisis worse).

I don’t see a huge call for change from the people. In fact the poorest White Americans voters in conservative states seem to want less government involvement, not more.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[quote=CA renter]
In the meantime, back in Realityville, the most successful, democratic, countries with high standards of living tend to have very socialistic (NOT communist — there is a difference) tendencies.

See for yourself:

http://www.nationmaster.com/statistics
[/quote]

If you’re saying that our system is broken and that it needs reform, I may agree.

If you’re saying that government should intervene to lift people’s earnings, starting with public employees, rather than race to the bottom, I may agree also.

It sounds like you’re saying a more socialistic system, with better distribution of wealth would be better. I think that you are correct there.

But within our existing system, people get paid what the market will bear. Fairness doesn’t really come into play. (I see the bailouts as preserving our way of life prior to the crisis. There was an opportunity to reform at the same time, but we chose not to, I suspect, for fear of making the crisis worse).

I don’t see a huge call for change from the people. In fact the poorest White Americans voters in conservative states seem to want less government involvement, not more.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[quote=CA renter]
In the meantime, back in Realityville, the most successful, democratic, countries with high standards of living tend to have very socialistic (NOT communist — there is a difference) tendencies.

See for yourself:

http://www.nationmaster.com/statistics
[/quote]

If you’re saying that our system is broken and that it needs reform, I may agree.

If you’re saying that government should intervene to lift people’s earnings, starting with public employees, rather than race to the bottom, I may agree also.

It sounds like you’re saying a more socialistic system, with better distribution of wealth would be better. I think that you are correct there.

But within our existing system, people get paid what the market will bear. Fairness doesn’t really come into play. (I see the bailouts as preserving our way of life prior to the crisis. There was an opportunity to reform at the same time, but we chose not to, I suspect, for fear of making the crisis worse).

I don’t see a huge call for change from the people. In fact the poorest White Americans voters in conservative states seem to want less government involvement, not more.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[quote=CA renter]
In the meantime, back in Realityville, the most successful, democratic, countries with high standards of living tend to have very socialistic (NOT communist — there is a difference) tendencies.

See for yourself:

http://www.nationmaster.com/statistics
[/quote]

If you’re saying that our system is broken and that it needs reform, I may agree.

If you’re saying that government should intervene to lift people’s earnings, starting with public employees, rather than race to the bottom, I may agree also.

It sounds like you’re saying a more socialistic system, with better distribution of wealth would be better. I think that you are correct there.

But within our existing system, people get paid what the market will bear. Fairness doesn’t really come into play. (I see the bailouts as preserving our way of life prior to the crisis. There was an opportunity to reform at the same time, but we chose not to, I suspect, for fear of making the crisis worse).

I don’t see a huge call for change from the people. In fact the poorest White Americans voters in conservative states seem to want less government involvement, not more.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[/quote]

The problems with respect to the pensions are due to **investment losses,** not spending problems. These investment losses exist for many reasons, but one of the primary reasons is because Wall Street sold these “toxic loans” to the pension funds. The pension funds (that I’m aware of) had fairly large positions in real estate and in MBSs, CDOs, etc. Anyone with two brain cells should have known the losses on these investments would be tremendous. Unfortunately, the large pension funds had begun farming out a lot of their fund management duties to private equity and hedge funds, so they had no idea what they were getting into. They were forced to do this because of the long period of low rates forced upon them by the Fed (and there was some apparent corruption at the top, as well).

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[/quote]

The problems with respect to the pensions are due to **investment losses,** not spending problems. These investment losses exist for many reasons, but one of the primary reasons is because Wall Street sold these “toxic loans” to the pension funds. The pension funds (that I’m aware of) had fairly large positions in real estate and in MBSs, CDOs, etc. Anyone with two brain cells should have known the losses on these investments would be tremendous. Unfortunately, the large pension funds had begun farming out a lot of their fund management duties to private equity and hedge funds, so they had no idea what they were getting into. They were forced to do this because of the long period of low rates forced upon them by the Fed (and there was some apparent corruption at the top, as well).

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[/quote]

The problems with respect to the pensions are due to **investment losses,** not spending problems. These investment losses exist for many reasons, but one of the primary reasons is because Wall Street sold these “toxic loans” to the pension funds. The pension funds (that I’m aware of) had fairly large positions in real estate and in MBSs, CDOs, etc. Anyone with two brain cells should have known the losses on these investments would be tremendous. Unfortunately, the large pension funds had begun farming out a lot of their fund management duties to private equity and hedge funds, so they had no idea what they were getting into. They were forced to do this because of the long period of low rates forced upon them by the Fed (and there was some apparent corruption at the top, as well).

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
unions want Wall Street to pay for the damage they created. They all want *Wall Street (and associated parties)* to pay for it, not you.
[/quote]

How exactly did Wall Street create state and local government budget problems?

If an individual spent all his bubble earnings, is that caused by Wall Street too?

[/quote]

The problems with respect to the pensions are due to **investment losses,** not spending problems. These investment losses exist for many reasons, but one of the primary reasons is because Wall Street sold these “toxic loans” to the pension funds. The pension funds (that I’m aware of) had fairly large positions in real estate and in MBSs, CDOs, etc. Anyone with two brain cells should have known the losses on these investments would be tremendous. Unfortunately, the large pension funds had begun farming out a lot of their fund management duties to private equity and hedge funds, so they had no idea what they were getting into. They were forced to do this because of the long period of low rates forced upon them by the Fed (and there was some apparent corruption at the top, as well).

[Author]

Posts