"An Open Letter to my Friends on the Left"

[toblerone3]

I learnt something from this letter. I had not realised that the growth of the subprime market had political encouragement

The portrays an attempt to extend home-ownership to less well off groups through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac soaking up the risk in subprime loans offered by other banks. In return the government promised (or vaguely promised at least) to support Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should they get into trouble.

So there is government intervention to correct market failure which made it difficult for less well off people to be able to afford to buy their own homes.

This works for a number of years while the housing market flourishes (under a bubble). But when the bubble bursts, the government has to step into to bail out the banks.

His conclusion is that poor people should never have been supported to buy their own homes in the first place and should just accept their place in the free market order of things and wait for trickle-down.

To me it seems that what has collapsed has been a US equivalent of "The Third Way" applied to the US banking and mortgage sector. His conclusion is that the Third Way should never have been attempted and that we should revert to raw capitalism.

 

[editor]

Indeed. The Orthodoxy must be maintained at all costs Comrade.

Or perhaps by putting threads in the right forum it's a courtesy to other users, makes it easier for people to find threads later and saves needless strain on the server - which some of us are paying for.

If you're having trouble adhering to the simple posting rules here, feel free to whine elsewhere.

 

[Darios]

Or perhaps by putting threads in the right forum it's a courtesy to other users, makes it easier for people to find threads later and saves needless strain on the server - which some of us are paying for.

Fair enough.

 

[isvicthere?]

You pick 10 adult individuals at random from the UK. You ask them if they would, given the choice, rather give their money to businesses and enterprises that provided some kind of social benefit instead of to those who didn't.

What do you think the results might be?

Well, if I was one of the random ten, I would go for the social benefit option. Don't look for me in Asda, McDonalds etc.

 

[nino_savatte]

He is arguing that we shouldn't regulate because greed is everywhere, and we don't complain about that, so it can't be the problem.

Crap. That's like the pro-gun argument in the US after a high school shooting: let the kids and teaching staff carry guns to school to 'deter' would be mass murderers.

 

[Dravinian]

No disagreement there. A bit pointless to say though wasn't it?

"Everyone" also wants to be able to get to work and/or see their relatives. A lot of behaviours, or the range of choices in behaviours are 'locked in'. And at the moment - being "green", as many have noted, is still the privileged choice of those with enough spare income to do so. You don't find it remotely interesting however, that many of those who are able, financially, to take "greener" or more "ethical" solutions do so?

In the current corporatist set up yes that's true. However, I thought we were discussing an alternative?

Well how was it pointless to say when you made the point that asking people what they would do proves something? Clearly it is refuting that by pointing out that what people say and what people do is different?

Why make the claim that asking 10 people a question, which they will answer to make themselves look good, means something?

You also talk about locked in behaviours, as if this means something, yet you ignore the fact that within the very letter you linked is this quote.

The problem with that explanation is that greed is always a feature of human interaction. It always has been.

So greed is a "locked in" behaviour, according to your own source. Since it is always a feature.

Yet you think an "alternative" is going to give people freedom and yet still eliminate greed?

I pointed out that people will still be greedy, thus the company that creates the most profit will be the company that succeeds.