Comments by bampbs

When Republicans attack the stimulus as ineffective, they undercut the prime article of their faith, for much of it was tax cuts. There is always the risk that some fiendish Democrat may point this out, and sow doubt among the as-yet unconfirmed.

I am entirely in favor of going back to the old days, when only unlimited liability individuals or partnerships could hold seats on the NYSE. Investment banks ought never to have been allowed to become limited liability corporations.

Commercial banks ought to be the dull, old regulated utilities they used to be, in return for the government safety net. A chaos of disintermediation turned out badly for finance and for the economy. Shadow banking was vulnerable to what amounted to uncontrollable runs when wholesale liquidity dried up after Lehman's collapse. So my attitude is that if you act like a bank by borrowing short to lend long, you are a bank, and no "shadow" about it.

Yes, it's a shame that he's running in a party that has lost it's mind since 1995.

I think Romney could work with a Democratically controlled Congress to do the country some genuine good.

"The notion that the market economy makes people greedy, selfish, and amoral is simply fallacious."

That is quite true of typical markets in goods and services. It is however, not true of financial markets. They are qualitatively different, and those handling immense sums of other peoples' money need to be both limited in what they can do, and watched very closely.

My overriding concern is transparency. I don't like the idea of IRS Code 501[c][4] non-profit status going to obviously partisan political groups, because donors don't have to be identified.

I want a centrist party to vote for! There are enough objectionably extreme people on Left and Right that it ought to fly. Who can pick up the ball and run with it?

The socially liberal, fiscally conservative voter used to have a home in the GOP, but those days are long gone.

It must be exhausting to stand on a pedestal in a copper suit holding your arm straight up in the air all the time.

I've long wondered if there was only a very thin skim of educated, peripatetic "Europeans" atop populations deeply rooted in their own lands and their own cultures, who were no more "Europeans" than the Americans are. I guessed that serious economic hardship, if it came, would provide an answer. I also worried that the fascist Right would return under such circumstances.

So much is up in the air. So many of the ways it all could land are dangerous. It is hard to believe that Germany has allowed a 100 Billion Euro problem with Greece to turn into such a hazard. But, since Bismarck was fired in 1890, a united Germany has always overplayed her hand, and turned success into disaster.

"And of course Germany has done best of all (which is why everybody else feels the right to lecture Mrs Merkel on how to run an economy)."

I thought everybody else was lecturing her on how to run a monetary union.

Realistically speaking, I thought the old Phillips Curve showed that, caeteris paribus, a marginal change in inflation would result in a corresponding marginal change in unemployment. Jumping over the Lesser Depression hardly qualifies.

I pick number 2. And I think they're right.

Just wait until Elizabeth II breaks Victoria's record. That ought to be a party.

"It follows that efforts to preserve demand can also preserve the economy’s supply-side potential. That, too, seems to be one of the lessons of international experience. It is not too late for America to limit most of the long-run damage of its crisis; but it may soon be."

Yup, but the GOP has no interest in doing anything to improve the economy until November, and then only if Romney wins.

If you talk about austerity enough, you scare businesses and consumers into pulling back, even if cuts haven't cut yet.

You miss the fact that these phenomena were driven by ECB easy money policies that were primarily for Germany's benefit, and were far too loose for most of the other Euro countries.

And don't forget that it is impossible to borrow too much unless someone lends you too much. Since when are bankers exempt from due diligence? What else are they paid for?

Romney's "Show me the numbers," is great for picking a takeover target. I don't think it is a recommendation for the Presidency.

It's a shame he has to run away from his record as Governor to reassure the Yahoos.

When the "Silent Generation" has been shuffled off, each to his own afterlife, then maybe we can consider trusting the South. Certainly, it is doubtful that the problem will be gone until the last of those old enough to vote in 1964 are gone, too.

By the way, how's the Deep South doing on integrated senior proms?

China has a very long way to go before the Rule of Law becomes established.

Every vulture capitalist tries to masquerade as a venture capitalist, but we all know the difference. One good indicator of the vulture is that his deal wouldn't work without the absurd and harmful asymmetry between taxable dividends paid on equity and non-taxable interest paid on debt. "Private equity" became the new, preferred self-description of LBO sharks once the older, original name took on a bad odor. Genuine venture capital takes huge risks to create something new. It operates in the unknown. Romney's "Show me the numbers," doesn't work in that world, but is key to the financial manipulation of existing companies at great profit to the manipulators.

A lot of the people who walked away were investors. Here we go again.

This is way cool.