My take on what happened - I think easy to believe;)

Since I have not been posting very often, mostly because of new back problems and a cold virus which kept me off my feet for over a week, I want to catch up a little with thoughts that have been running through my head. I have been making some comments at other blogs, but haven't mustered the energy to post here. This post consist of comments I made on other blogs.

This comment I made at Gypsy Scholar in response to this post, Professor Jasper Kim on the Financial Crisis, is my take on the financial crisis.

I think it was the speculators that got over their heads, more so than the immigrants and poor people, but blaming those people is so gauche. That did not create the financial crisis, it was that funny paper that banks bought and sold, formerly known as MBS', CDO's, CDS' and other derivatives. People made money hand over fist on these sales and the banks and other financial institutions were stuck with the bad paper, most of it far removed from the original mortgages. Even if every mortgage had been paid, eventually the worthlessness of some paper would have caused failure. No one will say it but Bernard Madoff was not the only one running scams. This is my view of the financial crisis, which I think is as true as anyone else's. I came to this conclusion based on listening to what the economist, bankers and pundits have said, not on any knowledge of economics.

For those not familiar with the acronyms MBS = mortgage backed securities, CDO = collateralized debt obligations, and CDS = credit default swaps .

At another blog, ResurrectionSong, I commented yet again where most think they know what will work to solve the financial crisis. This is a response to another comment.

"I’ve yet to hear one piece of regulation that was axed that contributed to the mess, and I’ve yet to hear one plausible alternate history where this mess wouldn’t have happened. (Emphasis on plausible.) “

You see I have read another blogger who says the opposite, whom should I believe? My common sense tells me that I don’t have enough knowledge to discern that. It also tells me that anything said here as a solution, has a high probability of being as right as the President’s proposals. Its all ideology, because you have no proof as to what will work. We have never seen in our history the exact same problem with opposite solutions. Many say what FDR did prolonged the depression, but there isn’t any proof, just a best guess that fits into a particular ideology.

We live in an era of bullshit, because we do fear the unknown, that outlier.

I also would say this also is an era of financial ignorance. We all have our take on what happened, like me, but like most, I can't propose any solutions. There may be some who know enough to provide a real solution, but we would not recognize it if we saw it? For some that would be because of ignorance and others, because it went contrary to their ideological beliefs. I really wish we could have an unbiased scientific approach to this financial crisis.

Terrorist attack a transformational act?

I was reminded of Ron Silver's death last week and thought of a tribute of another blogger. This said by R. G. Combs.

But after the 9/11 attacks, Silver had the courage and wisdom to rethink his own long-held beliefs, and — despite the hostility of the Hollywood community to which he belonged — he clearly, articulately, and passionately defended his new view of the world time and time again. For that, I greatly admired him. And I'm very sorry that he's gone.

I am thinking why would the attacks of September 11, 2001 push someone to change their political beliefs. There was no label when Al Qaeda claimed the attacks. In all of their messages, I have clearly understood their purpose is to kill Americans. A message also more religious than political. I didn't think infidel meant Democrat or Republican. Osama bin Laden's views of America had been shaped by both Democratic and Republican administrations and policies. Since the Republicans were in charge of the government, who else was going to lead the response, but George W. Bush. His leadership in this could not be compared; for no other president had had the same circumstances. If one admired Bush's response, it could only be to his response as a man, not of his party.

There were a few liberal voices, blaming terrorism on America's policies, but the majority of Democrats gave Bush everything he asked for, until his re-election and much afterward. The world view of the Republican party could not have changed the event, because it was under their administration with their world view that escalated their assistance and armed Osama bin Laden in his fight against the Soviets. Their only concern was to fight the Evil Empire, not the democratization of Afghanistan. If one thought of the Republicans as the only ones with neo-con sensibilities, there were Democrats that were complicit in arming the rebels and osculating the Afghan war with the soviets.

I have given my reasons why I think that one would not have had reason to change their political beliefs, so I can only assume that emotions cause by the attacks on September 11, were so strong that fear became their guiding force. I am one that also believes that neither war in Afghanistan nor Iraq has made us any safer; considering how few people it took to bomb the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19,1995 and those people did it for totally different reasons than Al Qaeda.

If beliefs have been held and molded most of ones life, terrorism becomes a transformational act when your intellect has been disturbed, such that your ideas change suddenly; I would say that the terrorist have achieved their purpose.

Optical Illusion

The Second Amendment

Grubs and Mushrooms

If you view the Astronomy Picture of the Day, everyday, on my sidebar, you eventually get to realize how vast the size of the universe. Man's ego cannot make us small, even though we are. In a religious sense some of us see an end, but that also includes the universe, not just the end of man. The rest of us do not see the end of man as a species. We think our technology, our humanness, that our ability to adapt will kept our species from becoming extinct or at least marginal.

Technology whether simple or complicated require resources. The simple tools of farming; plow, pitchfork, shovel, wagon, and a working animal, can not produce any crop if the soil is spent. When there is virtually little fuel left, it would more likely to use it to keep us warm and for cooking, than for reprocessing or reclamation. Machines will wear out and lie dormant, when parts can't be made to repair them. Innovation can also lie dormant for centuries. We have seen where in certain religious or political climates, innovation has been stifled on purpose.

We never think that this will happen. We think we can change the environment, slow global warning or we don't think of it at all. We hardly ever think of slowing ourselves down. As we grow in population we will pave over topsoil and move our food supply to each country until there is none left. Only in a crisis do we think grow locally. So far the crisis hasn't lasted long to influence all of us. We will shift out energy resources for oil, but when that happens, our use will be as great. Not to worry, there is plenty of wind; not thinking that the transmission of energy still takes its toll on resources, the copper, the fiber, the machines.

There will be creatures that will adapt without technology, that will live in the niches of the environment humans have left. We have to learn that innovation and technology can not always save us or we may fall into that niche, where we will be eating grubs and mushrooms.

If there were no other debt since September 30, 2008

There would be a little over 10 trillion dollars in Public Debt for the U.S. and as they say now, our grand children will be paying for that The budget deficit last year was $455,000,000,000.(page 7 of this GAO report) From Federal fiscal year 2000 to 2008, the public debt has nearly doubled.

Did a cat have the Republican's tongues the past eight years? Will our grand children notice the increase from the Obama administration?

Congratulations, Mr. President!

It is at the end of a long day. I remained mostly unemotional through the ceremonies, until an Italian American co-worker told me that he was proud to be an American today. Then the tears started to come, but I held them back with a smile. I watched most of the day and had to see the First Lady's gown. I, like most people who voted have no expectation that President Obama will walk on water, contrary to those who are without understanding. I only wish the President the best.

Post Racial?

Recently much has been made of the progress from Martin Luther King Jr. 's time and Barack Hussein Obama's inauguration tomorrow.

Last year reading, seeing and hearing these kinds of comments, I wonder.

Hatred at Palin Rally in Johnstown, PA

This reminded me of the kind of anger and taunts experienced when desegregating lunch counter, schools, and during peaceful protest marches.

The last words of M. L. King's, March on Washington speech are not yet self evident.

When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

I Have a Dream - Address at March on Washington

The Party of Lincoln - The Betrayal

Quite often the question to Black folk asks why we support the Democratic party when there have been racist among them. Mostly asked by folk who are Republican, as if there were no racist among them, especially in the south. Perhaps a reasonable question, since the first party of Black folk was the party of Lincoln. As I see it, there are two answers to this question; after the Great Depression, Black folk who could vote, voted their self interest and the betrayal by the Republicans.

Weighing in cotton. Pulaski County, Arkansas. Oct. 1935.

Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.

What Republican forget, is during the Great Depression most Blacks lived in the south. Their jobs were mostly dependent upon service in middle class and rich white homes, share cropping and picking cotton. For the most part, they were poorer than the poorer whites. Most of their destiny was dependent upon white people's fortunes. People without, can not depend upon ideology to provide for them and the programs of FDR offered, appeared to them a better way than do nothing market theory. Still there were many Blacks who remained, quite a few because they were comfortable with the changes that had occurred since Reconstruction. They believed in self determination and the free market model, but they also were aware of the inequality of Black people and the need to be your brother's keeper at times.

The March to Montgomery
March 25, 1965

There is no doubt from the sign in the picture, that "States Rights" is synonymous to "Racial Integrity". It is very clear that it is a code word meaning to keep segregation. That was the Republican Party's stance on desegregation "States Rights." Trying to take the high road with ideology, when every southerner knew what that meant. The liturgy of the racist Democrats, Dixiecrats, who had tainted the Republican Party when they moved their party affiliation. When they were accepted with open arms, that was the final betrayal of Black folks after it became too hard for Republicans to support Black folk after Reconstruction. More recently they have perfected Black bashing, as part of their fight in the cultural wars. It is interesting that those asking the question don't see this or realize that even though some blacks may be conservative, their reaction to racism trumps any other ideology.

When I'm Sixty Four

It will be thirteen days.

When I'm Sixty-Four - with Lyrics

I will be 64 in a few weeks. I am amazed how fast I have gotten here in spite of the fact that many horrific years seemed to have moved so slowly. The Beatles song When I'm Sixty Four poses the questions of love, when time has changed us. When you are young, you might have thought the mind ages with the body. By the time I was forty I knew this was not true, becoming mature is not the same as aging. I still have the same intellect, curiosity, desires and needs as I did at 25. Unfortunately, the body does age and changes so much. Since I have not grown old with someone, I wonder if anyone can love, need and feed me.

2009

Happy New Year,Y'all

No resolutions. No predictions. Only one wish for the world. Quite and Peace!